IPTC 17233 Qatar LNG Terminal Flare Gas Reduction Project – JBOG Bashir Mirza, Qatargas Copyright 2014, International Petroleum Technology Conference This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 20–22 January 2014. This paper was selected for presentation by an IPTC Programme Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Petroleum Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at IPTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees of IPTC. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Petroleum Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, IPTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax +1-972-952-9435

Abstract Qatar produces 77 million tonnes of LNG per annum, and is the largest provider of this clean energy in the world. The world’s largest man made harbor in Ras Laffan City, located 80km north of Doha, has six LNG loading berths. During loading of the liquefied natural gas in the special LNG ships, a portion of the minus 160oC liquid boils off as it comes in contact with the warmer ship tank. This boiled off gas is currently being flared at the berth because there is no outlet for this low pressure gas. The average flow rate of the boil-off gas is 100 mmscfd, which has the potential to produce around 750MW of power. In line with Qatar’s National Vision to produce and supply clean energy to the world, Qatar Petroleum and the Ministry of Environment decided to recover the flared gas at the LNG berths to the maximum extent practical. This intent gave birth to the Jetty Boil-off Gas Recovery Project in 2007. A Pre-FEED design had been done by RasGas, and the project was handed over to Qatargas in June 2007. The JBOG Project when fully implemented will save the emission of 1.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. One trillion cubic feet of gas will be saved for the State of Qatar over a period of 30 years. The design of this project encountered many challenges. • The gas is discharged from the ships at a pressure of less than 1 Bar Gauge Pressure (BarG). • The volume of the gas to be recovered is several times higher than at any other similar facility in the world. • Gas is discharged at -100oC, making all facilities cryogenic. • No provision had been made for space allocation at the harbor for Boil-off Gas Recovery facilities • Check valves and buckling pin valves' design and operating experience was not available for the large flow rates, low

pressures and cryogenic temperatures. • No space was available at the berths to locate the compressors, as designed in the Pre FEED • Limited space available inside the port for JBOG main facilities. • Most of the facilities were going to be in brownfield areas, in close vicinity of live hydrocarbon-n carrying lines. • Lack of accurate and up to date as -built drawings for brownfield facilities.

The Qatargas JBOG Project Management Team (PMT) brought in experts from the shareholders and addressed each of these challenges through innovation, extrapolation and a strong determination to succeed. The Front End Engineering Design (FEED) was awarded to Fluor Daniel in Houston, USA in late 2007. The FEED teams from Qatargas and Fluor produced a basic design package by Q3 2008. In the days of $150 per barrel oil prices, the cost estimate ballooned. Qatar Petroleum took a wise decision, and delayed the final investment decision by a year to let the markets cool down. During 2009, Qatargas JBOG PMT continued to work with Fluor on a Pre-EPC phase. In order to overcome the lack of as-built

2 IPTC 17233

drawings, The PMT commissioned a "Laser Scan Survey" of all the brownfield areas through which the JBOG facilities were going to be installed. This scan produced digital images of high resolution, which were later incorporated into the 3D computer design model. This innovative approach saved millions of dollars, eliminated possible clashes and reduced the amount of time which otherwise would have been spent on manual surveys, drawings' review and rectification of clashes during construction. The critical path of the project ran through the procurement and delivery of the large Boil-off Gas Compressors. Qatargas and Fluor worked on fine tuning the design of the compressors during 2009, allowing the project the option to purchase the compressors within a month of the start of the detailed design phase. During 2009, the JBOG PMT managed to bring the Capital Expenditure (CapEx) of the project down significantly. This was a result of both scope changes and improved market conditions. The project owners, QP, ExxonMobil, Total, Shell and ConocoPhillips approved the investment decision for the JBOG Project in February 2010. This led to the award of the EPCm contract to Fluor. The LNG ships’ compressors drive the gas out of the ship, and this pressure is utilized by the JBOG Project to take the gas to a central compression facility, which is located approximately 5km away from the berths. Around a hundred LNG ships need to have the compressor surge control line modified to ensure that the ships produce the right discharge pressure. Construction of the project was a challenge due to the fact that most of the work being done was in brownfield areas. The Central Compressors Area is greenfield - but congested, due to the limited space available in the port area. The average pipe diameter is 16”, and this leads to difficulties in the building of piping in and around pipe racks. Safety of people and property is the highest priority of the Qatargas JBOG PMT. To date, the project has kept all of its 3000 workers safe from serious injury. The Incident and Injury Free safety behavioural program has been implemented fully on the JBOG Project, and many initiatives are in place to enhance safe working on the project. Background Qatar assumed the mantle of the largest producer of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in the world in 2011. 77 million tonnes of LNG are exported annually from the biggest LNG export terminal at Ras Laffan City, which lies 80 km north of Doha. When the cold LNG is loaded into a relatively warm ship, about 1% of the LNG is boiled-off in the form of lean natural gas. This boiled-off gas, termed Jetty Boil-off Gas (JBOG) needs to be removed from the LNG ship. As Qatar’s nascent LNG industry started to develop between 1995 and 2000, the need for recovery of this JBOG was not considered economically feasible at the time. However, as LNG production rose, Qatar Petroleum realized the need for recovering the JBOG, the average production of which is around 100 mmscfd. A decision was made in principle to build a JBOG Recovery facility to recover gas from the first four berths. Conceptual Design RasGas was entrusted with the task of developing the conceptual design for the JBOG Recovery Project in 2004. The initial design was based on using liquefied nitrogen gas as a cooling medium to liquefy the boil-off gas into LNG at the berths. The LNG would then be sent to the storage tanks, and eventually exported with the bulk LNG. This conceptual design was taken to the Front End Design stage by RasGas. However, it soon became evident that that the volumes of nitrogen required to liquefy the boil-off gas generated from six berths would be enormous. The design was based on an “open cycle”, which meant that as the liquid nitrogen evaporated after liquefying the JBOG, the nitrogen gas was vented to the atmosphere. Releasing such a high amount of nitrogen in the atmosphere could be harmful for the local environment. In addition, the power consumption required to liquefy air to produce liquid nitrogen became too prohibitive.

IPTC 17233 3

After a few months of Front End Design performed by ABB, the design was abandoned, and the RasGas engineers went back to the drawing board, looking for a more feasible design. In 2006, the design was altered to take the gas from the LNG ships, compress it and then send the gas back to the LNG production facilities to be used as fuel gas. This concept has survived the test of time, and is the concept being used to build the facilities. Design Challenges The conceptual design had one huge challenge. The gas was taken from each of the berths, and then compressed in a compressor located at each berth. The Ras Laffan City (RLC) LNG terminal had not been designed with sufficient space to install a compressor, driver and associated equipment. The location of the compressors at the berths solved the problem of low pressure gas from the ships and also saved the expense of using stainless steel pipelines to carry the cold gas to the central area. However, the conceptual design did not go into the physical details of the size of the facilities needed at each berth, or indeed whether there was sufficient space for these facilities or not. Another difficult challenge facing the design team was the lack of any allocated space for installing JBOG pipelines and cables inside the port area. The port expansion plans had included for future LNG berths, but had not foreseen the JBOG facilities. In effect, JBOG Project would be largely a brownfield project with no space allocation at the conceptual design stage. Conceptual Design In June 2007, RasGas handed over the JBOG Project to Qatargas. The Qatargas JBOG Project Team initiated detailed review of the design, and consulted third party specialists. The reviews indicated that the location of the compressors at the berths might lead to safety, constructability, cost and schedule issues. The Qatargas Project Management Team, PMT, awarded a Front End Design and Engineering (FEED) contract to Fluor Daniel in Houston, USA. The FEED scope included a “Location Study” at the beginning of the FEED, which was designed to evaluate the optimum location of the compressors. This study took three months, and concluded that the location of the compressors at the berths was not preferable because of:

a) Lack of available space for compressor, auxiliaries and substation b) Lack of available space for running multiple cables and pipes to each berth c) Relatively high cost and time needed to build “reclaimed pads” at each berth to accommodate equipment

The study recommended the location of all the compressors at a central location approximately 5 kilometers away from the furthest berth. While this recommendation resolved the compressors’ location problem, it gave rise to two key issues. When the compressors were located at the berths, the temperature of the compressed gas would have been around 40oC, hence normal carbon steel pipe would have been acceptable for that service. Now that the cold gas had to travel all the way to a central location, the pipelines needed to be made of expensive stainless steel to withstand the -100oC gas. The other consequence of the relocation decision was that the JBOG Facility was now dependent upon the LNG ships’ compressors for pushing the gas all the way to the central location. The discharge pressure of gas exiting from the ships was as low as 600mBarG. This meant that the gas pipelines needed to be of sufficiently large diameter to ensure that the pressure drop would be less than 500 mBarG. The combined impact on CapEx of the large diameter and stainless steel pipes was still lower than the cost of building special pads at each of the berths. In addition, there were intangible factors about construction and operational safety, impact on construction schedule due to ship movements in the harbor and lack of available corridor space for cables. All this analysis led to a decision by the JBOG PMT to change the design of the plant, and relocate all the compressors to a central location.

