meidp the deepwater gas route tomeidp the deepwater gas
TRANSCRIPT
MEIDP The Deepwater Gas Route toMEIDP The Deepwater Gas Route to IndiaIndia
1
IntroductionIntroduction
Who? SAGE– South Asia Gas Enterprise Pvt Ltd (SAGE),
– Joint venture between the Indian Siddhomal group and UK based deepwater technology company
– Considering building a deepwater, transnational, natural gas pipeline system from the Middle East to India
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2
IntroductionIntroduction
Why? India needs gas– Reserves over 2,000 TCF in India trading countries
(including Qatar, Iran and Turkmenistan)
– The deepwater route provides a short secure distance between huge reserves and industrial heartland of India
– Route from Middle east is too short for LNG to be an economic transportation option
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
3
IntroductionIntroduction
How? A pipeline across the Arabian Sea– Building on the extensive study Oman to India Pipeline in
th Mid 1990’the Mid 1990’s
– Sage concept studies have strengthened technical Vi bilitViability
– Major body of deepwater design and pipelay experience has been accumulated over the last decade
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
4
Indian Natural Gas SupplyIndian Natural Gas Supply
14000
Indian Natural Gas SupplyMMSCFD
3500
4000
10000
12000 3560
KG‐D6
2000
2500
3000
MSCFD
6000
8000
500
1000
1500
2000
MM
2000
4000 0
500
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Year
2007 2008 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Import Requirement 1096 1096 1096 2740 3288 3562 3288
Indian domestic Supply 3014 3014 7397 8219 8767 9041 9041
0
Year
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
5U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EIA-0484(2010)
SAGE MOU’s and AgreementsSAGE MOU s and Agreements
MOUs/Agreements to Co-operate with SAGE in developing MEIDP have been signed with:
• Saipem spa• Heerema Marine
• Indian Oil Corporation• Oman Ministry of Oil and
Contractors• TATA-CORUS steel
yGas
• GAIL• WELSPUN• FUGRO GeoConsulting Ltd.
• NIGEC• Peritus International Ltd.
• INTECSEA (UK) Ltd.• Det Norske Veritas
• Engineers India Ltd.
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
6
Gas Routes to IndiaGas Routes to India
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
77
Historical Route Options
O dOman-India 1995I I diIran-India 1997Iran IndiaIran-India (200NM) 2003003Iran-India (350NM) 2003MEIDP 2010OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
88
Difficulty of Deep Pipelay Projects
1991 Zeepipe IIB 40''
1992 Campos Bain 10''
1993 Transmed 26''
1993 Auger 12''
1994 Marlim 12''
1995 Troll Olienor 10''
1995 Popeye 6''
1995 Oman India 24''
Oman India Ahead of its Time
1996 Mars 8''
1996 Mensa 12''
1997 Europipe 2 42''
1998 Roncador 10''
1999 Allegheny 12''
2000 Agaba 30''
2000 Malampaya 16''
2000 Ursa 18''d
Installed
Under Construction
Under Design2000 Diana 18''
2000 Horn Mountain 12''
2001 Mica 8''
2001 Blue Stream 24''
2002 Canyon Express 12''
2004 Ceasar 24''
2004 Cleopatra 16''
2005 Cleopatra Lateral 16''
2005 Ceasar Lateral 24''
Year an
d Field g
Under Consideration
2005 Ceasar Lateral 24
2005 Proteus 24''
2006 Okeanos Lateral 20''
2006 Atlantis Lateral ‐ Ceasar 24''
2006 Atlantis Lateral ‐ Cleopatra 16''
2006 Independence Hub ‐ Atlas 8''
2009 Perdido 10''
2009 MedGaz 24''
2009 Cascade‐Chinook 14''MEIDP Th Ti h
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
2010 Block 31 ‐ PSVM 12''
2009 Galsi 24''
2009 Jack‐St.Malo 24''
2010 Southstream 32''
2010 MEIDP (SAGE) 24''
Water Depth (m)
The Time has come
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
9
Design BasisDesign BasisMECS OGCS GPRTMECS– Dehydration
400B
OGCSWater Monitoring400B
GPRTWater Monitoring90B– 400Barg
– Cooling400BargCooling
90BargHeating
GeneralGeneral– 1.1BSCFD– Sales QualitySales Quality
Natural Gas
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1010
Pipeline route Profile MECS => OGCS => GPRT
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1111
Pipeline route Profile MECS => GPRT
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1212
2010 Activities Completed
Overall Project Management• Overall Project Management• Design Basis definition• Flow Assurance Studies• Flow Assurance Studies• Mechanical Design• Onshore Compression Station DefinitionOnshore Compression Station Definition• Offshore Compression Station Definition• Quantified Risk Assessment - OIP UpdateQuantified Risk Assessment OIP Update• Geohazard and Fault Crossing Assessment Phase 1• Metocean data Phase 1• GIS Data collection Phase 1• Assessment of the effects of moderate heat treatment
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1313
2011 Activities Completed
Overall Project Management• Overall Project Management• Vessel & equipment capabilities review• Pipeline intervention review• Pipeline intervention review • Geohazard and fault crossing assessment phase 2• Metocean data phase 2Metocean data phase 2• GIS data collection• Riser and subsea by-pass definitionRiser and subsea by pass definition
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1414
Seabed Slope Mapp p
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1515 The route stays to the South of the Indus Fan to avoid expensive, difficult crossings.
