Oil & Gas Production Protocol Public Workshop Webinar September 22 nd and September 8 th, 2009 1.
-
Upload
jason-bruton -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
2
Transcript of Oil & Gas Production Protocol Public Workshop Webinar September 22 nd and September 8 th, 2009 1.
Oil & Gas Production Protocol
Public WorkshopWebinarSeptember 22nd and September 8th, 2009
1
Overview of agenda and logistics Introduction to The Registry and its reporting
program Oil & Gas Production (O&GP) Protocol—
background and development process Overview of the O&GP Protocol and key
issues for public feedback Questions and comments Wrap-up
Agenda
2
Logistics for the Call Presentation & agenda available for download:
http://www.theclimateregistry.org/resources/protocols/oil-and-gas-production-protocol/
All participant lines muted until question and comment period Electronically “raise hand” or use chat feature to
ask question Must enter unique audio pin to “raise hand” and
speak on the call Technical problems: Tel. (866) 523-0764
3
OVERVIEW OF THE REGISTRY
4
5
MISSION: To standardize and centralize high quality GHG data into a North American GHG registry to support voluntary and mandatory reporting programs
BOARD: 12 Canadian Provinces/Territories 41 U.S. States and D.C.
6 Mexican states4 Native Sovereign Nations
MEMBERS: 345 Members
The Climate Registry
The Registry: General Overview
The largest climate initiative in North America Voluntary GHG reporting program of best
practices Policy neutral
Policy decisions are left to the provinces, territories, states and Native Sovereign Nations
No lobbying Primary goal is accurate, consistent data
Protocols based on internationally-recognized standards
The Registry coordinates with state/provincial, regional and federal policymakers
Support states and provinces in execution of mandatory programs Primarily infrastructure support
6
7
Voluntary Reporting Benefits1. Prepare for mandatory state/federal reporting
2. Document early actions
3. Education for employees on GHG emissions
4. A cost effective means to track/manage GHG emissions
5. Access to software and technical support
6. Get a seat at the table on policy development
7. Recognition as a global environmental leader
Key Registry Components Participation in The Registry requires all
organizations to report at a minimum: All GHG emissions in North America (Canada, US,
Mexico) Entity-wide emissions at the facility-level All six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6) All direct (Scope 1), indirect emissions (Scope 2)
and biogenic emissions from stationary combustion Annually
Requirement for annual third party verification General Verification Protocol (GVP)
Climate Registry Information System (CRIS)8
Organizational Boundaries Control (Financial or Operational)
Report 100 percent of the emissions from sources that are under your control, including both wholly owned/operated and partially owned/operated sources
Public companies also disclose equity investments
Equity Share Report all emissions sources in which your entity
has an equity share. If you would like to report according to equity
share, you must also report according to a control methodology (as described above)
9
Other Organizational Issues Corporate Reporting
If parent company is a Registry Member, then all subsidiaries must report through parent
All Members are encouraged to report at the highest level possible
Government Agency Reporting All departments must report under governing
entity, if it is a Registry Member (including municipal utility, if applicable)
10
Leased Assets
Finance or Capital Lease Must report emissions as if wholly owned
and controlled regardless of organizational boundary approach
Operating Lease Operational Control: must report
emissions Equity Share or Financial Control:
reporting emissions is optional
11
Operational Boundaries Direct Emissions (Scope 1)
Direct emissions from stationary combustion Direct emissions from mobile combustion Direct emissions from physical & chemical
processes Direct fugitive emissions
Indirect Emissions (Scope 2) Indirect emissions from electricity use Indirect emissions from imported steam, CHP,
district heating and cooling Biogenic Emissions
Stationary combustion
12
Facility-level Reporting GRP Facility Definition
Any stationary installation or establishment located on a single site or on contiguous or adjacent sites that are owned or operated by an entity Including all mobile sources that operate within
the boundary of a single stationary facility Commercial building and special categories of
facilities (T&D systems) can be aggregated Mobile sources aggregated by geographic
