Anda di halaman 1dari 9

SPE 86604

Improving Energy Efficiency in E&P Operations


John Edwards, BP

Copyright 2004, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.


Establishing The Baseline
This paper was prepared for presentation at The Seventh SPE International Conference on The starting point in any performance improvement
Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production held in Calgary,
Alberta, Canada, 29–31 March 2004. programme is to understand the current situation, have a
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
means to quantify the baseline and measure any changes from
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as that position.
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any Within BP, an internal protocol had already been
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
established to estimate and report CO2 emissions and
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper therefore it was a relatively simple matter to collate data on
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300 combustion sources and report energy and hydrocarbons
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous consumed, flared and vented. Since that time there has been
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. great progress in establishing a consistent methodology for
greenhouse gas emissions estimation for the petroleum
Abstract industry 1
BP has been striving to minimise the greenhouse gas A robust baseline of energy consumed, flared and vented
emissions from its operations for several years. Since most was established in 2001 and is broadly aligned with this
emissions come from the combustion of fuel in processing methodology. This indicated that in BP operated assets the
operations, improving energy efficiency is the key to better gross energy consumed and hydrocarbon loss from flaring and
emissions performance. The paper describes the tools and venting was over 320,000 boe per day of which 83% was
processes that have been developed to improve energy energy consumed in processes.
management and shares lessons from practical experiences of
performance improvement in new projects and existing E&P Measuring Energy Efficiency
operations. In all cases, improving energy efficiency has The measure of energy performance was defined in the form
delivered significant business benefits. of “specific energy consumption”, energy per unit of
production. By expressing production in units of energy, this
Introduction performance indicator can be expressed as a simple
In 2001 BP achieved the commitment it made 4 years earlier percentage, energy consumed as a percentage of exported
to reduce its GHG emissions by 10% by 2010. Its goal now is production. Wherever possible true energy units such as GJ
to stabilise emissions at this level by minimising the emissions are used, however in most existing operations available data is
associated with growth , continuing to reduce emissions from in barrels of oil equivalent (boe).
its operations and participating in the development and use of The indicator is unsatisfactory in a number of respects, in
flexible mechanisms such as emissions trading. particular because it cannot be used fairly to compare
Within E&P operations the early successes in emissions performance between different assets since the measure takes
reduction were largely associated with reducing hydrocarbon no account of the work required to deliver production.
loss through flaring and venting. Now the focus is moving This is illustrated in Appendix A which lists the energy,
increasingly towards improving energy efficiency in flaring and venting loss for the Business Units in the 2001
E&P operations. baseline. The most energy intensive asset is the Greater
This paper describes BP’s experiences in generating value Prudoe Bay operation in Alaska which re-injects around 9
by exploiting technology, developing energy management billion scfd at up 4,000psi using 2GW of fully loaded gas
processes and engaging people to drive improved energy and turbine driven compressors. By the standards of our industry
emissions performance in new and existing E&P operations. this is a relatively efficient operation but its high
thermodynamic efficiency is not reflected in the value of the
Energy Team performance indicator of 16% energy consumed as a
An important first step was to set up a dedicated team in order percentage of production when compared with the Group
to provide focus on energy efficiency and to develop and co- average of 5.6%.
ordinate the improvement programme. Specialists from Table 1 gives the summary 2001 baseline data for energy
various parts of the company were established in the new consumed, flared and vented in operated facilities.
group to provide a range of expertise and experience.
2 SPE 86604

Energy Flaring Venting A more focussed approach to improve energy efficiency


Consumed can generate value by:-
% Exported
5.6 0.9 0.25 Reducing operating costs. The practice of running excessive
production spare capacity to minimize production risk, as in the nitrogen
boe / day
(gross operated)
268,000 42 12 rejection example above, is not only wasteful in energy terms
% Total but will generally increase maintenance costs. This is
83 13 4
particularly evident in the common practice of running
Table 1 excessive spinning reserve for electricity generation where
there is a strong link between gas turbine and reciprocating
These figures do, however, demonstrate the great value of engine maintenance cost and running hours.
expressing energy performance in these terms. It immediately Increasing production The most significant source of value
communicates the scale and significance of energy has been from increased production with many options
performance to anyone and it is far more engaging than any identified eg achieving higher availability using motor driven
other performance indicator. machines, improved controls stability, higher throughput from
centrifugal machines after resetting surge control lines,
Sources of Value reducing production impact of high ambient temperatures by
Organisations may embark on programmes to improve energy improving aerial coolers.
efficiency for a variety of reasons:- because it makes sense Increasing product value In several cases controls
commercially or to demonstrate corporate social responsibility modification have enabled improved liquids recovery in gas
by reducing emissions and conserving finite resources. plants, producing additional value in excess of 1 million
Whatever the motivation, progress is much quicker when the dollars per year. Automated compensation for day: night
projects and programme deliver commercially as well as in temperature variation is a frequently encountered opportunity.
energy and emissions terms. Furthermore in future carbon is likely to have a cost or
Since making its commitments on climate change in 1998 value in most operations, as emissions trading, other flexible
BP’s E&P segment has reduced emissions by 18% in absolute mechanisms and emissions regulations become more
terms and this has been achieved at no net cost to the business. widespread.
The focus remains on improving energy efficiency with
actions which make good business sense. Engaging People
The most obvious source of value is selling the fuel gas Having established a baseline and some understanding of the
saved as a result of improved energy efficiency. However, value of energy consumed in each operation, the challenge is
frequently the way energy is managed and reported does not to engage everyone whose actions can influence performance
engage people to appreciate its significance. Historically an to give an appropriate degree of prioritisation to energy
attitude that “fuel is free” irrespective of the operation’s performance.
circumstances, has lead to poor energy efficiency in design Within BP’s programme, the key elements here were:
and operating practice across our industry. During a recent - the setting of clear targets
energy survey on a North Sea platform, significant re-cycling - consistent leadership behaviours
was observed in the gas re-injection compressors. A quick - provision of tools, processes and support to enable
calculation showed that reverting to the previous practice of identification of opportunity and implementation of good
employing suction throttling to control surge with reduced re- practice in a consistent manner
cycling would increase sales revenues by at least $100,000 per Energy targets supplemented the GHG emissions targets :
year. This insight caused the simple change to be made - a 15% improvement in energy efficiency over 10 years
almost immediately. - a requirement for the new project portfolio to consume no
In a survey in a gas plant in the USA in a declining field, 3 more than 2% of production over field life.
nitrogen rejection units were being operated when production The importance of climate change and the role of energy
could be satisfied by one. Shutting down one of these units efficiency in BP’s contribution to stabilising global emissions
saved $5m a year in imported electricity. However even in is given continuous support by the highest levels of leadership
this case where the saving opportunity was fairly obvious, in presentations to shareholders, staff and in wider academic
there was great reluctance to make the change because of the and public meetings. Without such support it would have
perceived increased risk to production. been very difficult to develop the level of interest needed to
Half of our fuel gas is consumed in assets where fuel gas make progress.
appears to have little or no value because of absence of a gas Within BP’s operations the HSE community were the most
export route, commercial terms or pipelines being at capacity receptive to the challenge. Generally it was they who
so gas saved will not be monetised until some uncertain time facilitated the face to face meetings between those developing
in the future. the programme at the centre and the major projects and
BP’s experience has been that there are several sources of operations management in the regions. These meetings were
value that can be derived from applying the processes we have essential to achieve personal commitment and leadership
employed to improve energy performance. Therefore limiting within the assets and major projects teams.
work to areas where fuel gas has value may not be The level of activity and achievement in pursuit of energy
appropriate. performance improvement in individual operations has been
SPE 86604 3

