Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

LNG pt. 1 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby prajeshbhat » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 12:53:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vampyregirl', 'S')hell has commissioned the very first Floating Liquified Natural Gas facility. This ship will eliminate the need for installing hundreds of kilometres of pipeline and building jettys and onshore LNG plants.
When the ship is completed it will have decks measuring 488 by 74 metres and fully loaded will weigh 600k tonnes, about six times the size of an aircraft carrier. Despite its massive size its only a quarter the size of an onshore LNG plant.
It will be moored in the Prelude field, 200 kilometres off the coast of Australia, which has trillions of cubic feet of liquid rich gas.
All LPG and LNG production will be done onboard the ship. It will offload onto smaller ships for delivery to world markets.
The FLNG is expected to produce at least 5.3 mtpa of liquids and 3.6 mtpa of LNG.
Its another technological innovation from Shell who revolutionized deep sea drilling in the Parque das Campas field off Brazil and in Perdido Bay in the Gulf of Mexico.


Will someone please explain the rationale behind this. Isn't constructing a pipeline one time cheaper than the repeated to and fro transportation of large volumes of natural gas in a gigantic floating vessels :?:

OK. This is what I read somewhere.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his type of ship/platform will enable the conversion of gas to LNG to occur offshore and take advantage of wells that were impractical to pipe to on-shore facilities.

:idea:

So I guess the reason is that Natural gas is going to be very very scarce in the future. So nobody is going to bother building permanent pipelines for wells that are only going to produce miniscule quantities of gas. The gas will be stored in vessels and taken only to countries that bid the highest price. :badgrin:
I don't think this is being done with the intention of bringing the price of gas down at all. It's just that the countries are getting desperate for whatever gas is left.
prajeshbhat
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 17 May 2011, 02:44:33

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby vampyregirl » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 12:57:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('prajeshbhat', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vampyregirl', 'S')hell has commissioned the very first Floating Liquified Natural Gas facility. This ship will eliminate the need for installing hundreds of kilometres of pipeline and building jettys and onshore LNG plants.
When the ship is completed it will have decks measuring 488 by 74 metres and fully loaded will weigh 600k tonnes, about six times the size of an aircraft carrier. Despite its massive size its only a quarter the size of an onshore LNG plant.
It will be moored in the Prelude field, 200 kilometres off the coast of Australia, which has trillions of cubic feet of liquid rich gas.
All LPG and LNG production will be done onboard the ship. It will offload onto smaller ships for delivery to world markets.
The FLNG is expected to produce at least 5.3 mtpa of liquids and 3.6 mtpa of LNG.
Its another technological innovation from Shell who revolutionized deep sea drilling in the Parque das Campas field off Brazil and in Perdido Bay in the Gulf of Mexico.


Will someone please explain the rationale behind this. Isn't constructing a pipeline one time cheaper than the repeated to and fro transportation of large volumes of natural gas in a gigantic floating vessels :?:

OK. This is what I read somewhere.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his type of ship/platform will enable the conversion of gas to LNG to occur offshore and take advantage of wells that were impractical to pipe to on-shore facilities.

:idea:

So I guess the reason is that Natural gas is going to be very very scarce in the future. So nobody is going to bother building permanent pipelines for wells that are only going to produce miniscule quantities of gas. The gas will be stored in vessels and taken only to countries that bid the highest price. :badgrin:
I don't think this is being done with the intention of bringing the price of gas down at all. It's just that the countries are getting desperate for whatever gas is left.

I thought i aready explained that. It eliminates the need for the pipeline AND the need for building jettys AND an onshore LNG plant which would be 4 times the size of this ship. And BTW there is currently a gas glut on the market. Gas is not going to be scarce anytime soon.
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby prajeshbhat » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 13:17:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vampyregirl', ' ')And BTW there is currently a gas glut on the market. Gas is not going to be scarce anytime soon.


That's probably what they said about oil in the year 2000. I won't count the chickens before they hatch.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') thought i aready explained that. It eliminates the need for the pipeline AND the need for building jettys AND an onshore LNG plant which would be 4 times the size of this ship.


But what about the cost of compressing and liquefying the gas offshore? And the cost of moving and maintaining the gigantic ship?
No way this gas can be cheap. The fact that the companies are going after the small reserves should tell us something.
prajeshbhat
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 17 May 2011, 02:44:33
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby vampyregirl » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 13:50:12

Hardly a small reserve. The FLNG will be moored in the Prelude field which has trillions of cubic feet of liquid rich gas. Sorry if i failed to mention that before.
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 04:00:00

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby papa moose » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 21:33:52

