| Popis: |
The Upstream oil and gas industry is adopting more and more environmentally friendly solutions to achieve the COP 21 goal set in Paris in 2015 (i.e., no more than 1.5°C of global temperature rise versus the pre-industrial levels). As such, when selecting a technology on a project, operators started acknowledging the need to adopt not only economic solutions but also low carbon ones. Some technologies today can already give an answer to the decarbonization challenge. In Offshore deep waters, which is an area keener to innovate and where many future field developments would happen, rotating equipment can play a huge role when looking at power generation and compression for Floating, Production, Storage, and Offloading (FPSO). Traditionally, Open Cycle Gas Turbines (OCGTs) are used for Offshore due to their simplicity of operation, large references, and low weight/compact footprint. A big portion of the energy used on a FPSO is driven by associated gas; this gas is either burnt on GTs for power generation and mechanical drive or compressed for processing/export/re-injection purposes. Power generation alone represents the source of more than 60% of the carbon emissions of a latest generation FPSO. Adopting larger and more efficient Gas Turbines, thus increasing topside power density, and reducing footprint, is one option that can already provide some economic as well as environmental benefits. Recently, electric motor driven compressors are also being increasingly selected to eliminate the need for GT driven compressors (GTC) thus lowering related emissions and enabling the aforementioned power density. When the two previous technologies are coupled with Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGT), a third step in efficiency increase is obtained, while also bringing the utmost advantages of reducing lifecycle costs under certain conditions. This work presents a comparison of "conventional" rotating equipment solutions, employed on a typical large-size FPSO project, versus the introduction of the below solutions: All Electric compressionLarge size Gas Turbines for power generationCombined Cycle A lifecycle cost analysis model has been developed to analyze these alternatives, including a sensitivity assessment around carbon prices and fuel gas costs. The different architectures have been compared based on carbon intensity and total lifecycle cost (CAPEX plus OPEX). Results showed that the three proposed technologies can help achieve >20% in carbon intensity reduction and >10% in overall cost savings when compared to the conventional solutions. |
