feasibility assessment: proposed b.c. lng facilities and renewable power

1

Proposed British Columbia

LNG Facilities and

Renewable Power

Feasibility Assessment

May 13, 2014

Steve Davis & Associates Ltd.

OUTLINEI. Basic parameters for powering the Liquefied

Natural Gas (LNG) facility

A. Sizing, assumptions and objectives

B. Scenarios: D-Drive, Ancillary Renewables-Grid and

Maximum Renewables

II. Maximum Renewables Scenario

A. Description of Power Facilities

B. Schedule

C. Reliability

• Power availability, by fuel, as wind generation changes

III. Summary of Scenario Comparisons

IV. APPENDIX: Reference Slides

2

I. Basic Powering Parameters• Single LNG Facility

‒Producing 22 MTPA (Million Tonnes per Annum)

• 1,000 MW power requirement (at full build out)

‒Compression = 800 MW

‒Ancillary = 200 MW

‒Built in two phases; 500 MW each

• Power Scenarios Considerations

Designs proposed by LNG proponents

Designs by recent and proposed LNG – e.g. No shared facilities

Government and BC Hydro goals & constraints– e.g. No increase to other BC Hydro ratepayers

3

Design Objectives1. Maximize renewable generation

2. Meet LNG industry requirements on:

Reliability and

Schedule – meet terminal start-up date

3. Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions

4. Reduce local emissions (i.e. NOx)

5. Provide Legacy of power infrastructure

6. Avoid BC Hydro twinning transmission lines

7. Create permanent local jobs

8. Minimal increase in cost of LNG produced4

3 Scenarios

1. Direct Drive (D-Drive)

– Single cycle gas turbines (SCGT) directly drive

Compression and power Ancillaries

2. Ancillary Renewables - Grid– Highly efficient SCGT direct drive for Compression

– Ancillary powered by Grid connected to wind

3. Maximum Renewables (Max RE)

– Combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT), Reciprocating

Engines (Recips), Boil-off-gas (BoG) turbines and

wind power produce electricity to drive Compression

– Ancillary powered by Grid connected to wind

5

Power #s for 3 Scenarios

6

D-Drive vs Max Renewables

7

Ancillary RE-Grid vs Max

Renewables

8

II. Max. Renewables Scenario

• 1,000 MW power requirement for E-LNG

Built in two phases of 500 MW each

Compression = 800 MW. Ancillary = 200 MW

• Ancillary load is driven by the grid connected

to local wind project

• Compression uses electrical motors that can

be fully driven by gas power

Phase 1 is CCGT; Phase 2 adds Recips.

Wind output is used to reduce generation from

gas engines and power ancillary9

Facilities Map

10

Wind FarmReciprocating

Gas Engines

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

CCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

Maximum RE

Facility Sizes*:

11


Gas Engines

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

CCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

MW

783

MW

400

MW

40

MW

360

MW

200

MW

200

MW

800

MW

* At Full Build-Out

Energy:

12


Gas Engines

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

CCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

TWh/y

ear

2.2 1.6 0.3 3.0

1.7

1.8

7.0

Result = 44% Renewables

Power Cost:

13


Gas Engines

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

CCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

$ per

MWh

$144 $86 $72

$62

$95

$108

Two

Gas

Turbines

@ 120 MW

each

One

Steam

Turbine

@ 120 MW

14 2-on-1 CCGT Totaling 360 MW

Reciprocating Gas Engines

15

Twenty 18 MW engines + One 40 MW Steam Turbine = 400 MW

Photo of 20 engines at 231 MW wind-chaser project near Denver

RECIPROCATING ENGINES

Excellent Wind Chasers

• Very fast start and high ramp rates

• Modular (e.g. 20 engines at 18 MW each),

yields efficient part-load operation:

– Individual units can be turned off and on,

rather than turned down.

• Combined-cycle increases efficiency

• High reliability, especially w. multiple units

• NOx can be lower than gas turbines

16

Power Availability

17

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

MW

Ava

iab

le

% of hours each year

Power Available by Source - Maximum Renewables, Full build-out

CCGT

Wind

Grid

Combined Cycle

Recips.

BoG Turbine

B. Schedule

Maximum Renewables Scenario

• Planned Schedule and Phasing

• Upsetting Events - Delay in:

CCGT or Reciprocating Engines

Transmission

Wind Energy

Other LNG facility

18STEVE DAVIS & ASSOCIATES LTD.

STEVE DAVIS & ASSOCIATES LTD.

Current Experience

• There are many examples of CCGTs,

SCGTs and Reciprocating Engines

Lead time ~ 5 years*

• B.C. has four operating wind farms:

Lead time ~ 5 - 6 years*

• Transmission

Capacity upgrades to Prince Rupert or Kitimat

are straightforward and already underway

Transmission lines from wind farms

19* Source: BC Hydro 2013 Resource Options Update Report

Power Schedule and Phasing

20

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

MW

In

sta

lled

CCGT

BoG Turbine

Grid, phase 1

Grid, phase 2

Combined Cycle Recips.Wind 1

Wind phase 1

Wind 2

Compression Load, Phase 2

Total Load, Phase 2

Total Load, Phase 1

Compression Load, Phase 1

Phase 1 on-line in 2019

Phase 2 on-line in 2022

Upset Event:

CCGT or Recips. are Late

• Are generation plants more likely than

D-Drive to be delayed?

Generation plants have more flexible siting.

Air permitting should be quicker in a

chosen location than in a required location.

Separate target to oppose, but supports

lower environmental impacts.

• Plants are dedicated to individual facility

21

Upset Event:

Transmission Upgrades Late

• Twinned line to coast is not needed

• Wind farm or interconnection late?