directly proportional to the success in developing personal It is interesting to note that despite five years of active
commitment by key leaders in each operation. effort to reduce GHG most E&P assets score in the one to two
This was well demonstrated in our North Sea operations star range, whilst refineries and petrochemicals tend to be
where an engineer took responsibility for the local GHG three star and above.
programme. Having achieved some initial successes through
energy assessments on platforms, a series of one day Energy Metrics
workshops were held with operations staff from most of the A key early action from the workshop is to implement a
individual facilities. The consultant and local leader shared performance monitoring system having more detail than
our vision for emissions improvement and the opportunities required by the six monthly energy / production report
identified in the surveys. This set the scene to brainstorm submitted to monitor the segment performance.
opportunities for the facility and in every case generated both This is done in cascading stages
good business opportunities and a commitment to be more Level 1: Energy as % exported production. Flaring as % of
active. Since that time almost every large facility has production, Venting as % of production. Ideally this will be
undertaken an energy assessment or has one scheduled for reported in real energy units ie GJ energy consumed / GJ
2004. production exported, however in many cases it is necessary to
aggregate this in terms of boe.
Energy Management Level 2: At this level the total energy is apportioned to the four
Once a commitment to improve has been achieved those main areas of consumption :
managing the programmes tend to react in one of two ways: - gas compression: kW/mmscfd/ compression ratio
those whose priority is to develop a sustaining process of - oil pumping: kW/bbl/bar
energy management, and those who want to find and do - water injection: kW/bbl/bar
projects.. - power generation: %
As a consequence there is a tendency to start work on These metrics usually cover the majority of the energy
identifying opportunities and energy projects before consumed and start to enable more rigorous target setting and
developing the people, resources, processes and understanding performance management.. They are also expressed in units
to properly manage and implement the right opportunities. which makes performance benchmarking between operations
In 1999 all segments started to use a proprietary software more realistic than the level 1 metric, albeit issue such as gas
package to support the development of a consistent approach composition may distort the gas compression comparison to
to energy management and to benchmark the standard of their some extent.
energy management processes. Level 3 At this level the metrics in Level 2 are cascaded to
The software is used in a workshop attended by a cross individual large machines or trains and other unit operations
section of people who influence energy performance: such as dehydration, gas sweetening, fractionation etc may be
leadership, operations engineers and technicians, maintenance, included.
purchasing, HSE. An issue for many E&P operations is the lack of fuel gas
The workshop considers a number of elements of any metering which significantly restricts the ability to manage
management system: leadership, performance monitoring and energy in this way.
reporting, planning, people and competence, financial aspects, Where it exists and an operation is prepared to make the
procedures etc together with some more directly energy investment in time and training to set up an energy monitoring
related areas such as O&M, plant and equipment etc. For each system good energy management can then be implemented.
element good practices are considered, starting at high level
and becoming increasingly more demanding until a practice is Energy Management Tools
reached which is not used in the operation.
At the end of the session the software uses the responses to Performance Monitoring. Proprietary monitoring and
provide an overall score and “star rating”, an example is given targeting software is being used in other segments in BP to
in Appendix B. It also provides scores for each element and a monitor energy performance. However these systems do not
list of the five actions which are likely to have most impact in cope well with indicating performance against technical limit
improving energy management in that operation. The for a particular configuration of turbines, compressors and
intention is that a manageable programme of actions is pumps as loading on the equipment varies.
initiated and, when implemented, a follow up workshop is BP is therefore developing a system with consulting
held to generate the next phase of the programme. partners in Aberdeen to enable energy performance
The action programmes are generally self evident, management in typical E&P operations. This takes
however the value of the process is that it is a good vehicle for information from existing instrumentation, via the data
- stimulating active discussion and sharing of information historian, and compares actual performance against the design
across all those with an involvement, performance curves which are configured when the system is
- generating confidence that developing an effective energy commissioned.
management system over time is achievable The system also reports the key performance indicators
- developing ownership by a site wide team over the action discussed above and can be configured to report consumptions
programme because it was generated from the assets and deviations from target not only in energy and production
discussion and not imposed by an external expert. based units but also money in a choice of currencies.
4 SPE 86604