Identified RisksIdentified Risks Geohazard LocationGeohazard Location
Tsunami Oman and Indian coastlineSteep slopes Oman and Indian continental slopes and the Qualhat
SeamountSeismic activity Northern Oman, Kathiawar Peninsula (Gujarat, India)
and along the Owen Fracture Zoneand along the Owen Fracture ZoneFault displacements
Faults of the Owen Fracture Zone and the Indian shelf and slopep p
Liquefaction Oman and Indian (inner) shelfSlope failures Oman and Indian Continental slope, Qualhat
Seamount, channels of the Indus FanTurbidity currents Indus Fan
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
Murray Ridge and Qualhat Seamounty g
Qualhat Seamount location (Compression facility)Q ( p y)Outside of all Territorial WatersWithin helicopter supply range.N h Sl 20d i il L df ll
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
Northern Slope 20deg similar to Landfalls.1717
Indus Fan and Indian Slope
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1818
Completed Studies – Metocean Phase 1
North West Monsoon
Environmental ParametersMean Surface Currents
North West Monsoon
Mean Surface Currents Mean Significant Wave Heights (3hr Storm)Heights (3hr Storm)Seabed CurrentsTemperaturesTemperaturesWinds
South East Monsoon
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
1919
Completed Studies - Mechanical Design
DNV-OS-F101 using DNV 485 DSAW linepipeSupplementary requirement U material strength factorDNV t h i l t F b i ti f t 1 0DNV technical report => Fabrication factor αfab = 1.0, Ovality = 0.5%
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2020
Completed Studies - Mechanical Design
Selected WT’s
Pressure Collapse
40.5mm 36.6mm 32.9mm796500 tonnes
DCC Buckling
Seabed Profile
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2121
Installation Vessel J-Lay Demandy
MEIDPTop Tension Demand J‐Lay
5000
6000
2000
)
MEIDP Top Tension Demand J Lay
Top TensionDemand (Empty) tonne
Top Tension Demand (Flooded) tonne
J-Lay Demand1060 tonne normal lay>1950 tonne A&R
3000
4000
1000
1500
nsion Dem
and (ton
ne)
Water Depth (m) >1950 tonne A&R
0
1000
2000
0
500
Top Ten
J-Lay Capacity1600 tonne normal lay
‐2000
‐1000‐500
Dep
th (m
)
lay>2000 tonne A&R
‐4000
‐3000
‐1500
‐1000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Water D
KP (km)
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
22
KP (km)
New Pipelay Vessels under Constr ctionConstruction
CastorONE (Saipem SpA)CastorONE (Saipem SpA)Operational early in 2012Rated for 3500m Pipelayp yJ-Lay & S-Lay
Aegir (HMC)Aegir (HMC)Operational early in 2014Rated for 3500m Pipelay
Pieter Schelte (Allseas)
J-Lay
ete Sc e te ( seas)Operational Mid 2014Rated for 3500m Pipelay
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
S-Lay2323
QRA UpdateQRA Update
The following hazards have been quantified: • Trawling • Anchoring • Objects dropped from ships • Ship sinking • Ship grounding • Internal corrosion • External corrosion • Material and construction defects
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
MEIDP v’s OIP Failure FrequencyMEIDP v s OIP Failure Frequency
2 50E 023.00E-023.50E-024.00E-02
1 00E 021.50E-022.00E-022.50E-02
-5 00E-036.00E-175.00E-031.00E-02
elf ak
pe
pe e)
S-
gh
an
pe
pe ak f
-5.00E-03
Om
an
Sh
e
Sh
elf
Bre
a
Om
an
Slo
p
Om
an
Slo
p
(Om
an
Sid
idg
e (
ME
CG
CS
)
ay
Rid
ge
S
-GP
RT
)
mp
le T
rou
g
Pla
in (
Ind
iaS
ide
)
ind
ian
Slo
p
Ind
ian
Slo
p
Sh
elf
Bre
a
nd
ian
Sh
el
MEIDP
Om
an
Up
pe
r O
Lo
we
r O
ssa
l Pla
in (
Mu
rra
y R
iO
G
Mu
rra
(OG
CS
Da
lrym
Ab
yssa
l P S
Lo
we
r i
Up
pe
r I
Ind
ian
In
OIP