Bear in mind also that an onshore facility with associated pipelines and load out facilities is only useful for the life of the field that it is associated with, and perhaps a few close neighbours.
An FLNG is by definition mobile, it's no speed boat (not even sure if it is self propelled, no matter that's what tugs are for) but when one well dries up just "steam" off to the next.
This new ship is only for processing and storage not transport the LNG tankers that actually transport the stuff can travel to where ever the FLNG is currently set up.
So to my mind this is using innovation to give a longer lifespan to a given investment.
"That really annoying person you know, the one who's always spouting bullshit, the person who always thinks they're right?
Well, the odds are that for somebody else, you're that person.
So take the amount you think you know, reduce it by 99.999%, and then you'll have an idea of how much you actually know..."
papa moose
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed 17 Nov 2010, 01:44:59
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby JRP3 » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 22:45:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vampyregirl', ' ') And BTW there is currently a gas glut on the market. Gas is not going to be scarce anytime soon.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ased on a data from the U.S. Geological Survey, the United States government, via its Energy Information Administration, is cutting its estimate of natural gas recoverable from the Marcellus Shale by nearly 80%.


http://protectingourwaters.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/geologists-slash-estimate-of-shale-gas-by-nearly-80/

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he data show that while there are some very active wells, they are often surrounded by vast zones of less-productive wells that in some cases cost more to drill and operate than the gas they produce is worth. Also, the amount of gas produced by many of the successful wells is falling much faster than initially predicted by energy companies, making it more difficult for them to turn a profit over the long run.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1
Blogging about EV's
http://ephase.blogspot.com/

Building the AMPhibian
http://amp-phibian.blogspot.com/

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/
User avatar
JRP3
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon 23 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby prajeshbhat » Fri 02 Sep 2011, 00:27:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('papa moose', 'B')ear in mind also that an onshore facility with associated pipelines and load out facilities is only useful for the life of the field that it is associated with, and perhaps a few close neighbours.
An FLNG is by definition mobile, it's no speed boat (not even sure if it is self propelled, no matter that's what tugs are for) but when one well dries up just "steam" off to the next.
This new ship is only for processing and storage not transport the LNG tankers that actually transport the stuff can travel to where ever the FLNG is currently set up.
So to my mind this is using innovation to give a longer lifespan to a given investment.


Agreed. If the new offshore fields had any significant quantities of gas, it would be cheaper to build pipelines. The fact that the companies have chosen a make-shift floating container tells me that the fields will produce small volumes of NG.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JRP3', 'T')he data show that while there are some very active wells, they are often surrounded by vast zones of less-productive wells that in some cases cost more to drill and operate than the gas they produce is worth. Also, the amount of gas produced by many of the successful wells is falling much faster than initially predicted by energy companies, making it more difficult for them to turn a profit over the long run.


Here is an article where the chief of chevron is saying the gas prices have to rise
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/08b5d9cc-4e93-11e0-874e-00144feab49a.html

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')
George Kirkland, Chevron’s head of oil and gas exploration and production, said the industry needed prices “in the sixes and sevens” in the long term to cover the cost of investment.
prajeshbhat
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 17 May 2011, 02:44:33
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby vampyregirl » Fri 02 Sep 2011, 02:26:00

the Prelude field contains at least three trillion cubic feet of liquid rich gas. if thats your idea of small volume what do you consider a signifigant amount?
The FLNG is expected to produce in Prelude for at least 20 years.
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 04:00:00

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby prajeshbhat » Fri 02 Sep 2011, 02:58:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vampyregirl', 't')he Prelude field contains at least three trillion cubic feet of liquid rich gas. if thats your idea of small volume what do you consider a signifigant amount?
The FLNG is expected to produce in Prelude for at least 20 years.


3 tcf is not that big. Considering the global annual consumption is 110 tcf. So all that gas is just 10 days of supply.
prajeshbhat
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 17 May 2011, 02:44:33
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby kildred590 » Sun 04 Sep 2011, 08:03:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ill someone please explain the rationale behind this. Isn't constructing a pipeline one time cheaper than the repeated to and fro transportation of large volumes of natural gas in a gigantic floating vessels


The vessel is built in international waters (outside of the Australian migration zone) ; hence Shell can use Chinese workers for $30 a week, rather than Australian workers for $30 an hour.

They can also avoid tiresome Australian OH&S and labour safety regulations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ear in mind also that an onshore facility with associated pipelines and load out facilities is only useful for the life of the field that it is associated with, and perhaps a few close neighbours.
An FLNG is by definition mobile, it's no speed boat (not even sure if it is self propelled, no matter that's what tugs are for) but when one well dries up just "steam" off to the next.


Well no, a vessel is usually more expensive. And of course, Shell intends to sink it after use.

But this vessel will be built in Korea - thus avoiding more Australian work.
kildred590
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue 25 Jan 2011, 00:57:35
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby prajeshbhat » Sun 04 Sep 2011, 12:00:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kildred590', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ill someone please explain the rationale behind this. Isn't constructing a pipeline one time cheaper than the repeated to and fro transportation of large volumes of natural gas in a gigantic floating vessels


The vessel is built in international waters (outside of the Australian migration zone) ; hence Shell can use Chinese workers for $30 a week, rather than Australian workers for $30 an hour.

They can also avoid tiresome Australian OH&S and labour safety regulations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ear in mind also that an onshore facility with associated pipelines and load out facilities is only useful for the life of the field that it is associated with, and perhaps a few close neighbours.
An FLNG is by definition mobile, it's no speed boat (not even sure if it is self propelled, no matter that's what tugs are for) but when one well dries up just "steam" off to the next.