The pilot installation is on the point of being commissioned in As an example the level 2 energy metrics discussed above are
our ETAP operation in the North Sea. reported so that the underlying efficiency of different
operations can be compared.
Knowledge Management. As more people become involved Over the past four years 20 surveys have been undertaken
in energy efficiency and the level of awareness grows it throughout the North Sea, USA, Canada, Alaska, Colombia,
becomes increasingly difficult to manage our corporate Argentina, and Pakistan.
knowledge and to identify the best practice and best person to Most of the surveys have been undertaken by the same
advise on an issue. company which has had significant benefit. Their knowledge
We have therefore produced a sophisticated web site that and experience of previous surveys and understanding of what
allows anyone to input information or to search the website for we are trying to achieve has enabled them to establish
information. It is the repository for all energy reports, good themselves quickly with the operating teams and develop the
practice guidelines, energy performance, technology reports, trust and openness that is essential to develop an accurate view
success stories etc. It also contains the results of all of the of what is happening in the operation.
energy management benchmarking workshops which enables The surveys consist of:
assets with development plans in one area to contact sites who - a pre-visit review of process flow diagrams and selected
have performed most highly in that element. P&IDs by a cross section of expertise in the consultancy
More recently a Q&A forum has also been linked to the - typically a rotating equipment specialist and controls
energy website which allows all involved in energy to join a specialist visit to the operation for 5-7 working days
community which enables anyone with a problem to ask accompanied by a member of BP’s central energy team.
questions of the whole community to access all available - immediate feedback of key findings to the local operations
expertise on the issue. team
- a report providing a breakdown of energy consumption by
Identifying Opportunity operation, CO2 emissions profile, key performance indicators,
When an asset follows the energy management route to energy & CO2 savings opportunities with budget proposals
improving energy performance they will almost certainly categorised in low, medium and high capital requirement.The
unlock significant opportunity in their operation from ideas typical survey cost is around $40,000 and is almost always
generated within their team. recovered very quickly by simple no cost operational changes.
Just as importantly, the opportunity identified tends to be The expectation was that some pattern would emerge in
the lowest cost and most easy to implement from the whole the scale of typical energy saving, value of savings and
spectrum of opportunity. generic areas of opportunity so that in time a quicker, cheaper
People generally know when they are running excessive and more focussed type of survey would evolve. However
generation or spare capacity, low loaded plant, or are this is only partly true.
operating with fouled turbines, coolers, compressors, air filters The energy saving potential from good commercially
or employing excessive comfort factors eg on their sound projects tends to be in the range 5-15% across 20 to 40
dehydration or gas sweetening set points versus contractual projects or actions. Very often the payback is derived more
limits. They tend not to know the cost associated with these from production or other benefits rather than from the value of
historical practices and that they are no longer as acceptable. energy saved. This seems to be due to plant that appears to be
If they don’t, then good energy management practice working reliably and satisfactorily rarely attracting the level of
would identify these opportunities without it having to be engineering expertise and challenge that is applied in the
identified by a third party and its far more sustaining and energy survey.
motivating to generate the success and ownership within the Despite the level of savings identified, it has proved
team. difficult to realise the full savings potential in practice.
However in depth specialist energy surveys certainly have Generally the opportunities identified need further work to
a place. confirm feasibility and to work the opportunity into a
When BP came to commission its first survey in early sanctionable project and the asset tend not have the resources
2000 there appeared to several oil and gas consultancies who available to undertake this work. Therefore the quick and
would undertake a survey. However few had actually simple things tend to be done quickly whilst more significant
undertaken one in an offshore facility or could clearly opportunities are either progressed very slowly or postponed
demonstrate any real understanding of how it should be done indefinitely.
or what could be expected in the way that a conventional For this reason the central energy team has now obtained
energy consultancy would for the rest of industry. central funding to follow up the first tranche of surveys to
It was therefore decided that we would put together a good either provide the resource or expertise to implement a project
oil and gas consultant with a good conventional energy eg controls changes, or to develop the opportunities into well
consultant to produce an E&P energy survey protocol which considered, detailed project proposals. However these
was then tested on a survey by these consultants, Performance projects will still have to compete for available capital and it
Improvements and Enviros March, on the Magnus platform in may prove necessary to provide additional support to ensure
the North Sea. that good projects attract funding.
This ensured that future surveys would be undertaken in a
common manner, both in the scope and level of investigation
that was expected and in the style and content of the report.
SPE 86604 5

