addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EXHIBIT 4-2: Uncertainty Example for Fugitive Emissions Estimation Input Data: Table 4-1 contains components counts and their uncertainties for an electric reciprocating compressor. The uncertainties shown for the component counts are the 95% confidence limits on the average number of components and were determined from an analysis of field survey data. It is assumed that the sampling plan was designed to be representative of the component population, and therefore bias is eliminated. Table 4-1. Component Counts and Uncertainties Equipment schedules for facilities in the upstream O&G industry Equipment Type Electric reciprocating compressor Lower Uncertainty (%) Upper Uncertainty (%) Component Type Service Count Connectors Gas/Vapor 275 18 18 Connectors Light Liquid 2 77 77 Controllers Fuel Gas 5 31 326 Compressor Gas/Vapor 2 75 75 Seals Open-ended Gas/Vapor 4 58 58 Lines Valves Gas/Vapor 20 16 16 Valves Light Liquid 1 77 77 CAPP, Volume 5, Table 4.1, 2004 Emissions Factor: Table 4-2 provides emission factors and their uncertainties for each of the components in Table 4-1. Here also, bias is assumed to be eliminated due to a well designed sampling plan. Table 4-2. Emission Factors and Uncertainties Summary of average emission factors for uncontrolled fugitive THC emissions (kg/hr/source) at UOG facilities. Factor Group Sweet/ Sour Service Equipment Component Type Emissions Factors (kg THC/source-hr) Lower Uncertainty (%) Upper Uncertainty (%) Gas All Gas/Vapor Connectors 7.06E-04 31 31 Gas All Light Liquid Connectors 5.51E-04 90 111 Gas All Fuel Gas Controllers 2.38E-01 27 27 Gas All Gas/Vapor Compressor 7.13E-01 36 36 Seals Gas All Gas/Vapor Open-ended 4.27E-01 62 161 Lines Gas All Gas/Vapor Valves 2.46E-03 15 15 Gas All Light Liquid Valves 3.52E-03 19 19 CAPP, Volume 3, Table 19, 2004 Weight Fractions of Emissions: Table 4-3 contains the CH 4 weight fractions for gas production and light crude. The weight fractions are from Table C-7 of the 2009 API Compendium. Expert judgment was used to estimate the uncertainty. Since the uncertainty of the components and the emission factor give lower and upper uncertainty bounds, it is important to have lower and upper uncertainty levels for the weight fraction as well. Pilot Version, September 2009 4-11
EXHIBIT 4-2: Uncertainty Example for Fugitive Emissions Estimation, continued Methane Emissions Table 4-3. Methane Weight Fractions for Production Operations by Service Operations Wt. Fraction Lower Uncertainty (%) Upper Uncertainty (%) Conventional Oil: 0.523 5% 5% Gas Service Conventional Oil: 0.0363 5% 5% Light Liquid Service Source: Picard, D. J., B. D. Ross, and D. W. H. Koon. A Detailed Inventory of CH 4 and VOC Emissions from Upstream Oil and Gas Operations in Alberta, Volume II Development of the Inventory, Canadian Petroleum Association, March 1992, Tables 12 through 15. The methane emissions are estimated by the following equation. Methane Emissions = Component Count × Emissions Factor × Weight Fraction Uncertainty Estimate: o To estimate the uncertainty of the emissions for the individual components, use Equation 4-6, the equation for the uncertainty of a product. This applies the relative uncertainties for uncertainties that are independent. For this example, the equation is written as: Urel U U U 2 2 2 ( ) component = count + emission factor + weight fraction For example, the total methane emissions for compressor seals are: 0.713 kg 8760hr tonnes Emissions = 2 seals× × 0.523 wt. fraction × × = 6.53 tonnes/yr hr-source year 1000kg The lower uncertainty of this estimate is calculated as follows: Urel U U U 2 2 2 2 2 2 ( ) component = count + EF + wt fraction = 0.75 + 0.36 + 0.05 = 83.3% o Note that in the emissions formula, there are two constants. Multiplication by a constant does not change the relative uncertainty of an estimate. The total methane emissions are the sum of the methane emissions for all of the components. The total uncertainty for methane emissions resulting from fugitive sources associated with the electric reciprocating compressor are calculated using Equation 4-4, which applies the absolute uncertainties for the uncertainty of a sum. Pilot Version, September 2009 4-12
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 and 44: 3.5 Heat Content Determination The
Page 45 and 46: 3.5.2 Computational Methods Heating
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: 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 65 and 66: EXHIBIT 4-4: Uncertainty Example fo
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?