REGASIFICATION PLANTS: TECHNOLOGIES LNG · LNG Regasification is an excellent chance to diversify...

1 giovedì 29 settembre 2016

HIGH EFFICIENCY LOW

EMISSIONS CONFERENCE Milan, 27 September 2016

Saipem. Engineering Energy

REGASIFICATION PLANTS:

ENERGY EFFICIENT

TECHNOLOGIES

Anton Marco Fantolini Saipem LNG Technology Projects Manager

Co-authors:

Salvatore De Rinaldis Innovation Dpt.

Luca Davide Inglese LNG Dpt.

LNG

2 (REF 2015 – Source IGU World LNG Report 2015)

757 MTPA

108 FACILITIES

245

MTPA

TRADED

LNG

LNG Value Chain

INTRODUCTION

0.2-2% Energy Loss 1-3% 7-10% 0.1-1%

3

INTRODUCTION

LNG Regasification

LNG Regasification is an excellent chance to diversify energy sources

Global Regasification market continues to expand at a steady pace

LNG supply is increasing thanks to new

Liquefaction plants entering into the

production phase

IGU World LNG Report 2016

Global Regasification capacity: 757 MTPA

Increase from 2014: 33 MTPA, +5%

Floating Regasification: 77 MTPA, +35% yoy

4

ENERGY EFFICIENT LNG REGASIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES

Recover Energy – Reduce Emissions

FSRU TOSCANA Offshore (Italy)

Saipem, in cooperation with POLIMI (Politecnico di Milano)

studied possible schemes to improve energy efficiency in Regasification

assessed several HELE alternatives, with various flow diagrams now available

investigated the market for Equipment technical feasibility and Economics

Import Terminals pay considerable expenses for electrical power import

Low usage, recurring seasonally, increases power cost weight on income

Possible Carbon Tax would further increase the costs for power consumption

5

ENERGY REQUIREMENTS

Thermal and Electric Power

216,000 m3

(1,362 GWh)

2.25 MWe 27 MWt

TNG = 3°C

P=63÷84 barg

SCV

987 kg/h

NG 1000

kg/h

LNG

Regasification

line

ORV

Regasification

line

CO2: 45 kg/h CO2: 9.5 kg/h 16.2 kWe 23.3 kWe

1000

kg/h

LNG

1000

kg/h

NG

LNG: 139 t/h

TLNG= -160 °C

TSW = 9°C

6


Energy Recovery Performances

0

-100

Performance indexes Target

7

Technologies Overview

Direct expansion, pumping the cryogenic LNG to high pressures and

expanding the regasified LNG to delivery pressures

Cogeneration, producing simultaneously electric and thermal power

from burning a fraction of the regasified LNG

Gas Cycle, producing electric power from a fraction of the regasified

LNG rejecting heat (thermal power) to regasify LNG

Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC), producing electric power using

seawater as an energy source and rejecting heat to regasify LNG


8


Direct Expansion: Concepts & References

LNG is pumped at a higher pressure than

network and is vaporized by a heat source

(seawater or SCV at high temperature)

HP Natural Gas is then expanded to

transform mechanical energy into

electrical energy by using an expander

coupled to a power generator

Himej direct expansion layout

References (Japan) Year

Sodegaura 1979

Senboku Daini 1982

Kitakyushu 1982

Tobata 1982

Himej 1984

Chita 1984

Yokkaichi 1989

Chita LNG Import Terminal

9

Direct Expansion: application schemes

Direct Expansion linked to ORV

Nikkiso: Booster Pump


Direct Expansion linked to SCV

L.A. Turbines Turbo-expander

10


Cogeneration: Concepts & References

Zeebrugge plant scheme

COGENERATION: simultaneous generation of

electricity and recovery of heat from a single

source and via a single process

UNBALANCE:

Heat/power ratio of LNG line: 8÷10

Heat/power ratio of Cogenerator: 1÷3

Heat recovery from exhaust gas via water

closed loop provides only part of thermal duty

References – on stream plants:

Andres, Himeji, Kochi, Manzanillo, Penuelas,

Zeebrugge

Penuelas Import Terminal

11


Cogeneration: Main Components Feasibility

Solar: Gas Turbines

Bergen: Internal

combustion Engine

(Other Vendors: GE

Jenbacher, Wartsila)

GE: PGT16

(Alternative: PGT25)

