The Risk of Cryogenic Liquid Exposure Could Have Been a Show Stopper for FLNG (Floating Liquified Natural Gas Production and Storage) Projects : How Did the Industry Respond?

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Wade
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Cryogenic Liquid ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Natural Gas Production ◽  
And Storage

scholarly journals Low carbon renewable natural gas production from coalbeds and implications for carbon capture and storage

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaixing Huang ◽  
Christine Sednek ◽  
Michael A. Urynowicz ◽  
Hongguang Guo ◽  
Qiurong Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Natural Gas Production ◽  
Renewable Natural Gas ◽  
And Storage

Reducing cost of CCUS associated with natural gas production by improving monitoring technologies

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Mohammad Bagheri ◽  
Scott Ryan ◽  
David Byers ◽  
Matthias Raab
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Monitoring Cost ◽  
Natural Gas Production ◽  
Monitoring Technologies ◽  
The Cost ◽  
And Storage

This paper examines how we can reduce the cost of carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS). The CO2CRC research and demonstration projects during the last 15 years and the upcoming Otway Stage 3 Project aim to reduce the cost of CCUS. The CO2CRC Otway Stage 3 Project will develop subsurface monitoring technologies which can significantly reduce the cost of the surveillance. The CCUS associated with natural gas processing carries the lowest cost compared to other industries because production of concentrated CO2 streams is already part of the gas production process. Transport and storage remain the highest cost components of CCUS for natural gas production. Ranges of storage and transportation costs based on different publicly available data are ~US$2–40/tCO2 and ~US$2–10/tCO2 respectively. Further, the US Department of Energy cost model identifies 40–60% of storage cost as relating to recurring monitoring. This is highly dependent on project specifications, regulatory requirements and geographical considerations. The application of Otway Stage 3 subsurface technologies show preliminary long-term monitoring cost savings estimates for a large Australian project of up to 75% compared to conventional surface seismic-based methodologies. Depending on total injection mass, this would equate to an estimated cost saving of up to AU$12/tonne of CO2 injected for such a project. Reduced monitoring costs could be applied to all CCUS projects but would be of most interest to gas projects because storage is likely to be the biggest contributor to overall CCUS cost.

scholarly journals Quantitative study on natural gas production risk of Carboniferous gas reservoir in eastern Sichuan

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guo Yu ◽  
Haitao Li ◽  
Yanru Chen ◽  
Linqing Liu ◽  
Chenyu Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Probability Method ◽  
Gas Reservoir ◽  
Production Risk ◽  
Probability Interval ◽  
Natural Gas Production ◽  
Stable Production

AbstractQuantifying natural gas production risk can help guide natural gas exploration and development in Carboniferous gas reservoirs. In this study, the Monte Carlo probability method is used to obtain the probability distribution and growth curve of each production risk factor and production in a Carboniferous gas reservoir in eastern Sichuan. In addition, the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is used to conduct the sensitivity analysis of the risk factors, and the natural gas production and realization probability under different risk factors are obtained. The research results show that: (1) the risk factor–production growth curve and probability distribution are calculated by the Monte Carlo probability method. The average annual production under the stable production stage under different realization probabilities is obtained. The maximum probability range of annual production is $$\left( {43.43 - 126.35} \right) \times 10^{8} {\text{m}}^{3} /{\text{year}}$$ 43.43 - 126.35 × 10 8 m 3 / year , and the probability range is 14.59–92.88%. (2) The risk factor sensitivity analysis is significantly affected by the probability interval. In the entire probability interval, the more sensitive risk factors are the average production of the kilometer-deep well (D) and the production rate in the stable production stage (A). During the exploration and development of natural gas, these two risk factors can be adjusted to increase production.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document