4 IPTC 17233

In January 2008, the JBOG Owners endorsed this change, and Fluor Daniel proceeded with the FEED. Benefits of JBOG Project to the Environment The JBOG Project will reduce 1.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually. It takes millions of rainforest trees to absorb this level of carbon dioxide. The savings from flare reduction will amount to nearly 1 trillion cubic feet of gas over a period of 30 years, which will increase the life of Qatari natural resources. The recovered gas can be used to produce 750 MW of power, which can provide power to around 300,000 homes. Ship Interface As mentioned earlier, the change in the location concept of the JBOG facilities, i.e., moving the compressors from the berths to a central location, had one major consequence. The new concept now relied heavily on the ships’ High Duty BOG Compressors to deliver the gas at pressure sufficient high to get the gas transported from the ships all the way to the Central Compressors Area (CCA), which was approximately 5 km away. The ship compressors were designed to produce 2 Bar Absolute discharge pressure BarA, which was sufficient for JBOG, taking into account the pressure drop through the loading arms and ship rail.

This aspect of the project was raised during the JBOG Project’s risk management sessions as a key risk, and it was decided to test a few LNG ships to confirm that the ship compressors work as designed. In August 2008, the project personnel boarded three LNG ships in Ras Laffan City (RLC), and conducted a test whereby the JBOG facilities were simulated by throttling the discharge of the HD compressors. The results were very unexpected and caused a great deal of alarm in all quarters. Out of the five ships tested, one ship produced pressures higher than design, while the other four ships produced pressures significantly lower than predicted. The project management team approached the Qatar Ship Building Team, which was supervising the ship building program in Korean shipyards. The JBOG Project Team also approached the Qatargas Shipping Department in an attempt to resolve the low discharge pressure issue. After a series of deliberations, the JBOG team members witnessed the performance testing of the Cryostar compressors in France, and also witnessed the site acceptance testing of the compressors when they

IPTC 17233 5

were being installed in the ships by Korean shipyards. By the end of 2008, it was clear to the JBOG Project Team that the compressors were indeed built and tested at the factory per the specification, and did produce the required discharge pressure of 2BarA. However, when the compressors’ surge control line was being set by Cryostar, Honeywell and Kongsberg, the surge control line was not being set consistently and in line with the design compressor performance curve. Since the ships’ HD Compressors were only required to push the gas out to the local flare, the lack of design discharge pressure was not noticed by the operators. It was only when the JBOG team tried to test the ship HD compressors to their full performance map that the compressors failed to deliver. While it was a huge relief for the JBOG Project Team that the compressors were of the right design and specification, the enormity of the challenge ahead started to sink in. The JBOG Project Team had to first persuade the Qatar Ship Building Team of the erroneous way in which the surge control line was being set. After that the Qatar Ship Building Team had to convince the shipyards to correct this practice for the ships which were still being manufactured in the yards. The JBOG Project Team had to come up with practical ways to upgrade the ships in service so that the HD Compressors’ performance matched its specified performance. It took an enormous effort by the PJBOG Project Team to communicate effectively with all the various stakeholders, and finally in May 2009, the Qatar Ship Building Team confirmed that the surge control lines were being set properly for the ships still in the yard. The JBOG Team consulted extensively with Cryostar, and decided that the JBOG Project Team will take the responsibility for upgrading all the 89 LNG ships, including the conventional ones to ensure that they support the JBOG project design. This work was both technically challenging as well as a test of our stakeholder management skills. The 89 ships had different owners, various operators and had no flexibility to change their planned voyages, loading and unloading to accommodate JBOG. The JBOG team prepared a detailed plan for the ships upgrade work, and decided to do the work in three stages. The first stage would be the tackling of the Q-Flex and Q-Max ships. The logic behind this move was that these new and large ships were mostly under the direct control of Qatari owners, and were operated by STASCO, which was supporting the majority ship owner Nakilat. The second stage would be the conventional ships, which are operated by Qatari companies. The third stage would be the “Free Onboard” (FOB) ships, which are owned and operated by non-Qatari companies. The JBOG Project Team contracted with Cryostar, Honeywell and Kongsberg to work on a series of studies, tests and programming to produce the detailed procedure for upgrading the Q-Max and Q-Flex ships. This process took two years, and the first ship upgrade occurred in late 2011. This process is continuing to the present day, and the Project targets the upgrade of all ships by mid 2014. The upgrading of the LNG ships has undoubtedly been one of the most challenging tasks for the JBOG Project Team. The complexity of the technical issues coupled with the myriad of ship owners, operators and builders has made this part of the project both interesting and vexing. Front End Engineering Design (FEED) Once the JBOG Project Team made a decision to relocate the compressors to a central location, the FEED was formally started by Fluor Daniel in their office near Houston, USA. The main challenges for the FEED team were: a) Design of the suction pipeline system to ensure pressure drop is minimized

Based on the gas pressure available at the “ship rail”, Fluor was asked to design the suction pipeline network to ensure that the gas arrives at the suction of the Low Pressure compressor at positive pressure. Several design software models were employed by both Fluor and Qatargas to check and recheck the pressure drop calculations for the main design case. A dynamic simulation model produced during the detailed design phase in 2011 confirmed the FEED work as accurate and conservative. b) Plant Sizing

6 IPTC 17233

The conceptual design asked for the JBOG Recovery Project to be sized for the recovery from three simultaneous ship loadings. We embarked on an extensive data mining exercise to acquire and analyse actual JBOG production during ship loadings for different types of ships at the Berths 1, 2 and 3, which were operational at that time. Since the Berths 4, 5 and 6 were not in operation during early 2008, the JBOG PMT asked Fluor to produce a JBOG Generation Study. This study took all the actual JBOG production data, created a model to predict the JBOG production, and then extrapolated the model to predict what the JBOG production would be at Berths 4, 5 and 6. This study produced some interesting results.

