Vent Gas MitigationVent Gas Mitigation

PTAC Environmental ForumPTAC Environmental ForumJanuary 30, 2002January 30, 2002

Bruce Peachey, P.Eng.Bruce Peachey, P.Eng.New Paradigm Engineering Ltd., EdmontonNew Paradigm Engineering Ltd., Edmonton

About New Paradigm Engineering Ltd. Independent consulting company, Inc. 1991 Engineer “new paradigms” for industry Small but supplement manpower with other

specialists and consultants as needed for the work. Last three years spent on assessing existing and

new options for reducing methane emissions, through a series of Vent Options Studies and other activities.

• Vent Option Studies Total (2000-01)• CHO Audits and Equipment Trials (1999-2001)• New Technology Development (1998-2001)

Overview of Vent Mitigation Proposals

Stage 1What are the Options?How do you decide?

Stage 2Demonstrate the

Economic Options

Stage 3Focused R&D on Options

where needed

Economics drives theUtilization of Options

No economics drives theDevelopment of Options

Overview of Proposals – Stage 1 Vent Options Studies ($200,000)

• Phase 1a – Conventional Heavy Oil Vents (complete)» Focus on casing vents

• Phase 1b – Thermal Heavy Oil (nearly complete)» Focus on energy efficiency options

• Phase 2a – Oil & Gas Production Vents (complete)» Focus on dehydrator, power gas and tank vents

• Phase 2b – Gas Compression/Processing (nearly complete)

» Focus on fugitives and leaks

• Phase 3 – Ground Seeps (Planned for 2002)

Overview of Proposals – Stage 2 Demonstration Projects ($100,000+)

• Demonstrate that Vent Option Studies can be profitably applied in each type of producing operation.

• Proposed in November, 2001 looking for gov’t support• Collaboration with Clearstone Engineering and

Producers Catalytic Converter Trials ($10,000-$15,000 per site)

• Field tests of low cost units to convert CH4 to CO2• Unit cost <$5000 for 50 m3/d capacity• Can pay for itself on $US1.5-2 per tCO2eq• Proposed January, 2002

Overview of Proposals – Stage 3 Basic Concept

Baffles

Building gas separator Fugitive methane

withdrawn with some air Use waste heat in

exhaust stacks, and/or CANMET reverse flow reactor to maintain catalytic reaction

Just convert CH4CO2 Potentially enough for

heating or power.

Air Air

Process or CompressorBuilding

Engine

Overview of Proposals – Stage 3 Components Opportunity Definition – New Paradigm, Clearstone,

Boreal Lasers and Producer Participants. » Characterization of fugitive flows in process buildings» Proposal being prepared for work to start in April/May, 2002

Catalytic Reactor Modeling - U of A, Dr. Robert Hayes» NSERC and COURSE applications submitted ($150-$400k 2002-04)

Prototype Reactor Development and Lab/Shop Testing

» CANMET (Varennes) - Reverse Flow Catalytic Reactor» New Paradigm - Waste Heat Supported Reactor» New Paradigm – Catalytic Vent Converter (Completed in 2001)

Prototype Field Testing – 2002-2004

Work Scope – Overall Focus Areas Define or Develop Economic Options for Methane Vents Fuel Displacement by Vents in Upstream Operations

• Conventional Heavy Oil 200-300% of fuel demand

• Natural Gas and Oil Production 10-30% of fuel demand

• Gas Plants and Compressor Sites <5% of fuel demand

• Thermal Heavy Oil <1% focus is on demand reduction Reduction of Vents where fuel demand < vent stream Use of vents for power or EOR where vents >> fuel need Convert any CH4 left over to CO2 for emission credits

Deliverables by Project Stage

Stage 1 – Vent Options• One page option sheets, flowcharts, tools available on web• Technology Transfer Workshops and courses

Stage 2 – Demonstration Projects• At least one consistently documented case study on

economic mitigation of methane vents in each of six main types of upstream operation

Stage 3 – Focused R&D on Small and Fugitive Streams• Catalytic reactors or other options to economically recover

energy and/or convert irreducible methane emissions.

Implications for Industry and Regulators – The Big Picture Over $400-$800M/yr of methane vented or

emitted from upstream sites (@$3-$6/GJ)• Equivalent to over 20% of upstream energy use

Methane emissions from upstream sources

• Almost 50% of oil & gas GHG emissions • Over 8% of Canada’s GHG emissions

At the same time methane is also being flared. GHG, flaring and odour issues affecting O&G

development

Implications for Industry and Regulators – Methane - An Economic Target It has an economic value ($3-$6/GJ) Opportunities to increase sales or reduce costs It can provide the energy to support it’s own use Enable increased recovery of other hydrocarbons Many opportunities to use existing technology.

• Many existing facilities based on 1960’s design factors Gas at C$0.30/GJ and no concerns about methane impact on the environment.

Implications for Industry and Regulators - What comes with the Methane Vents? Greater GHG impact; 1 t CH4 = 20-23 tCO2e Lower cost to convert than to sequester CO2

• Sequestration US$20/tCO2• Methane Economic or <$US1.50/tCO2e

VOC’s, H2S and BTEX emissions• Sources of Odour, Public Concern and Resistance to Development are reduced with the methane.

Regulatory Pressure to Change

Overall Schedule – Where are we now?

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Stage 1 – Ph 1 & 2 Ph 3

Stage 2 – Demos

Stage 3 – Focused R&D

Stage 1 – Technology Transfer

Follow-up Work

Want to develop projects as Win-Win• Producers get needed support for economic

results• Governments get results communicated widely • Proponents get to apply their knowledge and

expertise• Public gets understanding of GHG issues• Everyone gets accelerated emission reductions

Demonstrate potential benefits for all Upstream Oil and Gas Sectors and Stakeholders

Contact Information

New Paradigm Engineering Ltd.C/o Advanced Technology Centre9650-20 Avenue Edmonton, AlbertaCanada T6N 1G1

tel: 780.448.9195fax: 780.462.7297email: bruce@newparadigm.ab.ca

web: www.newparadigm.ab.ca