location, vehicle-type, existing fleet or individual vehicle
13
PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
14
Protocol Development Process Developed in partnership with the Western
Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Effort has three elements:
Task 1: Scoping Paper for the Oil and Gas Industry
Task 2: Report on Significant Source Categories and Technical Review of Estimation Methodologies
Task 3: The Climate Registry’s Voluntary Reporting Protocol for the Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Sector (O&GP Protocol)
15
Protocol Development Process Inclusive, transparent, multi-stakeholder
approach Outputs subject to comprehensive review Development process involves four key
groups:1. O&GP Workgroup2. Public Stakeholders3. Protocol Committee4. Registry Board of Directors
16
Protocol Development Process O&GP Workgroup
Approximately 25 GHG reporting experts representing government, business and environmental organizations
Supported by WRAP, Registry staff and expert contractors
Responsible for identifying key reporting and quantification issues, proposing protocol options, providing detailed review of all drafts of protocol, and discussing stakeholder feedback
Public Stakeholders Provide feedback during public comment period
17
Protocol Development Process Registry Board of Directors
Final decision on adoption of protocol at January 2010 meeting
Protocol Committee Subcommittee of Board of Directors Approves release of public comment draft,
recommends adoption of final protocol to full Board of Directors
Final decision making authority on policy issues
18
Workgroup Organizations Alberta Environment Ministry American Petroleum Institute BP Petroleum British Columbia, Ministry of
Environment California Air Resources Board California Department of
Conservation California Independent
Petroleum Association Canadian Association of
Petroleum Producers Chevron – Texaco El Paso Exploration &
Production
Environmental Defense U.S. EPA – Natural Gas STAR Mexico: SEMARNAT Air Quality Natural Resource Defense
Council New Mexico Air Quality
Bureau New Mexico Oil Conservation
Commission Santa Barbara County APCD Shell Oil Company Williams Production World Resources Institute Yates Petroleum
19
Major Milestones
Complete protocol outline 4/29 Complete initial draft of 6/22
O&GP Protocol Workgroup review of initial draft 6/22
- 7/10 Complete public comment draft 8/21 Public comment period 8/24 –
9/25
20
Overview of the Oil and Gas Production Protocol
Overview of the Oil and Gas Production Protocol
ForWestern Regional Air Partnership
Oral PresentationAugust 13, 2009Presented by: Science Applications International Corporation
22
Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview
Overview:• Applicability of the O&GP Protocol• General structure/organization of the Protocol
Major issues addressed in O&GP Protocol:• Facility definitions• Alternative calculation methods for stationary combustion emissions
Additional issues raised in cover memo:• Required reporting of Scope 3 emissions from drilling, completions
and workovers• Completeness of the O&GP Protocol
Clarifications provided on application of GRP rules to O&GP sector
Additional estimation methodologies provided for O&GP emission sources
23
Applicability of the ProtocolApplicability of the Protocol
The O&GP Protocol covers all emissions sources in the exploration and production (E&P) of oil and natural gas
In addition, the O&GP Protocol covers all emission sources for:• Natural Gas Processing Plants• Crude Oil Transportation (including pipelines, trains, trucks, and
marine vessels) The O&GP Protocol does not cover:
• Oil refining and the downstream distribution of petroleum products• The transmission, storage and distribution of natural gas
downstream of the processing plant The O&GP Protocol is addressed to all companies involved in
any way in E&P, natural gas processing, and/or crude oil transportation, including:• Oil and Gas leaseholders• Support services contractors (e.g., drilling contractors)
24
Applicability of the Protocol (Cont.)
Applicability of the Protocol (Cont.)
Oil Industry Sector
The O&GP Protocol does not address oil industry operations shown in the shaded area.
Gathering Separation & Distribution
Gas Treating Facilities
Gas Exporting Facilities
Oil & GasDistributionOil Refineries Oil Exporting
Facilities
Pumpjack
Production TransmissionStorage
& Distribution
ProcessingDrilling & Completion
Injection (Water, Steam, Gas)
Water HandlingIncluding Steam
25
Applicability of the Protocol (Cont.)
Applicability of the Protocol (Cont.)
Natural Gas Industry Sector
The O&GP Protocol does not address natural gas operations shown in the shaded area.