Berth LNG Loading Rate (m3/hr) Maximum BOG Generation Rate (kg/hr)

Minimum BOG Generation Rate (kg/hr)

1 12,000 45,779 31,926 2 10,400 38,443 27,272 3 10,400 42,041 27,696 4 14,000 52,841 36,886 5 14,000 53,737 37,473 6 14,000 56,569 39,338

The generation study showed that there was a range of possible JBOG flowrates which could be produced from the berths. The actual volume would depend on several factors, e.g., ambient temperature, heat inleak into the transfer pipes, arrival temperature of the ships and loading rate of LNG. In order to determine a practical and reasonable plant size, the JBOG Project Team took the three highest JBOG generation rates for all berths. This turned out to be Berths 4, 5 and 6, because they were located the furthest from the storage tanks. This basis of design gave a plant design throughput of 163 tonnes per hour.

0.910.87

0.85

0.91

0.800.83

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Berth 1 Berth 2 Berth 3 Berth 4 Berth 5 Berth 6

BO

G G

ener

ated

(kg/

hr)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

BO

G/L

NG

mol

%Generatiion due to flashingGeneration due to ship boil-offGeneration due to displacementBOG/LNG mol%

IPTC 17233 7

c) Constructible and operable corridor space for the large diameter pipes in brownfield areas

In 2008, RLC was in the middle of a Port Expansion Project (PEP). This project envisaged the construction of a new breakwater adjacent to the existing one. The new breakwater would be designed to accommodate five new LNG berths, one of which, i.e., Berth 6, was being designed at that time. However, in spite of this new development, no provision had been made to provide corridor space for the JBOG Project. The reason for this apparent omission was that the plans for JBOG had not been firmed up at the time the PEP was executed. It was too late to expand the breakwater to suit JBOG. The JBOG PMT had extensive discussions with RLC on this subject, and in view of the strategic nature of the JBOG Project, RLC agreed to provide a 3m wide corridor for the JBOG 60” main pipeline on the new breakwater. This corridor was the absolute minimum we could live with from a safety, constructability and operability point of view. This did mean that the pipeline would have vertical expansion loops instead of the usual horizontal ones. The cables had to be threaded through the pipe support foundations to ensure that we stayed within our approved corridor width. A novel solution had to be found for the JBOG corridor on the old breakwater. During one of the routine visits to site, a JBOG PMT member discovered that there was some space available between a berm and the security road on the north side of the old breakwater. The berm had been made redundant because the old breakwater was now protected from high waves by the new breakwater. JBOG suggested to RLC that part of the berm be removed, and the space utilized to accommodate JBOG pipes. This solution was accepted, and thus JBOG managed to secure corridor space within a fully developed harbor. d) Minimise footprint of the CCA to efficiently utilize scarce real estate in the RLC port area

The location of the CCA had to be within the RLC port area. We identified a plot of land adjacent to the RasGas LNG Tank Farm. Further enquiries revealed that the land was reserved for a future tank for RasGas. The JBOG plot was moved northwards, but RLC requested the JBOG Project Team to minimize the plot plan to leave space for future expansion of the JBOG facilities or for another similar project. The FEED design team looked hard at the plot requirements from a safety, constructability and operability point of view. The equipment location was optimized and every inch of available space was utilized effectively. Several innovations were employed to reduce plot size. For instance, the JBOG facilities do not have their own dedicated flare stack. The flares for Lot H, Lot N, QG1 and the berths are utilized to blow down JBOG gas inventory. The buildings were located as close to the compressors as physically possible, but the building had to be designed as “blast-proof”. This was

3027

3731

4227

5419

40

50

37 56.6

7326

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80BOG Generation (t/hr)

10,400 m 3 /hr Projected max. at14,000 m 3 /hr

10,400 m 3 /hrProjected max. at 14,000 m 3 /hr

JBOG Minimum Design Rate

Actual derived flow / HD Compressor

curve

Actual measured flow

Simulated range (min1 → max1)

10,400 m3/hr loading

Simulated range (min1 → max1)

14,000 m3/hr loading

JBOG Maximum Design Rate

Simulated range (min2 → max2)

10,400 m3/hr loading

Simulated range (min2 → max2)

14,000 m3/hr loading

AC

TUA

LS

IMU

LATE

D

90-1

00 m

barg

ons

hore

tank

Pre

ssur

eM

in1:

No

subc

oolin

gM

ax1:

50

mba

rg o

nsho

re ta

nk P

Min

2: 0

.5°C

sub

cool

ing

Max

2: 9

0 m

barg

ons

hore

tank

P

8 IPTC 17233

mandatory to allow the plant to be safely shut down in case of an explosion. The piperack was changed from a wide and squat structure into a narrow and tall one. By the time a plot plan was developed for review, RLC requirements had been met, and this led to the approval of the land allocation in an area where real estate was extremely scarce. e) Accurate advanced data on compressors’ sizes

The compressors were the heart of the plant, and the whole piping, structural and electrical design revolved around the compressors. In order to improve the accuracy of the FEED, and avoid expensive rework, the JBOG PMT had to utilize realistic compressors data in terms of size, power and weight. Fluor engineers worked with a few compressor suppliers, and came up with budgetary and outline information from several compressor suppliers. The designers then took one of the compressor suppliers, and used its information for the design. There was an inherent risk that if the compressor supplier changed during the detailed design phase then the plant design may see significant change. The only way to fully mitigate this risk would have been to purchase the compressors during the FEED stage. However, the project owners did not agree to commit to a large expense prior to the approval of the final investment decision, which was due at the end of the FEED. Therefore, the JBOG PMT mitigated this risk to the extent possible by leaving some margins in the design for possible changes in compressor sizes. f) JBOG Recovery Study

One of the most important questions the JBOG PMT had to answer was the one related to JBOG Recovery estimates. The key project stakeholders, i.e., the owners and the Ministry of Environment were keen to know as to how much JBOG will the project will be able to recover. While it was clear to everyone involved with the project that elimination of all flaring would be prohibitive, it was also a requirement from the Ministry of Environment that the project recover gas to the “maximum extent practical”. Once the initial assessment of plant design was made as 163 tonnes per hour, we commissioned a JBOG Recovery Study, with the remit to accurately assess the amount of gas which can be recovered by a facility of this size.

IPTC 17233 9

In order to produce a study like this, we needed a realistic JBOG production profile. No such data existed at that time, largely because not all the berths had been built and commissioned. Fortunately, the JBOG PMT hit upon a harbor modeling study done for a different purpose. A “Sandwell” model had been created by the LNG owners to simulate the movement of ships within the 6-berth harbor. The Sandwell model was used to finalise the number of berths by calculating the berth utilization, and checking whether the utilization of berths and ship movement was within safe margins. The JBOG PMT took the Sandwell model simulation for the year 2015, and used the data to build a model showing the movement of ships at each berth for a typical year. We took the actual JBOG flowrates from Berths 1, 2 and 3, and the estimated flowrates from the JBOG Generation Study for Berths 4, 5 and 6. These flowrates were superimposed on the ship movements at each berth. The sum of the flowrates from each berth for a full year produced a reasonable estimate of the typical annual JBOG Production Profile. The JBOG Production Profile helped the JBOG PMT resolve several issues. The main advantage of this production profile was the realization that with two 50% compression trains, the first train can recover up to 70% of the total gas. The second main

outcome from this analysis was that the two 50% compressor trains, working together, can theoretically recover 97% of the gas available for recovery. Only three percent of the JBOG will be unrecovered because this would constitute the excursion from the plant design rate of 163 tonnes per hour. It was also obvious from this chart that any attempt to recover 100% of the gas would mean that we would need to double the size of the plant. Potentially doubling the CapEx to chase the last 3% of the gas did not make practical or economic sense. Hence, this recovery study confirmed that the basis of our plant sizing was indeed robust. The next step was to determine the actual recovery rate to take into account the reliability, availability and other factors into account. A Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study was carried out to determine the amount of time the plant will need to shut down for preventive and unplanned maintenance. A detailed study was done to determine how much gas would be unrecoverable during the start of the recovery cycle. One major factor in this discussion was the arrival condition of the LNG ship. If the LNG ship arrived at the loading harbor with a small quantity of LNG remaining in her tanks, also termed as “heel”, then the ship would be called a “Cold Ship”. If the ship did not have any LNG in her tanks then the ship would be termed a “Warm Ship”. When the ship arrives “warm”, it needs to be cooled down for several hours by spraying a small flowrate of LNG inside the tanks. This is necessary to avoid losing a large amount of LNG during bulk loading due to boil-off. As the ship tanks get cooler, the rate of LNG is raised until the full loading rate can be reached. This process affects the JBOG recovery rate because the JBOG cannot be recovered from a ship

10 IPTC 17233

until the ship HD compressors are run. These HD compressors cannot be run until the JBOG temperature drops down to around -40oC. The bottom line was that more gas will need to be flared if the ship arrived warm as opposed to arriving cold. Since it is impossible to predict the proportion of warm and cold ships, the JBOG Project Team consulted with the ship operators and assumed that roughly half of the ships would be warm, and the rest cold. This was the basis around which the JBOG Recovery Study estimated that over a period of ten years, to cover major maintenance cycles, the average recovery rate would be 90%. In any given year the recovery rate can be higher if the plant is not shut down for planned maintenance. Similarly the recovery can move up or down depending upon the actual proportion of warm and cold ships. A sensitivity analysis was run to determine the impact of various parameters on the JBOG recovery.