Well no, a vessel is usually more expensive. And of course, Shell intends to sink it after use.

But this vessel will be built in Korea - thus avoiding more Australian work.


Hmmm. Labor arbitrage. It makes sense. But as energy becomes more and more expensive, well being of the laborers will take back seat to profits. An analogy is found in the shale gas fracking in USA. The people working on those gas wells are constantly exposed to the fracking fluid.
prajeshbhat
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 17 May 2011, 02:44:33
Top

Re: Another technological first

Unread postby kpeavey » Sun 04 Sep 2011, 12:50:56

Built on land the plant would be subject to environmental regulations, unannounced inspections, and would require union workers for construction.

Placed at sea, regulations are far more liberal, inspectors would have to be flown/ferried in which offers time to get the ship into shape, spills are dissipated rather than reported, and construction labor becomes the cheapest in the world. The added bonus of the plant being portable means pipelines are not needed for every single well. This can offset some of the initial construction expenses. I wonder if the thing can be moved out of the way of a storm. Building the rig in floating sections then assembling at sea would significantly reduce construction time.

I think the elimination of construction permits and planning process for a land based operation saves immeasurable hassle, time and expense. Land acquisition, zoning, local/county/state ordinances, environmental considerations for soil/water/air/species, evacuation planning, and of course, taxes, taxes, taxes.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever."
-George Orwell, 1984
_____

twenty centuries of stony sleep were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, and what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
-George Yeats
User avatar
kpeavey
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon 04 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

LNG pt. 1 (merged)

Unread postby WildRose » Tue 29 Jan 2013, 20:20:41

The switch from diesel to NG that is already underway:

From the Edmonton Journal Today:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business ... story.html

"Encana opened its Cavalier liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility near Strathmore just east of Calgary on Tuesday,"

"Encana already has one permanent and 10 mobile LNG fuelling stations in the U.S. along major trucking routes.

As well, Canadian National Railway is testing two main line diesel-electric locomotives fuelled principally by natural gas on the line between Edmonton and Fort McMurray. "

"Encana is converting its entire fleet of more than 1,300 trucks and passenger vehicles to natural gas. In 2011 alone, the company saved approximately $11 million in fuel costs by using natural gas instead of diesel. It has also converted close to 40 per cent of its drilling rigs."
User avatar
WildRose
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1881
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 29 Jan 2013, 20:25:54

They came.

They saw.

They drilled.

They fracked.

They saw that it was good.

And then they started converting the surface transportation network to natural gas. 8)
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby WildRose » Tue 29 Jan 2013, 20:41:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'T')hey came.

They saw.

They drilled.

They fracked.

They saw that it was good.

And then they started converting the surface transportation network to natural gas. 8)



Converting the "surface" to Swiss cheese, you mean.

Guess I haven't been paying attention!
User avatar
WildRose
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1881
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 29 Jan 2013, 21:21:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WildRose', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'T')hey came.

They saw.

They drilled.

They fracked.

They saw that it was good.

And then they started converting the surface transportation network to natural gas. 8)



Converting the "surface" to Swiss cheese, you mean.


There will be so many holes drilled in the ground its going to look like one of those old pegboards....and there will be so much frakking underground that the rocks will be like a package of crackers thats been hit with hammers.

But the NG is coming out of those rocks one way or another and the infrastructure for NG surface transportation is being put up.

Ready or not, here it comes.

Image
Let there be frakking. And there was frakking. And it was good.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Top

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby dinopello » Tue 29 Jan 2013, 21:29:35

All our buses use CNG. I was wondering about the tradeoffs between CNG and LNG and found this

http://www.agilityfuelsystems.com/why-n ... s-cng.html
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6088
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Urban Village

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby WildRose » Wed 30 Jan 2013, 00:01:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'A')ll our buses use CNG. I was wondering about the tradeoffs between CNG and LNG and found this

http://www.agilityfuelsystems.com/why-n ... s-cng.html


Thanks for that, dinopello.

I looked around a bit and found that Victoria, British Columbia will soon be adding CNG buses to their fleet:

http://www.timescolonist.com/business/n ... ia-1.35818
User avatar
WildRose
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1881
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby Shaved Monkey » Wed 30 Jan 2013, 08:52:37

I posted somewhere in another thread, my neighbour owns a bus fleet, trialled CNG and ditched it ,it wasnt as reliable as diesel
Even though he was peak oil aware he didnt see it as the solution.... yet.
He is trying to sell though
Ready to turn Zombies into WWOOFers
User avatar
Shaved Monkey
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2578
Joined: Wed 30 Mar 2011, 01:43:28

Re: LNG Coming Soon To A Place Near You

Unread postby misterno » Sun 03 Feb 2013, 16:34:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shaved Monkey', 'I') posted somewhere in another thread, my neighbour owns a bus fleet, trialled CNG and ditched it ,it wasnt as reliable as diesel
Even though he was peak oil aware he didnt see it as the solution.... yet.
He is trying to sell though


What do you mean by "CNG is not reliable"?
User avatar
misterno
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 844
Joined: Wed 07 Mar 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Somewhere super boring
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron