EPT delivering breakthrough solutions Developing Rigorous GHG Forecasts For E&P Operations GHG Forecast Tool John Edwards Head of Projects Emissions Asset Business

Accurate GHG Forecasts: Why ? Company Climate Commitments –Monitoring Progress And Making Appropriate Interventions Emissions Markets –Understand Future Cost Implications –Plan –Make Interventions Increasing Focus On Carbon and Its Management. –Likely Carbon Will have A Cost In Most Places –Reputation –Responsible Corporate Behaviour

BP GHG Emissions From E&P Segment Commitment 1 in 1998 Reduce Emissions By 10% by 2010 Commitment 2 in 2002 Hold 2001 Flat To 2012……… Forecast

Accurate GHG Forecasts: Why ? Company Climate Commitments –Monitoring Progress And Making Appropriate Interventions Increasing Focus On Carbon and Its Management. –Likely Carbon Will have A Cost In Most Places –Reputation –Responsible Corporate Behaviour Emissions Markets –Understand Future Cost Implications –Plan –Make Interventions

How To Produce Accurate Forecasts? Flows Through Facility No of Trains & Plant Loading Performance Curve to give power requirement No of Turbines & Loading Performance Curve to give energy requirement Fuel Gas Properties to give CO 2 CO 2 Profile CO 2 Cost Energy Cost Energy Metrics

Schematic Of Forecaster Tool Facility Model

Model Requires 3 Input Elements Modelling the installed equipment and its operational characteristics Profiles of the flows that cause energy to be consumed in the major equipment Operational factors: running standby capacity, ambient conditions, fuel composition, fuel / CO 2 prices, miscellaneous not modelled issues e.g. flare, thermal loads, general power etc Tool converts this data entry into Equipment running and its loading Equipment efficiency and its power requirement Turbine loading and fuel requirement CO 2 emissions, energy requirement profiles and associated costs

Input Screen Examples Separate Entry Tab For Each Unit Operation Each compressor or pump characterised by peak throughput and peak power requirement Driver can be motor or turbine from drop down list Driver can drive any combination of compression stages

Flow Profiles Input Tab Gas Export and Interstage Flows Gas Injection Oil Export Water Injection (2 Trains) Flare Vent Diesel (for miscellaneous duties e.g. crane, fire pumps) Period Usually annual for initial runs Can amend inputs to give multiple scenarios in a year - increases accuracy e.g. ambient temperature change, fuel change, equipment downtime etc.

Miscellaneous Data Miscellaneous inputs e.g:- loads not calculated in tool eg thermal requirements ambient conditions cost data

Output screen Illustration of typical output screen for selected period Traffic Light Performance Visual Indication of Installed Plant Number of Trains In Operation Breakdown of Power Use By Operation Report Options: Energy, CO2, Cost Detailed Report by Period Button for Charts Data Export etc

Confirmation of Accuracy and Application Tool tested blind using historical production data to give forecast and compared with what was reported Results very acceptable, within 5%, once main scenarios accounted for Usually needed a couple of hours to produce the results if accessed the right people from the operation: process engineer / production planning Once configured, very quick forecast updates available as production / operational changes are predicted. Future GHG forecast error will be due to differences in production / operational actuals v forecast, not GHG methodology

Initial Lessons Learned Great value in having an accurate, consistent, robust, transparent model for ghg forecasting. Concern about basing calculations on daily flows = annual flow / 365 when there were usually a number of periods in the year where the operating conditions would have influenced performance Therefore needed scenario modelling and aggregation: Excel output For some facilities we needed more functionality e.g. interstage gas flow, spinning reserve etc A lot of invaluable information being generated but not displayed. Tremendous potential for option appraisal in facility design Needed To Develop a Mk 2 updated version

Who Will Use? Initially GHG Forecaster Designed to get a balance between simplicity and accuracy Focus on use by Energy/ Environmental Engineer –Minimal training required –Can then do own options appraisal & sensitivity studies Does not need Process/Mechanical Engineer to run –Already incorporated in model Max ½ day population and running Updated Tool Concept Developer Project Development Team Operations Engineer

Use Of Forecaster For Option Appraisal Production Forecasts Concepts & Options Appraisal Option 1 Option 3 Option 2 BAT Technology Options Power Import CCGT GT vs Motor Drive No of trains Sensitivities Plant & Ops Options Different Gas Turbines Spinning Reserve Uncertainties Production Forecasts CO 2 Trading Value Fuel Price Fuel Gas Composition Days on Diesel Outputs Fuel & CO 2 Cost Energy KPIs Plant Load Profiles Emissions Profiles

Use Of Forecaster For Option Appraisal Example of a North Sea Facility: Mature asset 2 oversized turbine generators, both running for security of supply Turbine driven gas export and mid life compression EUETS trading exposure $1m Asset model developed for GHG forecasting Consider impact of : Right size turbines: Power Generation Single turbine operation: Power Generation Change from Mars turbines to electric compression on LP (midlife compressors)

Base Case: Current Operation Turbine 34% loaded MP Compression stage on recycle: HP is OK If motor driven soon able to turn of a train

CO2 Emissions Forecast Saving Potential Driver Change 15kTe/y Motor Drives 22kTe/y Single GT Op 23kTe/y All Electric 62kTe/y Saving From MP Compressor Shutdown

Analysis Shows Single turbine generator operation would save $4m / year, worth investing up to $20m capex eg standby power from adjacent platform Questionable decision to provide turbine driven mid life compression Motor drive would save $3.8m / year, could spend up to $20m capex Generally hard to justify driving different stages with single shaft over life of operation An all electric platform would save $11m/y now in CO2 and fuel costs Fuel Cost $7/mmBtu CO2 Cost $29/ tonne

Conclusions Possible To Achieve GHG Forecasts Within 5% Of Actual Emissions - subject to production forecasts being correct - for conventional centralised, eg offshore, operations Invaluable Having Consistent & Transparent Estimation Methodology Forecast Updates Take A Few Minutes - ie converting throughput forecasts to GHG forecasts Excellent Tool For Option Appraisal In Concept / Project Development - technology selection, driver selection, number of trains - inclusion of energy & CO 2 costs enable quick viability assessment - enables a life cycle approach to project development Has Application In Existing Operations Optimisation - standby plant operation, plan compressor re-wheeling, reducing running GTs - enables high level performance benchmarking Off The Shelf Product Available To All E&P Companies - Tool released through PI Energy & Emissions