JBOG Equity Sharing and Allocation The JBOG Recovery Project is owned by the two LNG producers in Qatar, i.e., Qatargas and RasGas. The recovered JBOG has to be returned to the LNG producers. In other words, the JBOG generated from an owner’s LNG cargo is returned to that owner. The JBOG PMT consulted with the owners as to the method of sharing the cost of the project and of allocating the gas to the owners. Two clear options were available to the team. One option was to link the JBOG allocation to the LNG production. This would mean that a formula would be agreed which would relate the JBOG production to LNG production through a factor. The difficulty with this option was that the JBOG production was not only a function of the LNG production, but also depended upon how far the jetty was from the tanks. As the LNG flowed in the transfer lines, longer transfer lines resulted in a higher heat inleak, and hence a higher proportion of the LNG evaporated into gas. This gas bubbles out inside the ship tank as pressure drops. The other allocation option was to calculate the exact JBOG Production at each berth, link the owners’ LNG production to that berth, and then allocate the JBOG CapEx to the owners in that proportion.

IPTC 17233 11

The JBOG owners preferred the second option. The JBOG PMT finalized the JBOG generation study, worked out the gas production at each berth, and agreed with the owners the CapEx sharing ratio. It was agreed that the actual allocation of the recovered gas to the LNG owners will be strictly equal to the actual gas generated by each ship. The JBOG Project Team included allocation meters at each berth to allow the operators to know exactly how much gas has been generated by each ship. Since each LNG ship carries the cargo of a single owner entity, it is easy for the operator to allocate the gas generated to the rightful owner.

These principles are being used to develop the Allocation and Metering Procedures, and also the Nomination Procedures for managing the allocation of the recovered gas in a transparent and auditable manner. Economic Crisis As the JBOG Project completed its FEED at the end of 2008, the global economic crisis started to have its impact on the oil and gas business. The owners asked the JBOG team to reduce the capital expenditure of the project. The team worked on reducing the scope to the practical extent by changing a 3 times 50% compression plant to a 2 times 50% compression plant. This change had a marginal impact on the reliability of the plant, but made a significant difference to the CapEx estimate. A few other changes brought the cost down by around 20%. However, these reductions were not sufficient to convince the owners to commit to around $1bn during the uncertain economic background of December 2008. The JBOG PMT successfully negotiated with the owners to let the team continue to fine tune the design, work on interfaces and develop the design in the difficult brownfield areas until the economic climate improved. The owners agreed with this proposal, and the JBOG team continued to work with Fluor in Houston on the Pre-EPC work, albeit with a reduced team. Pre-EPC Phase The scope of the pre-EPC phase was designed to reduce the uncertainties of the cost and schedule estimate, develop the off-plot brownfield design and work on the compressors’ requisition. The team worked with the RLC authorities to get the design approved for the numerous crossings of pipelines and cables. Another key aspect of the pre-EPC work was the monitoring of the market for oil and gas equipment and services. During 2008 the oil price had rocketed up to around $150 per barrel. This sharp rise in oil price led a rapid increase in the prices of equipment, materials and also of services, as a lot of new investments started to hit the markets. This inflation started to cool down during 2009, and the JBOG Project Team conducted several market studies to assess a “sweet spot” for the project to be resuscitated. By the end of 2009, the project design had developed, preparations for key tie-ins were in place, a new cost estimate was developed and the compressor requisition was taken to the point where the order could be placed within days of a Final Investment Decision by the JBOG Owners. During the second half of 2009, an exercise to select a detailed design contractor was started. By early 2010, the evaluation of the bids had been finalized, and the contractor selection ready for final approval. The revised cost estimate and investment proposal was approved by the JBOG Owners in February 2010, and an Engineering,

JBOG/LNMaximum1 Minimum1 Summer2 Winter2 Average2 Design Maximum

C For Max1 Casetonnes/hr m3/hr 50oC 15oC 34.7oC 17oC Case %

Berth1 5517 12006 45.8 31.9 45.1 44.4 44.8 0.0 0.83%Berth2 4802 10400 38.4 27.2 38.0 37.6 37.8 0.0 0.80%Berth3 4620 10399 42.0 27.7 41.5 40.9 41.3 0.0 0.91%Berth4 6180 13996 52.8 36.9 52.0 51.1 51.6 52.8 0.85%Berth5 6178 13991 53.7 37.4 52.9 51.9 52.4 53.7 0.87%Berth6 6174 13984 56.6 39.3 55.5 54.3 55.0 56.6 0.92%

