Upstream Oil & Gas Plant Performance

Benchmarking, Auditing and Simulation

Don Colley, P.Eng.DGC Consulting Ltd.

Dr. Bill Svrcek, P.EngUniversity of Calgary

GPAC April 15, 2005

DGC Consulting/UofC

Introduction This presentation will include:

Performance Benchmarking Energy and Environmental Audits Process Simulation

Tools for Energy Cost Optimization

DGC Consulting/UofC

Performance Benchmarking Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Facility, process and equipment benchmarking Energy KPIs Environmental KPIs

UOG Applications Monitoring and Tracking Performance Screening and Assessing Facilities Continuous Improvement Target Setting

UOG Examples Sour Gas and Sweet Gas Conventional Oil and Heavy Oil

DGC Consulting/UofC

KPI Structure

All based on production data: Numerator: Item of interest in units of

energy, mass or volume

Denominator: Total energy equivalent production Small and decreasing value is good Large and increasing value is bad

DGC Consulting/UofC

Energy Equivalent Production

Denominator calculated as the sum of: Total gas production Total gas liquids production Total oil production Total sulphur production Total exported power Total exported heat energy

EEP expressed as GJ or BOE

DGC Consulting/UofC

Items Benchmarked

Numerator can be: Energy consumption Carbon dioxide emissions Sulphur dioxide emissions Fresh water consumption Produced water disposal Sand production

DGC Consulting/UofC

Operational Decoupling

Plant Total Energy Intensity (PTEI) = Plant Processing Energy Intensity, PPEI Compression or Pumping Intensity, C/PEI Plant Flare Energy Intensity, PFEI Plant Vent Energy Intensity, PVEI

Field Gathering Energy Intensity (FGEI)

Total Energy Intensity = PTEI + FGEI

DGC Consulting/UofC

Monitoring & Tracking Performance

Performance Indicators with Targets can be set up to effectively monitor plant, process or equipment performance

Indicators can have low and high flags

DCS availability means operators can take immediate action to correct problems or schedule maintenance

DGC Consulting/UofC

Facility Level Benchmarking(Applied to over 30 UOG facilities)

Sour Gas Processing Plants Sweet Gas Processing Plants Conventional Oil and Solution Gas Batteries Gathering Systems EOR Heavy Oil Projects

DGC Consulting/UofC

Energy Intensity

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Jan-0

4Fe

b-04

Mar-0

4Ap

r-04

May-0

4Ju

n-04

Jul-0

4Au

g-04

Ave J

an-Au

g 04

Targe

tSe

p-04

Oct-0

4No

v-04

Ave S

ep-No

v 04

Inte

nsity

, GJ/

GJ

BTEI BPEI BFEI BVEI Bty/FldTEI BCompEI

DGC Consulting/UofC

Gas Plant and Gathering Systems Energy Intensity

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Jan-0

4Fe

b-04

Mar-0

4Ap

r-04

May-0

4Ju

n-04

Jul-0

4Au

g-04

Sep-0

4Oc

t-04

Nov-0

4De

c-04

Ave 2

004

Jan-0

5Fe

b-05

Ave J

an-Fe

b 05

Targ

et

Inte

nsity

, GJ/

GJ

GP TEI GP PEI GP FEI GS#1 TEI GS#2 TEI GP/GS TEI

DGC Consulting/UofC

Process/Equipment KPIs

Gas Compressor or Oil/Water Pump EI = Energy Input / EEP

Amine System EI = Reboiler Energy Input / EEP

DGC Consulting/UofC

Integrated Production Intensities

Wellhead to Point-of-Sale Intensity examples Sour Gas (field operations, plant processing and

field & sales compression)

Cold Heavy Oil (well operation, trucking and processing)

Thermal Heavy Oil (SAGD and conventional thermal production facility)

DGC Consulting/UofC

60.4

30.2

90.9

5.0

192.0

6.60

40

80

120

160

200

Ener

gy In

tens

ity, G

J/E3

GJ

Sour Gas SR, Field+Processing Sour Gas SR, ProcessingHeavy Oil Cold, Field+Processing Heavy Oil Cold, ProcessingHeavy Oil Thermal, Field+Processing Heavy Oil Thermal, Processing

DGC Consulting/UofC

Operational Auditing Purpose

Identify opportunities to reduce fuel gas and electricity costs and improve operational efficiency

Team Defining the objectives and scope of work defines

the team requirements

Results are opportunities to: Reduce energy consumption Optimized product yield Minimize emissions

DGC Consulting/UofC

Typical Audit Schedule

As requiredFollow up support

1-4 hrsReport presentation or final debriefing

4-8 wksReport Preparation

1-4 hrsField debriefing

1-5 daysField work

2-4 wksData collection and field preparation

4-8 wksScheduling of field work

4-6 wksBudget development and approval

1-2 wksScope and expertise selection

DGC Consulting/UofC

DGC Consulting/UofC

Oil Battery Results

Cost: Option 1: Restaging pump estimated at $25,000Option 2: Install a VFD at $250,000.

Payout: Option 1: 3 monthsOption 2: 2 years

Annual Savings: $125,000/y250 kW @ $60/MWh and 350 d/y

New Conditions:78 m3/h @ 8,960 kPa with no throttle valve.

EE Opportunity:Restage the pump and remove the throttle valve to match actual flow volume conditions or install a VFD to control motor and pump speed.

Current conditions:Capacity: 125 m3/h @ 14,270 kPa design, 78 m3/h @ 16,540 kPa actual, throttled to 8,960 kPa discharge; 670 kW motor with 519 kW actual consumption.