DistributionEngine
CompressorStations
Separator Gas Plant
Liquids Liquids to DistributionLNG
Underground Storage
Well
CompressorStations
Gas
Production ProcessingTransmission, Storage
& Distribution
Drilling & Completion
Exploration
C
C
26
General Structure/Organization of Protocol
General Structure/Organization of Protocol
Parallels the organization of The Registry’s Electric Power Sector (EPS) Protocol (and the upcoming version of the GRP):
– Each Part/Chapter/Section in the upcoming GRP is represented in the O&GP Protocol
– Reader is referred back to GRP when GRP’s generic guidance suffices– New guidance is provided where needed for unique O&GP reporting
requirements and situations
27
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Definition of a facility/Aggregation of emissions:– The Issue: O&GP sector is characterized by numerous dispersed
sources that do not readily fit the standard definition of a “facility”:– Oil and gas wells (currently can be aggregated to state/province level according to
GRP)– Compressor stations– Pipelines
– Currently the GRP provides Members with the option of aggregating emissions from oil and gas wells, and pipelines, to the state/province level, recognizing that:
– Separate reporting of these geographically dispersed sources would represent an unparalleled reporting burden (there may be hundreds of them in a single producing field)
– The transparency gained by separate reporting of each source would be counterbalanced by a level of detail potentially overwhelming to the data user
– But it was judged desirable to define one or more aggregation options in between an individual well and an entire state/province, to obtain a more useful level of detail
28
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Definition of a facility/Aggregation of emissions (continued):– Proposed Solution: O&GP Protocol calls for dispersed
emission sources to be aggregated, at a minimum, to “production field” level:
– Production field is a well understood, broadly accepted concept within the industry
– Production fields are precisely defined by state, province, or country
– Members are given the option of aggregating multiple fields together (particularly useful, e.g., for infrastructure common to more than one field)
– Emissions from sources corresponding to standard definition of a facility (e.g., natural gas processing plants) must be reported by facility
29
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Major Issues Addressed in Protocol
Definition of a facility/Aggregation of emissions (continued):•Public feedback requested on two issues:
Are there other options, besides state/province/territory, for placing an upper bound on the aggregation of multiple production fields (e.g., oil and gas basins)? Or should the aggregation option be made unbounded?
Should The Registry require Members to list the emission source types covered in each reported production field(s)? If so, is it feasible for The Registry to define the source types to be listed (if yes, please provide suggested list of source types)?
30
Major Issues Addressed in ProtocolMajor Issues Addressed in Protocol
Direct emissions from Stationary Combustion:– The Issue: All of the GRP methods for calculating emissions
from stationary combustion devices require, at a minimum, fuel consumption data
– But the O&GP sector is characterized by numerous small combustion devices that lack fuel consumption meters, e.g.:
– Internal combustion engines– Small natural gas turbines– Drill rig and workover rig engines– Heaters and boilers
31
Major Issues Addressed in ProtocolMajor Issues Addressed in Protocol
Direct emissions from Stationary Combustion (continued):– Proposed Solution: The O&GP Protocol provides alternative
methodologies for calculating stationary combustion emissions based on load factors and time of use:– The alternatives are to be used only when fuel consumption data are
lacking and– Time of use is metered or the unit runs continuously
32
Major Issues Addressed in ProtocolMajor Issues Addressed in Protocol
Direct emissions from Stationary Combustion (continued):– Public feedback requested on two issues:
– Do the alternative methodologies provide sufficient guidance to allow for the reporting of all stationary combustion emissions for the O&GP sector?
– If the data required to use the alternative methods (e.g., time of use, load factors, and capacity data) are not available, where could The Registry find published information that could serve as default factors?
33
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Required reporting of Scope 3 emissions from drilling, completions, and workovers:– The Issue: Drilling, completions and workovers are activities
that have been seen as integral and central to the oil and gas production process, but
– These activities are generally outsourced by oil and gas leaseholders, and the contractors have shown little interest in joining The Registry and reporting their emissions
– Hence the following questions are being raised:– Should The Registry require that Scope 3 emissions from drilling,
completions and workovers be reported by O&GP leaseholders?– When Members cannot obtain activity data from their contractors,
what default methodologies should they use to estimate these Scope 3 emissions (include a description of the data available to O&GP companies to support the proposed methodologies)?