163.1Design Case

LNG Loading Rate JBOG Rate in tonnes per hour

12 IPTC 17233

Procurement and Construction Management contract was awarded to Fluor Daniel in the same month. Engineering, Procurement and Construction The detailed design of the project started in Fluor’s office in Houston in February 2010. The JBOG PMT mobilized a small multi-disciplined team to the design office. Fluor mobilized a team in Houston and New Delhi, and started working on the basic design of the project. One of the first things to do was to verify the design basis of the FEED. A team of process engineers recalculated all the key pressure drops, equipment sizes and line sizes, and produced a FEED verification report. Within a month of the EPCm award the order for the compressors package was issued. GE Nuovo Pignone was selected as the compressor manufacturer. The advantage of this early ordering of compressors was that the design drawings for the compressors would be available earlier than usual, thus helping the design of the piping, foundations, structural steel and electrical disciplines. Another early achievement of the detailed design stage was the effective and successful execution of the tie-ins at Berths 2 and 3. There was a window of opportunity to complete these tie-ins due to the rare shutdowns of the berths. The preparations made during the pre-EPC phase coupled with quick mobilization to site during the detailed design phase ensured that JBOG completed its first site work safely and in a timely manner. By the middle of 2010, most of the mechanical equipment had been ordered. . The execution strategy was based on starting early on the brownfield work because of expected delays due to permitting and interface issues. Based on this strategy, most of the large diameter SS pipe was also committed by June 2010 to a pipe mill in Thailand. As the compressor design drawings were received from GE, it was revealed that the plot plan assumptions made during FEED were not accurate, and that some of the equipment sizes were larger than expected. The JBOG PMT was aware of the constraints on plot space in RLC, and therefore, worked hard with the Fluor design team to reorientate the plot to fit the larger equipment, while keeping the plot space the same as approved during FEED. This was a major achievement, and a result of smart engineering and design. By the end of 2010, the structural steel design was advanced enough to start ordering the steel to a fabricator in UAE, William Hare. Electrical design also started to take shape, and foundation drawings were issued to site. The CCA site needed around a thousand piles because the port area was largely reclaimed land. A contract was awarded to Ammico in mid-2010 to start the piling and site preparation work. The project had to build a causeway linking the new and old breakwaters to carry the pipes and cable. This work was awarded to STFA in Q3 2010.

A rapid site mobilization took place during mid 2010, with the acquisition of the site offices, laydown areas and the infrastructure required for supporting a site team. Discussions were started with a few parties to acquire a labour camp, and a deal was struck with Shell to purchase the Global Village in west RLC. This camp could house 3500 people, and was in good condition. The purchase of this camp was a key plank of the project’s strategy for workers’ welfare. By owning our camp,

IPTC 17233 13

the project made a step change in the treatment of workers on the project. The project could control the living, food and recreational arrangements for the workers. By the beginning of 2011, the site was a hive of activities, with Ammico drilling piles and STFA working on the causeway. The JBOG site PMT increased in size and moved to a new office. The main construction contracts were Offplot Civil, Piping and Structural, CCA Civil, Piping, Structural and Mechanical, and Electrical and Instrumentation. The work required for awarding construction contracts had started in 2010, and bid evaluation for the three construction contracts started in earnest during 2011. After several meetings and tender board approvals, the construction contracts were awarded by mid-2011 to Qcon for the Offplot and CCA mechanical work, and to Qatar Kentz for the Electrical and Instrumentation (E&I) work. By the summer of 2011, the piling and causeway work had been completed, and Ammico and STFA demobilized from site. This set the scene for Qcon to mobilise and start the foundations work in both CCA and Offplot areas. The SS large diameter pipes, elbows and cold shoes had started arriving at site. Qcon started working on the offplot foundations. The piles and all underground piping in the CCA were virtually sitting in saline water because of the reclaimed land and high level of subsoil water. In order to prevent corrosion, a complicated cathodic protection (CP) design was required for the CCA. We not only needed a permanent cathodic protection design, but also needed a temporary arrangement to protect the piles and underground piping until the permanent CP system could be hooked up to power during startup. Consequently the first step in the CCA, before foundations could be cast, was to drill holes for the CP anodes. Qcon started working on the drilling, and spent most of the Q3 and Q4 of 2011 completing the drilling, while working on the excavation and foundations in parallel. Due to high subsoil water level, the dewatering of excavations became a huge exercise, needing dozens of pumps, water settling tanks and a maze of water disposal pipes run all the way to the sea. By early 2012, foundations for buildings, compressors and piperacks could be seen mushrooming out of the ground. The blast proof buildings were designed like Fort Knox vaults, with all walls made of reinforced concrete. This took a significant amount of time as wall sections were cast one by one. A huge push was made by Qcon in Q1 2012 to raise production rates, and this led us to the point in mid-2012 when all the major foundations were completed. This led the compressors to be set on the foundations, and pipe rack columns and beams to be installed. Over the summer months of 2012, the three buildings, ITR65, 33kV and 132kV, were completed by Qcon, and handed over to Qatar Kentz for the architectural and electrical work. Qatar Kentz mobilized additional people, and started the internal walls, plastering and insulation work. As soon as the compressors were installed, the structural steel erection started for the compressor shelters. During the Q3 of 2012, the pipe rack erection and steel erection dominated the construction work. During 2012, the pipe fabrication had started both on site, and in a Qcon fabrication yard in Messaied. The fabricated spools were brought to site, and by the end of 2012, the pipe erection started in the CCA. The dawn of 2013 coincided with a massive push by Qcon to accelerate and complete the pipe erection work in the plant. The piping in offplot was getting completed as towering vertical loops for the 60” pipe were erected. In parallel, Qatar Kentz starting installing equipment inside the buildings and also finished off the hundreds of concrete duct banks inside the CCA. By the middle of 2013, over 400 piping test packs in the CCA were being tested. Electrical and instrumentation cables were being