New Projects of a project for later stages about which there is no certainty of
The great challenge to BP holding its emissions flat is caused ultimate development, however in technical limit terms this is
by the significant growth in new production over the period the major opportunity. It could have enabled, for instance,
covered by the commitment and the emissions that will power from shore for developments such as deepwater Guld of
inevitably accompany these new projects. Mexico or the Caspian with the potential not only to minimize
These projects therefore need to define a new standard in energy requirements but also improve capital efficiency,
energy efficiency and to that end a target was set to limit the reduce space and weight or allow future tie backs, improve
new producing operations energy consumption to the plant availability and production.
equivalent of 2% of exported production over the life of the The second consideration is more within the control of an
operation. This compares with our 2001 average loss of over individual operator but shares some of the obstacles. That is to
5%. what extent do the choices made for the first stages of a
project limit the total opportunity or limit opportunity in
Best in Class Tool. It is recognised that an “energy as a subsequent phases of the same project. Again a power from
percentage of production” measure is a crude device for shore project may achieve the critical mass it requires to be the
determining the standard of performance of an individual best technical and commercial option for the combined phases
operation, since it takes no account of the work required in the but the opportunity is likely to disappear if the initial phase
operation to deliver production. We therefore developed a generates its power on the platform.
tool which we have termed a “best in class” tool which gives a Allied to this opportunity, there may be the possibility of
far better impression of how good performance will be establishing some gas monetisation by oversizing the power
compared to how good it could be. station and exporting power to the local electricity grid or
This tool considers the flowrate and pressure requirements starting the first phase of a power complex that may expand to
and life of field profiles of the key operations: gas provide power for future LNG facilities.
compression, oil pumping and water injection together with Considering developments in project silos dominated by
ancillary loads and thermal requirements. It compares the cost and schedule issues therefore has the potential to both
projects estimate of total energy requirement with the energy inhibit the value of the overall development with very
requirement predicted by using technical limit and “best in significant implications for energy consumption and GHG
class” performance indicators for these operations. The tool emissions.
allows a project team to identify the significant areas where
performance does not compare well with the performance Value Improving Practice Workshop. Once the project is at
indicators and other projects. The project should then identify a stage where it is clearly committed to its own provision of
the options that would raise the performance to best and class power and energy it is encouraged to undertake a one day
and either implement the options or justify why the options are facilitated workshop to consider its energy options.
not feasible in this application.2 This examines four areas: provision of power, life of field
profiles and implications for equipment selection,
Early Engagement and Options Generation. The same consideration of losses and other technologies which may
principles for achieving success applied as they did with have relevance.
existing operations: engaging people, having appropriate The most significant is the provision of power. Converting
processes and tools to support the projects and selecting the fuel gas to shaft horsepower is by far the largest consumer of
right technologies. energy in any facility. The choices are:
The big difference is that there is a very short window of - power from shore or an adjacent facility or central power
opportunity when a project’s design can be influenced and facility;
there is very little time to evaluate all the implications of - distributed turbine or engine drives for the large machinery
implementing new technology. - centralised power generation and electric motor drives for all
From the experience of our dozen or more major projects rotating machinery
in Gulf of Mexico, Azerbaijan, Angola, Trinidad, Algeria, Most of our new projects have opted for large aero derived
Indonesia the key success factors are engaging a project at an gas turbine driven centralised power generation. This accesses
early stage and having a senior champion in the project with the far higher efficiency available from these machines and,
the determination and enthusiasm to ensure the pursuit of best with N+1 turbines and electric motor drives, higher plant
in class performance. availability and production.3
The technology options with the greatest impact are The second area of consideration is looking at the profile
relatively straightforward. The challenge is to enable the of the major loads oil, gas and water flowrates together with
project team to consider them with an open mind before the the associated pressure profiles. Too often equipment is sized
traditional way of designing facilities takes hold. and optimised for a short duration peak condition resulting in
At the very earliest stages in a new area there is the long periods operating inefficiently at low load or with
greatest opportunity to make a difference, which is to explore excessive re-cycle. A proper consideration of these issues
the development of common infrastructure shared by all enables better choices to made over: number of trains,
operators in an area. Only when a large development is into equipment selection and sizing, provision of variable speed
construction is the opportunity so apparent. Obviously there drives, load shedding opportunities to maintain high gas
are big obstacles, particularly in aligning the approach turbine generator loading etc.
between operators and in investing heavily in the early stages
6 SPE 86604