Situation:Oil battery with excess pump capacity for disposal of produced water. With no speed control on pump, throughput is controlled with a throttle valve.

DGC Consulting/UofC

DGC Consulting/UofC

Sour Gas Production Results

Cost:Option 1: NilOption 2: Nil.

Payout: Option 1: 0 monthsOption 2: 0 years

Note: Fuel gas saved become gas sales.

Annual Savings:Option 1: 3800 kW @ $5.25/GJ and 350 d/y for $600,000/yOption 2: 5200 kW @ $5.25/GJ and 350 d/y for $825,000/y

New Conditions:Option 1: 45 m3/h @ 46 wt%.Option 2: 35 m3/h @ 40 wt%.

EE Opportunity:Stepwise reductions in both amine re-circulation rate and amine strength until target operating conditions are achieved.

Current conditions:Amine flow at 72 m3/h @ 46 wt% requiring 5570 kW of reboiler duty. Heat medium heater @70% efficiency consumes fuel gas at $2,200,000/y.

DGC Consulting/UofC

Payout: Option 1: 0 monthsOption 2: 0 years

New Conditions:Heaters: 10-15% EA.Gas Engine: 2.4-9.5% EA.

Cost: Nil

Note: Fuel gas saved become gas sales.

Annual Savings: $49,000/y@ $5.25/GJ and 350 d/y

EE Opportunity:Heater: Operating at 24% excess air.TEG Reboiler: Operating at 140 EAIncinerator: Operating at 115% EAGas Engine: Operating at 30% EA

Current conditions:Gas plant with reboilers, heaters, incinerators and gas engines operating with excess air levels of up to 150%.

Sour Gas Production Results

DGC Consulting/UofC

Potential Savings vs Plant Energy Cost (CETAC Project)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

$0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000

Annual Fuel Gas and Electric Pow er Energy Cost (16 plants)

Pote

ntia

l Sav

ings

FG & EE Cost Savings GHG Emission ReductionsGHG Emission Reductions FG & EE Cost Savings

DGC Consulting/UofC

Simulation Tool

Objective Performance targets Process modeling and optimization Case studies Results and discussion Conclusions

DGC Consulting/UofC

Objective is to optimize operations based on specific criteria Energy Product Yield Environmental

And set performance targets for the: Facility Process Equipment

Process Modeling & Optimization

DGC Consulting/UofC

For gas plants we must consider:

Specific Configurations

Individual Processing Units

Granularity

Process Modeling & Optimization

DGC Consulting/UofC

Gas Plant Without Recycle

DGC Consulting/UofC

Gas Plant Without Recycle

DGC Consulting/UofC

Gas Plant With Recycle

DGC Consulting/UofC

Gas Plant With Recycle

DGC Consulting/UofC

TEG Dehydration Unit

Tower

Glycol_Gas_Contactor

Saturated_Raw_Gas

V1

Hx1

Tower

Teg_Regenerator

Sep1

Lean_TEGM1

TEG_Make_Up

P1

Hx2

S

Saturated_Gas_Higher_Heating_Value

S

Flash_Tank_Gas_Higher_Heating_Value

S

Still_Vent_Higher_Heating_Value

Sales Gas

DGC Consulting/UofC

Residual Water and BTEX Emissions as a Function of Glycol Rate

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5Glycol Rate (gpm)

Res

idua

l Moi

stur

e (lb

H2O

/MM

SCF)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

BTE

X Em

issi

on (l

b/hr

)

Residual Mositure(lbH2O/MMSCF)BTEX Emission (lb/hr)

DGC Consulting/UofC

Energy Input to Reboiler and PEI as a Function of Glycol Rate

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5Glycol Rate (gpm)

Ener

gy In

put t

o R

eboi

ler (

'000

' BTU

/h)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

PEI (

%)

Energy Input to Reboiler ('000' BTU/h)PEI (%)

DGC Consulting/UofC

Benefits

Eco-efficiency indicators can be imbedded into simulators as tools to optimize performance

Key indicator targets related to energy intensity are established

Process modeling provides a means to examine existing plant configurations and examine other options for energy optimization

DGC Consulting/UofC

Benefits Plant age, feed and product yield along with

technology can be taken into account when performing comparisons, setting targets or benchmarking performance

Management can select facility level KPIs to monitor performance against corporate goals

Operators can be provided with effective guidance

Simulation tools can be effectively used with audits to improve operational efficiency

DGC Consulting/UofC

Presentation Summary

In this presentation we have examined tools for: Improving Operational Efficiency.

They include: Performance Benchmarking using KPIs Energy and Environmental Audits Process Simulation

DGC Consulting/UofC

DGC Consulting/UofC

Discussion

AcknowledgementComponents of this presentation were developed as part of a CETAC-West

Integrated Audit and Benchmarking Program

DGC Consulting/UofC

References Upstream Oil & Gas Plant Benchmarking, D.G. Colley, CSChE

2004. Eco-efficiency Benchmarking and Modeling to Optimize Natural

Gas Plant Operational Efficiency, D.G. Colley, W.Y. Svrcek and B.R. Young, CSChE 2004.

Eco-efficiency Benchmarking and Modeling to Optimize Natural Gas Plant Operational Efficiency, D.G. Colley, W.Y. Svrcek and B.R. Young, HP, January 2005.

Energy and Emission Optimization of the Glycol Dehydrator Process, D.G. Colley, W.Y. Svrcek and H Adam, 1992 GRI Glycol Dehydrator Air Emission Conference.