Run on grid plus thermal generation

22

Upset Event:

Other LNG Facility is Late

• Has no bearing on power supply

• No generation and transmission is

contingent on multiple facilities

23

C. RELIABILITY

Max Renewables Scenario

• Statistics at steady state operation

Current use: familiarity and reliability

Availability and efficiency

Redundancy

• Responses to upsetting events

Wind variation

Transmission outage



Current Use• Unfamiliar?

Snohvit E-LNG plant: Operating since 2007

Freeport E-LNG plant: Under-construction

Woodfibre LNG application to NEB involves E-LNG

CCGT are common technology

Global capacity of large recips.: 55GW+ in 2013*

• Unreliable? Initial Snohvit problems explained and overcome

‒ Joint owner, GDF Suez, proposes E-LNG design on next project

Shell/Siemens report*: higher efficiency, lower costs

ABB report*: faster delivery, lower downtime


STEVE DAVIS & ASSOCIATES LTD. * See Appendix G for Reference Sources

Availability and Efficiency

• CCGT (phase 2)

Full output for over 75% of time

Never less than 60% output

94% avg. utilization: high efficiency

• Combined cycle reciprocating engines

Modular: reliable and no penalty for part load

operation



Redundancy

• Different levels of redundancy are

possible

• All scenarios considered have same

amount of redundancy:

allows apples-to-apples comparison



Upset Event:

Key Points- Wind Variation• When no wind:

CCGT and reciprocating engines at 100%

• When full wind:

CCGT at 60% output, recips. are idled

• When wind ramps up or down

Use reciprocating engines to follow wind

Small scale battery storage (e.g. GE’s

Brilliant Platform) creates smooth power to

follow with 30 minute foresight



Partial Wind to No Wind

29

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

MW

ava

iala

ble


Power Available by Source - Maximum Renewables, Phase 2

CCGT

Wind

Grid

Combined Cycle

Recips.

BoG Turbine

Full Wind No Wind

Recips: 90 MW to 400 MW in 30 seconds

Wind: At worst, would drop in 15-30 minutes

Full Wind to No Wind

30

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

MW

ava

iala

ble


Power Available by Source - Maximum Renewables, Phase 2

CCGT

Wind

Grid

Combined Cycle

Recips.

BoG Turbine

Full Wind No Wind

CCGT: 216 MW to 360 MW in 2 minutes (75 MW/min)

Recips: 0 MW to 400 MW in 2-5 minutes (hot start)

Upset Event:

Transmission Failure

• Only ancillary load is powered from grid

• Frequent short duration (e.g. lightning

strikes) outages won’t affect liquefaction

• Transmission from wind farms is new: build

with insulation



III.a Summary: Max RE vs D-Drive

• Increase Renewables from 0% to 44%

Increase wind from 0 MW to 783 MW, and

Reduce thermal generation by replacing SCGTs with

wind-chasing Reciprocating Engines and BoG Turbines.

• Maintain LNG Reliability & Schedule requirements

• Increase local permanent jobs by 43%

• Build $2.9 billion wind power legacy

• Power & Reduce GHG intensity by 46%

Reduce NOx by 68%

• Increase Power Cost by 19%

• Increase LNG Sales Price by 1.1%32

III.b Summary: Max RE vs Ancillary Grid

• Increase Renewables from 20% to 44%

Increase wind from 630 MW to 783 MW, and

Reduce thermal generation by replacing half the SCGTs with

wind-chasing Recip. Engines and BoG Turbines.

• Maintain LNG Reliability & Schedule requirements

• Increase local permanent jobs by 2%

• Increase wind power/transmission investment 26%

Reduce GHG intensity by 24%

Reduce NOx by 38%

• Increase Power Cost by 15%

• Increase LNG Sales Price by 0.9%33

IV. APPENDIX

A. Facilities Map: Direct Drive Scenario

B. Facilities Map: Ancillary RE – Grid Scenario

C. Capex for Maximum Renewables Scenario

D. Comparison Table: 3 Scenarios

E. Summary Comparison Table: D-Drive vs.

Ancillary RE – Grid

F. Key Assumptions in Financial Model

G. Reference Sources

34

Appendix A Facilities Map:

Ancillary Renewables - Grid

35

Wind Farm

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

SCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Appendix B

Facilities Map: Direct Drive

36

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

SCGT

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

Appendix C Capex:

37


Gas Engines

LNG

Facility

Ancillary

CCGT

Grid

LNG Facility

Compression

Boil Off Gas

Gas Turbine

Maximum Renewables

2.70

$ BILLION

0.45 0.03 0.41

0.198

Summary Table38 Appendix D

D-Drive vs Ancillary RE - Grid

39

Appendix E

Modeling Assumptions

40

Appendix F

Reference Sources for statements on slide 9

• Global capacity of large scale recips 55 GW

– Wartsila Power Plants References see:

www.wartsila.com/en/power-plants/references

• Shell/Siemens report:

– All electric driven Refrigeration Compressors in LNG Plants offer

advantages.

– By Fritz Kleiner, Siemens AG and Steve Kauffman, Shell

Development Ppy. Ltd., presented at GasTech2005

• ABB report:

– All electric LNG plants; Better, safer, more reliable – and

profitable.

– By Havard Devold, Tom Nestli & John Hurter ©2006 ABB

Process Automation Oil and Gas 41

Appendix G

http://www.wartsila.com/en/power-plants/references

Navius Research Inc.

[email protected]

604.683.1452

Steve Davis & Associates Consulting Ltd.

[email protected]

604-926-8352

42

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

feasibility assessment: proposed b.c. lng facilities and renewable power

Engineering