The third area of consideration is understanding losses. forecast consumption and what might be possible. The option
The most obvious is gas turbine exhaust heat, which may be to close the gap is to use the turbine heat that is not required
re-usable to satisfy thermal loads or be used to provide for process heating to generate steam for power generation i.e
additional power generation. Examples are the Norsk Hydro combined cycle.
Snorre B platform in Norway which uses a steam cycle to This option was studied in detail and was judged to be
generate electricity and the Trans Canada Pipeline facility at technically feasible, however with no value attributable to the
Grande Prairie in Canada which uses an organic Rankine cycle gas saved it was not possible to make a business case for the
to provide an additional 6MWe from a Rolls Royce RB211 option. It did demonstrate however, that even a low value for
gas turbine. gas or modest future cost for carbon could make this
There are other opportunities that can be accessed by technology commercially viable.
identifying and reducing losses. For example more flexible Our conclusion from this work is that for the larger high
gas compression using variable speed drives may avoid the power requirement operations, which now characterises most
need to operate on recycle for phases of the field life. Even new developments, the centralized all electric facilities model
examining the influence of pipe size or interstage cooling on employed in our Gulf of Mexico projects and elsewhere will
multistage gas compressors can show worthwhile savings become the standard for BP.
opportunities.
Finally there is a discussion on technology developments. The Next Generation Of Opportunity
There are a number of developments which will increasingly The technology employed in these projects comes close to
have to be considered and are starting to find application in the defining what is feasible in undertaking the work identified in
industry: very large electric motors, very high voltage electric a project most efficiently. The only significant breakthrough
motors such as the ABB machines being installed in the that can be predicted will be in making offshore combined
Statoil development in Troll, or once through steam generators cycle generation commercially viable.
which may make combined cycle offshore a much more The next phase in improving energy performance lies in
feasible option. reducing the work to be done to deliver oil and gas.
Opportunities lie in areas such as:
New Project Case Study - smarter water injection to place smaller volumes of water
This section describes a current BP project which into waterfloods where it has most production benefit i.e.
demonstrates what can be achieved. It will be a 220,000b/d avoiding short circuiting through a low resistance path to the
development in deepwater employing an FPSO. The total producing well with no benefit to production and waste of
power requirement is between 80 and 100MW, of which gas pumping energy.
compression is 44MW and water injection is 32MW. - subsurface separation and processing. We are close to
The initial design case would have produced emissions at piloting downhole technology to separate and re-inject part of
plateau of 1.2million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year. The the associated gas in high GOR fields rather than bring it to
project now being executed will be less than 700,000 tonnes the surface before re-injection.
per year. Over field life the energy requirement is equivalent - multiphase flow to shore where operations can take place
to just over 1.7% of production. more efficiently on a larger scale.
The energy related reductions are attributable to - drag reducing agents to reduce pumping losses.
- using large, ~30MW, aero derived gas turbines to meet all
power demands as electricity. Full load efficiency ~ 38% Holistic Energy Performance. An associated area is work on
versus 28% for heavy industrial engines what we term “holistic energy performance” or HEP.
- optimising turbine loading since all loads are electrical and This seeks to make better use of the available pressure and
not running standby capacity. temperature in reservoir fluids to reduce external energy input
- supplying all the process heating requirements with heat in the whole chain from reservoir to customer. It uses exergy
recovered from the turbine exhaust, This will be between 40 analysis, ie considering theoretically how much work could be
and 55MW extracted from a system at a given temperature and pressure.
- achieving flexible and high efficiency gas compression by The HEP concept embraces the following process
employing motor driven variable speed gearboxes. principles:
This enables separator pressure to be staged over field life at - Capture and use the alternative energies of thermal
31bar, 26 bar and finally at16 bar. In the first stage of (temperature) and potential (pressure) or indeed renewable
operation with 380mmscfd gas, operating conventionally at 16 energy sources such as solar, wind etc. rather than the fluid
bar instead of 31 bar would have increased gas compression chemical (combustion) energy.
requirement from 40MW to 60MW. - Pump liquid rather than compress gas.
Appendix C shows the breakdown of CO2(e) savings from - Where required and practicable, compress gases from their
the initial case. This also includes the other savings from highest pressure and lowest temperature.
employing a valved flare system enabling zero continuous - Stabilise using heat rather than pressure.
flaring and FPSO hydrocarbon gas blanketing of cargo tanks - Use largest practicable export line sizes with the lowest
with 100% vapour recovery. possible back-pressures.
Appendix D shows the benchmarked “best in class” score. Technologies are available that can be used to take
Whilst reasonably good, the area at the top of the “heat and advantage of all these areas of opportunity. Bi-phase and tri-
power” column indicates a substantial difference between the phase turbines can be used instead of chokes to reduce
SPE 86604 7

