20
Time and Cost to Commercialize an Oil Shale Retorting Technology Richard Sherritt 27 th Oil Shale Symposium Golden Colorado 16 Oct 2007

Sherritt 27th Os

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Sherritt 27th Os

Time and Cost to Commercializean Oil Shale Retorting Technology

Richard Sherritt27th Oil Shale Symposium

Golden Colorado16 Oct 2007

Page 2: Sherritt 27th Os

More small scale-up steps increase time and cost of development.

Fewer large scale-up steps increase risk of not achieving design capacity.

Staged Development

What is the optimum number of stages to balance cost and risk?

How to compare technologies that are at different stages of development?

Page 3: Sherritt 27th Os

• $250M for 6000 bbl/sd single module

Capital Cost

$10,000

$100,000

$1,000,000

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Feed Capacity (tonne/sd)

Ca

pit

al

Co

st

($/t

on

ne

/sd

)

Page 4: Sherritt 27th Os

• $250M for 6000 bbl/sd single module

• 0.6 cost exponent for single module

Capital Cost

$10,000

$100,000

$1,000,000

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Feed Capacity (tonne/sd)

Ca

pit

al

Co

st

($/t

on

ne

/sd

)

Single module

Page 5: Sherritt 27th Os

• $250M for 6000 bbl/sd single module

• 0.6 cost exponent for single module

• 25% reduction per module for 5 modules

• 33% reduction per module for 10 modules (Buchmann et al 1993)

Capital Cost

$10,000

$100,000

$1,000,000

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Feed Capacity (tonne/sd)

Ca

pit

al

Co

st

($/t

on

ne

/sd

)

Single module

5 modules

10 modules

Page 6: Sherritt 27th Os

Operating Costs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2650 4500 15500 157000

Capacity (BBL/sd)

$/B

BL

Nitrogen/Water

Environmental Health Safety

Mining

Electricity

Chemicals

Natural Gas

Finance and Administration

Operations - Maintenance

Operations - Production

Mining

Page 7: Sherritt 27th Os

• Includes grade reduction with increase in capacity

Operating Costs

1

10

100

1000

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Production Capacity (bbl/sd)

Op

era

tin

g C

os

t ($

/bb

l)

Total

Fixed

Variable

Page 8: Sherritt 27th Os

• Plants with ‘unproven technology’ result were often abandoned after 4 years of operation.

Rate of Achieving Design Capacity

for Mineral Processing Plants

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 12 24 36

Months since commisioning

% o

f d

es

ign

ca

pa

cit

y

Mature technology

Scale-up

Unproven technology

Duplicate plant

• Study by McNulty (1998)

• Rate is affected by design readiness and departure from prior plants.

Page 9: Sherritt 27th Os

Rate of Achieving Design Capacity for Shale Oil Plants

Shale Oil Examples

Project Year Scale-up FactorCapacity curve

achieved

Unocal-Parachute Crk

1987 100:1Unproven technology

PetroSIX 1992 5:1 Scale-up

ATP-Stuart 2000 50:1Unproven technology

Page 10: Sherritt 27th Os

Example 1: Best Number of Scale-up Stages?

• Scenario

Successful completion of 10 bbl/sd pilot plant

Resource = 125 000 bbl/sd for 30 yrs = 1B bbl

Page 11: Sherritt 27th Os

5 intermediate plants10 50 250 1250 5000 25 000 125 000 bbl/sd

Example 1: Options

1 intermediate plant10 1250 125 000 bbl/sd

2 intermediate plants10 250 5 000 125 000 bbl/sd

Page 12: Sherritt 27th Os

If unsuccessful scale-up, then abandon current plant after 4 years of operation and no follow-on plants.

Example 1: AssumptionsDiscount Factor 8%

Plant life 30 years

Oil price $50/bbl

Design availability 90%

Salvage value 0

Page 13: Sherritt 27th Os

Rate of achieving design capacity

Scale-up Factor ‘Scale-up’ curve‘Unproven

technology’ curve

5:1 90% 10%

25:1 67% 33%

100:1 33% 67%

Example 1: Assumption

• Probability of success depends on scale-up factor

Page 14: Sherritt 27th Os

Example 1: Option 1

Weighted NPV = (0.67)(-134)+(0.22)(-166)+(0.11)(6363) = $552M

Page 15: Sherritt 27th Os

Example 1: Results

No. of intermediate

plants

Number of

possible outcomes

Best outcome

Weighted NPV

$M

NPV

$M

Probability

%

1 3 6363 11 552

2 4 3861 22 978

5 7 530 53 188

Page 16: Sherritt 27th Os

New technology95% availabilitysuccessfully piloted @ 250 bbl/sd

Example 2: New or Demonstrated Technology?

Scenario:

Old technology80% availabilitysuccessfully demonstrated @ 5000

bbl/sd

Page 17: Sherritt 27th Os

New technology2 intermediate plants250 5 000 25 000 125 000 bbl/sd

Example 2: Options

Old technology1 intermediate plants5 000 25 000 125 000 bbl/sd

Page 18: Sherritt 27th Os

Example 2: Results

Demonstrated capacity

Bbl/sd

Availability

%

Number of intermediate

plants

Best outcomeWeighted

NPV

$MNPV

$M

Probability

%

5000 80 1 4991 81 3977

250 95 2 3369 53 1671

Page 19: Sherritt 27th Os

Conclusions

• Scale-up risk also needs to be considered.

• Development time and costs need to be considered when evaluating shale oil projects

• A new technology must promise a significant advantage to justify additional development time and cost.

Page 20: Sherritt 27th Os

Time and Cost to Commercializean Oil Shale Retorting Technology

Richard Sherritt27th Oil Shale Symposium

Golden Colorado16 Oct 2007