14 IPTC 17233

laid and cable trays and ladders installed all over the CCA. Temporary power was introduced into the buildings, and testing of switchgear commenced. The EPC journey which started in February 2012 in Houston had started to come to its end as the site started to resemble the finished product. At the time of writing this paper, the JBOG facilities are set to be completed by the end of 2013, with a start-up planned at the end of Q1 2014, in line with the promise made to the JBOG owners in February 2010 at the time of funding. Technical Innovations The JBOG Project has introduced several technical innovations to the design. Here are the main ones: Ultra Low Differential Pressure Check Valves

• Due to the very low inlet pressures (0.5 BarG), no check valve design was available to perform in this application

• JBOG PMT started a research project to design, build and test a special Tilting Disc Check Valve using an ultra-light titanium disc, shaped like an aerofoil

• The valve was tested in the US, and was proven to work better than designed

Largest Boil-off Gas Compressor

• The relative large volume of 163 tonnes per hour coupled with low suction pressure has given rise to the largest Boil-off Gas Compressor in the world

• Supplied by GE Nuovo Pignone, the compressor design went through several reviews, and special measures have been put in place to ensure safe and reliable operation of the compressor

Ultra Low Temperature Buckling Pins

• Buckling Pins are special pressure relieving devices used in applications where a quick pressure relief is required

• In order to protect the ship tanks from an overpressure scenario, JBOG has used buckling pin valves

• These Buckling Pin Valves need to operate at cryogenic conditions, and the JBOG PMT has worked with the supplier to design special seals and mechanisms to ensure reliability during operation

Safety The JBOG Project has put safety as its number one priority from day one of the project. The JBOG Project Team and the contractors have been completely focused on keeping everybody working on the JBOG Project safe from injury. Our goal is “Zero”, which means that we want an Incident and Injury Free project, and that we want Everybody to Go Home Safely. A large number of rules, initiatives, procedures, training and site

IPTC 17233 15

campaigns have been introduced on the project. Numerous standowns and several safety days have been organized to increase the awareness among the workers of risks to their safety. One of the biggest challenges for the project was to raise the risk-taking threshold of the workers, who come from backgrounds where safety of life and property is not necessarily treated as seriously as on the oil and gas projects. The JBOG Project introduced the Twelve Golden Rules, compliance with which was mandatory. We set the boundaries very clearly, trained the workers to understand the rules and then strictly enforced compliance with these rules. We had to release many workers from the project who did not comply with the Golden Rules. However, the end result has justified the enforcement of these rules, and many workers have given us positive feedback on the introduction and implementation of these rules. One of the key aspects of the JBOG safety program has been strict compliance and follow-up of every rule, procedure and initiative implemented on the project. Most of the measures we took on the project were not new, but our implementation, training and follow-up was first class. The JBOG Project has managed to achieve 18 million manhours without a Lost Time Injury. The Total Recordable Incident Rate, measured over a million manhours, is around 0.5, which points to a “pace setter” performance. We have worked hard to keep our workers safe over a period in excess of two years. Environment The JBOG Project is one of the largest environment projects in the world. The JBOG team had decided to be a model for enhancing the awareness of environmental issues. The JBOG PMT worked on a voluntary basis to highlight many environmental problems facing us. Following is a description of some of them:

• High quality camp provided by Qatargas for the workers of all contractors. Camp includes recreational facilities including swimming pools, grass playing field, free internet café, medical facilities and food prepared by native chefs

• Environmental initiatives taken. Beach cleaned and trees planted in Ras Laffan City • A working model of the JBOG Project was prepared especially to demonstrate the project to the public. The model

was displayed at the COP 18 conference exhibition in Doha in November 2012.

16 IPTC 17233