flowline pressures prior to the slugcatcher or first separator


and will extract energy. More conventionally turbo expanders
can be used to reduce pipeline pressures prior to gas
processing as is done at our CATS terminal in NE England,
and providing 50% of the terminal’s electrical requirement.
Using variable speed drives to provide greater flexibility in
gas compression allows higher separator pressures to be used
for a the earlier phases of the development to reduce
compression loads as described in the case study.
This project also exploits the use of temperature to assist
stabilisation by adding heat in the HP separator, and thereby
increasing gas separation in this vessel. This reduced LP
compression duty by 8% compared with the conventional
practice of raising temperature in the LP separator to assist
with water separation..

Conclusions
There are increasing pressures on our industry to demonstrate
a more responsible response to our impact on the environment
and to climate change.
Most of our emissions come from combustion of fuel gas
in our operating processes and therefore improving energy
efficiency must be at the core of any programme to reduce our
greenhouse gas emissions.
The experience of BP in trying to improve energy
efficiency in E&P operations is that there are cost effective
measures that can be taken to improve performance and that it
is worth the effort to try to access the several sources of value
that can be identified by applying appropriate resources to
challenge operations that were considered to be performing
well.
However accessing the value is limited more by resource
than opportunity. Getting the right level of priority to seek
and capitalise on opportunity requires strong leadership, good
energy management systems within each operating asset, a
local champion for energy and GHG emissions and in all
likelihood provision of “earmarked funded” for energy
projects.
Most existing operations are inefficient by design and the
significant gap to approach best in class performance cannot
be bridged economically. For the overall standard of the
industry to change it is necessary for all new developments to
strive to be best in class. Only by designing facilities well is it
possible to have good emissions performance at an affordable
cost.