34
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Required Reporting of Scope 3 emissions from drilling, completions, and workovers:– Pros:
– Emissions from drilling, completions and workovers can be significant (up to 10% of emissions from O&GP operations)
– Understanding these emissions will help O&GP leaseholders understand their full GHG risk exposure (as these emissions may be required under mandatory reporting programs)
– While O&GP leaseholders do not directly control their contractors’ emissions, they have the ability to select more efficient contractors and/or require that their contractors use lower-emitting technologies/fuels
35
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Required Reporting of Scope 3 emissions from drilling, completions, and workovers:– Cons:
– It may be difficult to obtain the data needed to report Scope 3 emissions from the contractors
– The Registry will therefore need to provide default methods for use when activity data is unavailable– Such methods may lead to very rough conservative emissions
estimates
36
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Additional Issues Raised in Cover Memo
Completeness of the Protocol:– The Issue: The O&GP sector has many unique
emissions sources– The O&GP must provide calculation methods for all
of these sources to enable O&GP Members across Canada, the U.s. and Mexico to report comprehensively
– Hence the public is asked to comment if:– Any emission sources for this sector have been omitted– There are additional calculation methods not covered in the
O&GP Protocol– There are additional emission factors that should be included in
the protocol
37
Clarifications Provided on Application of GRP Rules to O&GP
Clarifications Provided on Application of GRP Rules to O&GP
Reporting of offshore sources by nation or state/provinceNumerous examples on application of organizational
boundaries to O&GP providedDescription/examples of Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3
sources covered by the protocol providedRules for aggregating mobile sources clarified
38
Additional Estimation Methodologies
Additional Estimation Methodologies
Direct fugitive emissions– Methodologies are from API Compendium 2009 (Draft), API
Compendium (2004), Task 2 report, U.S. EPA Mandatory Reporting Rule, and Oil Sands / Heavy Oil Upgrader Industry Report (May 2004)
– Specific methodologies provided for: Flashing losses from tanks Working/Breathing losses from tanks Pneumatic devices Natural gas driven chemical injection pumps Wellhead and facilities fugitive losses Surface collection ponds Hydrogen units Flue gas desulphurization Oil sands mine and ponds emissions Transportation sector - Oil pump stations
39
Additional Estimation Methodologies (Continued)
Additional Estimation Methodologies (Continued)
Direct Process Emissions– Methodologies are from API Compendium 2009 (Draft), API
Compendium (2004), Task 2 report, and EPA Climate Leaders-Natural Gas STAR Program
– Specific methodologies provided for: Amine plants Dehydrators Well completions Underbalanced drilling Drilling mud degassing Well blowdowns Vessel and facility upsets/blowdowns Compressor engine start-ups and shutdowns Transportation sector - Truck, tanker, rail loading Transportation sector - Ballasting and transit loss emissions Transportation sector - Pipeline blowdowns and pigging
COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
40
Comments and Questions
If you have entered your unique audio pin: Raise hand electronically The moderator will un-mute your line and ask
you to raise your question or comment If you did not enter your audio pin:
Submit your question via chat box function The moderator will read your question to the
group so that it can be addressed on the call.
41
WRAP-UP
42
Protocol Finalization Schedule Public comment period Public webinar #1 Public webinar #2 Review and consolidate comments Workgroup meeting Prepare draft final protocol Protocol and Executive Committee
Review Board adoption
8/24– 9/259/29/89/28 – 10/8Early November11/6 – 12/11Late December
Late January
43
Public Comment Process Use of comments
Comments to be assessed by workgroup, reflected in final draft
Protocol Committee to make final determinations Comment mechanics
Review in conjunction with Cover Memo Comments should be submitted using provided
template All materials can be downloaded from our website:
http://www.theclimateregistry.org/resources/protocols/oil-and-gas-production-protocol/
Submit comments by September 25th, 2009, 5:00 PM Pacific to [email protected].
44
45
For More Information on the O&GP Protocol:Peggy Foran
[email protected] (213) 542-0291
www.TheClimateRegistry.org
For information on the WRAP Project:Tom Moore