addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3-5. Summary of Selected Heating Value Measurement Methods METHOD TITLE BRIEF DESCRIPTION MEASUREMENT PRECISION (*) ASTM D4891 – 89 (Reapproved 2006) ASTM D1826 – 94 (Reapproved 2003) ASTM D7314 – 08 ASTM D4809 – 06 ASTM D5865 – 07a Test Method for Heating Value of Gases in Natural Gas Range by Stoichiometric Combustion Standard Test Method for Calorific (Heating) Value of Gases in Natural Gas Range by Continuous Recording Calorimeter Standard Practice for Determination of the Heating Value of Gaseous Fuels using Calorimetry and On-line/At-line Sampling Standard Test Method for Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter (Precision Method) Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke − − − − − − − − − − − Used for the determination of heating value of natural gases and similar gaseous mixtures within a specified composition range Provides an accurate and reliable procedure for regulatory compliance, custody transfer, and process control Used for the determination of the total calorific (heating) value of fuel gas produced or sold in the natural gas range from 900-1200 Btu/scf Provides a reliable method for measurement on a continuous basis with a recording calorimeter Used to determine the heating value of gaseous fuels with at-line and in-line instruments Suitable for periodic operation on a continuous basis Suitable for monitoring systems for tracking properties when using or producing gaseous fuels in industrial processes Covers the determination of the heat of combustion of hydrocarbon fuels Can be used for a wide range of volatile and nonvolatile materials where slightly greater differences in precision can be tolerated Under normal conditions, the method is directly applicable to such fuels as gasoline, kerosenes, Nos. 1 and 2 fuel oil, Nos. 1-D and 2-D diesel fuel and Nos. 0-GT, 1- GT, and 2-GT gas turbine fuels Pertains to the determination of the gross calorific value of coal and coke by either an isoperibol or adiabatic bomb calorimeter − Repeatability: 0.76 Btu/scf, 95% confidence: 2.1 Btu/scf. − Reproducibility: 1.67 Btu/scf, 95% confidence: 5.1 Btu/scf. − Average bias: within 0.1% from reference value (*) Measurement precision data are provided as an indication of attainable precision if all steps of the methodology are adhered to as described in the methods procedures. − − − − − − − Weekly standardization with methane Errors < 0.5% within a week after standardization Higher errors expected for longer standardization periods No generic precision data apply here since this is a practice and not a method The installation and operation of particular systems vary with process type, performance and regulatory requirements Strict adherence to all details of the procedure is essential The error contributed by each individual measurement that affects the precision shall be < 0.04 %, insofar as possible Pilot Version, September 2009 3-20
3.5.2 Computational Methods Heating value may be determined from gas compositional analysis in accordance with a standard practice established by the ASTM for calculating heating values for natural gas and similar mixtures from compositional analysis. ASTM D3588 – 98 (Reapproved 2003), is the standard recommended practice for calculating heating values, compressibility factors, and relative densities of gaseous fuels (ASTM D3588-98, 2003). This practice covers procedures for calculating these quantities at base conditions (14.696 psia and 60°F or15.6°C) for natural gas mixtures from compositional analysis. It applies to all common types of utility gaseous fuels, i.e., dry natural gas, reformed gas, oil gas (both high and low Btu), propane-air, coke oven gas, and other gaseous fractions for which suitable methods of analysis are designated. The ideal gas heating value and ideal gas relative density are calculated from the molar composition and the respective ideal gas values for the components; these values are then adjusted by means of a calculated compressibility factor. The ASTM approach recognizes that the calorific value of a mixture, such as in refinery fuel gas systems, is a function of the mol% composition of the individual components of that mixture. For refinery fuel gas, this mixture could contain both carbon containing species, which upon combustion will contribute directly to CO 2 emissions, as well as non-carbon containing species. Hydrogen, for example, is an important contributor to refinery fuel gas heating values but it does not contribute to CO 2 emissions when combusted. To implement this practice, the user would first determine the molar composition of the gas in accordance with any applicable ASTM or GPA method. For a precise calculation, at least 98 % of the sample constituents should be determined as individual components, with no more than a total of 2 % in terms of groups of components (e.g. butanes, pentanes, hexanes, and so forth). An ideal combustion reaction for fossil fuels (that may contain hydrogen) in the ideal gas state can be generally represented as: ⎛ b c ⎞ ⎛ b ⎞ CaHb + cH2 + ⎜a + + ⎟ O2 = aCO2 + ⎜ + c⎟ H2O (Equation 3-1) ⎝ 4 2⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ The ideal net heating value is the heating value that is observed when all the water remains in the ideal gas state, while the ideal gross heating value is observed when all the water formed by the reaction condenses to liquid. The difference between them is the enthalpy of vaporization of the water formed during the combustion process. Therefore, the ideal gross heating value for a mixture can be expressed as: Pilot Version, September 2009 3-21
Page 1 and 2: Prepared by the LEVON Group, LLC an
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents SECTION Page FORE
Page 5 and 6: List of Tables SECTION Page 2-1 Ove
Page 7 and 8: FOREWORD The global oil and natural
Page 9 and 10: DOCUMENT AT A GLANCE This document
Page 11 and 12: 1.0 INTRODUCTION Policymakers use e
Page 13 and 14: The Intergovernmental Panel on Clim
Page 15 and 16: 2.0 SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY There ar
Page 17 and 18: Table 2-1. Overview of Methods Used
Page 19 and 20: the uncertainty associated with cur
Page 21 and 22: d. Data processing uncertainty Typi
Page 23 and 24: d. Material Balance For some emissi
Page 25 and 26: 3.0 OVERVIEW OF MEASUREMENT PRACTIC
Page 27 and 28: 3.1 Flow Measurement Practices Cont
Page 29 and 30: All these factors should be assesse
Page 31 and 32: Table 3-1. Example of FFMS Combined
Page 33 and 34: 3.2 Uncertainties of Flow Measureme
Page 35 and 36: Table 3-3. Compilation of Specifica
Page 37 and 38: EXHIBIT 3-3: FACTORS TO CONSIDER WH
Page 39 and 40: 3.3.2 Quantifying Sampling Precisio
Page 41 and 42: Table 3-4. Summary of Selected Carb
Page 43: 3.5 Heat Content Determination The
Page 47 and 48: using standard methods, non-standar
Page 49 and 50: 0.6 0.4 0.2 Error 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6
Page 51 and 52: s ± t × (Equation 4-1) n where s
Page 53 and 54: 4.2.1 Propagation Equations There a
Page 55 and 56: For two terms that might be correla
Page 57 and 58: EXHIBIT 4-1: Uncertainty Example fo
Page 61 and 62: Further guidance for assigning unce
Page 63 and 64: 4.4 Quantifying Measurement Uncerta
Page 69 and 70: Are the data based on a single poin
Page 71 and 72: Two methods are compared. The first
Page 73 and 74: . EXHIBIT 4-6: Uncertainty Example
Page 77 and 78: Table 4-13 shows the uncertainty in
Page 79 and 80: Table 4-13. Comparison of Annual Em
Page 81 and 82: • The evolution of activity and e
Page 83 and 84: These guidelines concentrate solely
Page 85 and 86: (Reprinted from the API Compendium)
Page 87 and 88: Table 5-2. Onshore Oil Field (High
Page 89 and 90: associated with them are assigned b
Page 91 and 92: Table 5-4. Onshore Oil Field (High
Page 93 and 94: 5.2.4 Propagating Assymetric Uncert
Page 95 and 96:
U( rel) = U( rel) + U( rel) + U( re
Page 97 and 98:
Coke burn rate approach (Equation 5
Page 99 and 100:
Wt% C ∑ lbmole x lbmole C 12 lb C
Page 101 and 102:
The CO 2 emissions are calculated u
Page 103 and 104:
GHG Emissions, tonnes/yr 60,000 50,
Page 105 and 106:
vast majority of the uncertainty fo
Page 107 and 108:
6.0 REFERENCES AGA, 2008, Greenhous
Page 109 and 110:
The Alberta Energy and Utilities Bo
Page 111 and 112:
Appendix A GLOSSARY OF STATISTICAL
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
APPENDIX B LIST OF INDUSTRY MEASURE
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 2.8B Establishment of the L
Page 121 and 122:
Chapter 11.5.3 Chapter 12.1.1 Chapt
Page 123 and 124:
Chapter 19.4 Chapter 20.1 RP 85 RP
Page 125 and 126:
ISO 8222:2002 ISO 8697:1999 ISO 902
Page 127 and 128:
ISO 7194:2008 Measurement of fluid
Page 129 and 130:
ASTM D4292 ASTM D4892 ASTM D5002 AS
Page 131 and 132:
APPENDIX C OPERATING CONDITIONS, IN
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix C OPERATING CONDITIONS, IN
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix D SELECT MEASUREMENT METHO
Page 137 and 138:
c. ASTM UOP539-97, Refinery Gas Ana
Page 139 and 140:
interference between known componen
Page 141 and 142:
maintained over the room temperatur
Page 143 and 144:
APPENDIX E UNITS CONVERSION
Page 145 and 146:
− Gasoline density (average) = 0.
Page 147 and 148:
Appendix F UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION D
Page 149 and 150:
The uncertainty for the heaters/reb
Page 151 and 152:
∑ 2 U ( abs) = U( abs) ∑(Wt%C)
Page 153 and 154:
Combining the fuel usage for the tw
Page 155 and 156:
Uncertainty Estimate of CO 2 e Emis
Page 157 and 158:
U ( abs) = ( U ( abs) + U ( abs) +
Page 159 and 160:
E E CO2e 219 tonne CO ⎛ 2 0.0108
Page 161 and 162:
E CO 2 6 500× 10 scf gas lbmole ga
Page 163 and 164:
• Fuel Economy (miles per gallon)
Page 165 and 166:
Upper: U ( abs) = (U( abs) +U( abs)
Page 167 and 168:
default CH 4 content is 5.53% from
Page 169 and 170:
Uncertainty Estimate of CO 2 e Emis
Page 171 and 172:
( ) Urel ( ) = Urel ( ) = Urel ( )
Page 173 and 174:
Uncertainty Estimate for CH 4 and C
Page 175 and 176:
specific mole % for CH 4 and CO 2 i
Page 177 and 178:
E CO2 0.07239 tonne CH 4 tonne mole
Page 179 and 180:
U ( rel) = U( rel) +U( rel) +U( rel
Page 181 and 182:
Table F-14. Fugitive Emission and U
Page 183 and 184:
U ( abs) = (U( abs) +U( abs) +U( ab
Page 185 and 186:
Table F-15. Onshore Oil Field (High
show all

addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?