References
1. Nordrum .S et al: “Development of a Consistent Approach
to Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the Petroleum
Industry” paper SPE 86609 presented at 2004 SPE HSE
Conference, Calgary , 29-31 March 2004
2. Svalheim S et al: “Life of Field Energy Performance” paper
SPE 83993 presented at Offshore Europe 2003, Aberdeen,
2-5 September 2003
3. Voltz D.A et al: “Are All Electric Platforms Viable in the
Gulf of Mexico.?” paper PCIC-2002-15 presented at the
IEEE Petroleum and Chemical Industries Conference, 23-
25 September 2002
SPE 86604 8

Appendix A
2001 Business Unit Baseline

2001 Business Unit Baseline


Egypt

Vietnam
Primary Energy
GoM Deepw ater Production Direct Use Energy
Central North Sea Flaring
China Upstream
Venting
Southern Business Unit

GoM Shelf
Northern Business Unit

Norw ay
Indonesia Upstream

Mid North Sea


Trinidad

Gulf States Pakistan 2001 Business Unit Baseline


Azerbaijan

Onshore USA
Venezuela
Southern Cone

Canada
Colombia

Alaska
Algeria Upstream

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Energy v Exported Production

Appendix B
Energy Management Benchmark Summary Report

One to Five Star Energy Benchmarking

Element Level of Development User Critical


Yet to Qualify Bronze Silver Gold Platinum Priority Action Items
1.1 Demonstrated corporate commitment - Bronze High Critical
2.1 Understanding of performance and opportunities - Bronze High Critical
3.1 Targets, performance indicators (KPI) and motivation Yet to qualify High Critical
3.2 Plans Yet to qualify High Critical
4.1 Accountabilities - - Silver Medium
4.2 Awareness and training - Bronze Medium
4.3 Resourcing - Bronze Medium
5.1 Criteria/Budgets for capital expenditure (CAPEX) - Bronze Low
5.2 Energy operating budgets - - Silver Low
6.1 Purchasing procedures and alternative energy options - - - - Platinum Low
6.2 Quality and reliability of supply - Bronze Low
6.3 Optimising purchasing within supply agreement - - Silver Low
7.1 Operating procedures - Bronze Medium
7.2 Maintenance procedures Yet to qualify High
8.1 Efficiency of existing plant design Yet to qualify Medium
8.2 Procedures- plant design/retrofit, purchasing/replacement - - Silver Low
8.3 Innovation and new technology Yet to qualify Medium
9.1 Metering and monitoring - - Silver High
9.2 Reporting, feedback and control systems - Bronze High Critical
9.3 Documentation and records - Bronze Medium
10.1 Energy cost performance in the past 12 months - Bronze Medium
10.2 Auditing progress Yet to qualify Medium

Overall Ranking: 2 Stars % Achievement: 25 % % required to reach next star + 21 %


SPE 86604 9

Appendix C
GHG Savings Case Study

Case Study :- GHG Emissions in a Plateau Year.


1.1 million reduced to 0.7 million tonnes CO2 equivalent

Valved Flared
System
1,200,000 Fuel Gas
Blanketting
1,000,000
Emissions (ton nes CO2-e)

All Electric flexible


800,000
Compression

Waste Heat
600,000 Recovery

400,000 Aero-derivative
Gas Turbines
200,000
TOTAL Final
Design
0
Initial Worst Case Design

Appendix D
Best in Class Benchmarking Example

Case Study:- “Best in Class” Benchmarking

120
Energy consumed /
Project Index production
Values in 1e6 GJ Energy GJ
100 Total BIC 78.18 Energy Consumed ***
Life of Field Energy Consumption (PJ)

Total Project 95.69 Oil + Gas Export ***


Project Forecast Proj. Index 122% metric 1.77%
80
“Best in Class”
Technical Limit
60

40

20

0
Total Hydrocarbon Gas CO2 Compression Water injection Oil Export (Heat+Power) Gen. Loss
Compression

-20