Gas Turbines

Internal Combustion Engines

12


Gas Cycles: Concepts

FLUID Argon Nitrogen Helium Air

MW [kg/kmol] 39.95 28.01 4.00 28.96

Critical temperature [°C] -122 -146 -268 -140

Critical pressure [bar] 48.6 33.9 2.3 38.5

GAS CYCLE: Brayton Cycle where the working fluid operates between a low

temperature boiler and a cold sink

13


Gas Cycles: Main Components Feasibility

Cannon: Boiler Atlas Copco: Integrally geared

Generator turbo-expander

Heatric: Printed Circuit Heat Exchanger (PCHE)

14


Organic Rankine Cycles: Concepts & References

Negishi plant

Rankine thermodynamic cycles using a suitable

organic fluid instead of water (steam)

Exploits the cold heat sink to produce power

Working fluid selection:

thermodynamic, economical, hazard aspects

Large variety of Organic Fluids:

different plant configurations additional

criteria: safety, min. pressure/temperature

Himeji Osaka gas

LNG Tank

TLNG -160°C

Generator

Organic

Fluid Condenser

Vaporizer

NG

Sea Water

TSW= 9°C

Pump

Turbine

References:

Japan, installations in

LNG terminals (80’s)

ORC often coupled

to other technologies

15


Organic Rankine Cycles: Main Components Feasibility

Working fluid - LNG HEAT EXCHANGER:

S&T Vendors, Heatric (Printed Circuit)

Working fluid - SEA WATER:

S&T Vendors

CRYOGENIC PUMPS:

Ebara, Nikkiso, JC Carter, Ruhrpumpen, Cryostar

TURBINES :

• Radial inflow: L.A. Turbines, Cryostar, Atlas Copco

• Radial outflow: Exergy

• Axial: Ormat, Turboden

Ebara: vertical in-pot pump

L.A. Turbines:

Radial inflow turbine

16


Organic Rankine Cycles: Single Level

No assessed fluid covers the entire regasification line power demand

The constraint of Tcond has a small effect on power production

High critical temperature fluids penalized due to minimum condensing

pressure constraint

17


Organic Rankine Cycles: Single Level

SINGLE LEVEL

Pure fluid

Single condensation level

recuperative

TWO LEVELS

Pure fluid

Two condensation levels

Recuperative AP and BP

CASCADE

Two single level cycles

different pure fluids

recuperative TOP cycle

economizer BOTTOM cycle

ORC net power is not sufficient

Pla

nt

com

ple

xit

y

18


Comparison Results

Cogeneration

NG

1.146 MTPA

8200 tons/yr

ORC Organic

Rankine Cycle

NG

1.154 MTPA

0 tons/yr

Gas

Cycle

NG

1.143 MTPA

11000 tons/yr

Direct

expansion

16000 tons/yr

CO2: -26000 tons/yr CO2: -2300 tons/yr

CO2: -23000 tons/yr CO2: -12500 tons/yr

(-50000 tons/yr)

ORV (SCV) SCV

SCV SCV

LNG

1.154 MTPA

NG

1.138 MTPA LNG

1.154 MTPA

LNG

1.154 MTPA

LNG

1.154 MTPA

FCS = -100%

FCS = -58%

FCS = -43%

FCS = -5%

19

COST AND PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS

Technology Economic Comparison

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Italy Poland Malaysia India China Tota

l Lif

e C

ost

(T

LC

), M

M$ Total Life Cost

Cogen ORC Gas Cycle SCV ORV

0

5

10

15

20

Italy Poland Malaysia India China

Payback T

ime (

PBT

), y

r

Payback Time, vs ORV

Carbon Tax:

35 $/ton

0

5

10

15

20

Italy Poland Malaysia India China Payback T

ime (

PBT

), y

r

Payback Time, vs SCV

Cogen ORC Gas Cycle

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

CA

PEX,

MM

$

CAPEX

20

CONCLUSIONS

LNG Regasification Terminals play a strategic role in the energy sources

diversification, with a particular emphasis in Europe

Saipem and POLIMI have analyzed various solutions to improve the energy

efficiency of Regasification Terminals

Several schemes are available to fit the needs of different plants, in terms of

size, location and constraints

These schemes, assessed with information from executed EPC projects and

referenced equipment manufacturers, are now available for a field application

21

Thank you

www.saipem.com

REGASIFICATION PLANTS: TECHNOLOGIES LNG · LNG Regasification is an excellent chance to diversify...

Documents

Transcript of REGASIFICATION PLANTS: TECHNOLOGIES LNG · LNG Regasification is an excellent chance to diversify...