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
Ab
ys
Ongoing 2011 studiesOngoing 2011 studies
E t bli h h d t t i i l• Establish no hydrotest principle• Onshore compression station review• Offshore layout optimisation• Offshore layout optimisation• Receiving terminal conceptual design• Emergency repair equipment reviewEmergency repair equipment review
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2626
Planned 2011 studiesPlanned 2011 studies
I i k i• Insurance risk review • Survey definition and scope of work• Define survey ITT and tender• Define survey ITT and tender • Environmental statement • Mill Prequalification and Ring Test Collapse ProgrammeMill Prequalification and Ring Test Collapse Programme• Examine the effect of moderate heat treatment)
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2727
Project Development ScheduleProject Development Schedule
The project Goal =>first Gas in 20172010-2011 Feasibility Studies2011-2012 Reconnaissance Surveys2012-2013 FEED Studies, Detailed surveys.2013-2015 Detailed Design, Equipment Trials,2013-2015 Procurement of long lead items2015-2017 Installation
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
2828
Technical summaryTechnical summaryMEIDP are no longer a giant leap forward but rather theMEIDP are no longer a giant leap forward, but rather the logical next step Th d l t f d t i l l bl fThe development of deepwater pipelay vessels capable of installing MEIDP due by 2014
St di f d i 2009 2011 f ibilit f thStudies performed in 2009-2011 prove feasibility of the MEIDP projectFabrication technologies exist within current mill capacities for MEIDP size/wall
Routes established to avoid the worst features of the Indus Fan, minimising project technical risks
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
29
Economic and commercial summary
The MEIDP pipeline– Provides the most economic method of gas supply to
th W t t f I dithe Western coast of India
– Enhances the security of energy supply for Indian b ti tsubcontinent
– Promotes competition in the Indian energy markets
– Will contribute significantly towards the implementation of sustainable development strategies of an integrated energy plan for the Indian Subcontinent
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
30
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
The authors would like to thank South Asia Gas Enterprise
PVT Ltd. for giving permission to publish this work, the g g p p ,
team in Peritus, for their continued hard work on the
project, DNV, Fugro GEOS, Fugro William Lettis and
IntecSea for their contributions and support.
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
31
ReferencesReferencesU S Department of Energy DOE/EIA 0484(2010) “International Energy• U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EIA-0484(2010) International Energy Outlook 2010”, July 2010, U.S. Energy Information Administration Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, Washington, DC 20585. Tables I1 & I4 pp293 &pp296I4, pp293 &pp296.
• NOAA, “Different types of production platforms” http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/06mexico/background/oil/media/types 600 htmltypes_600.html
• Saipem Vessel Data Castoronehttp://www.saipem.it/site/article.jsp?idArticle=5420&instance=2&node=2012&channel=2&ext=template/37DueColonne&int=article/1DefaultArticolo
• HMC Vessel Data Aegirhttp://hmc.heerema.com/tabid/1838/language/en-US/Default.aspxp g g p
• Allseas Vessel Data Pieter Scheltehttp://www.allseas.com/uk/19/equipment/pieter-schelte.html
OTC 21259 – May 2011Ian Nash & Peter Roberts
32