addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 4-9. Measured Composition Data Mole% dry January February March April May June July August September October November December Methane 90.73 91.3 91.37 91.21 94.86 93.97 93.91 94.3 94.45 94.33 94.08 92.85 Ethane 3.83 3.74 4.1 4.16 2.27 2.7 2.81 2.59 2.27 2.3 2.3 2.88 CO 2 3.69 3.24 2.93 2.96 1.32 1.23 0.79 1.13 1.38 1.38 1.4 1.49 Propane 0.9 0.8 0.82 0.88 0.61 0.79 0.66 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.76 i-Butane 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 n-Butane 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 i-Pentane 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 n-Pentane 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 C6+ 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.24 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.08 Total 99.48 99.43 99.54 99.57 99.39 99.13 98.54 99.24 99.1 99.01 98.78 98.4 Table 4-10. Average Composition Calculations Mean, mole% dry Std dev t*s/sqrt(n) U(rel) U(abs), mole % MW Calculation, lb/lbmole U(abs), lb/lbmole wt% C calculation, wt% U(abs), wt% Methane 93.11333 1.529369 0.971714736 1.04% 0.971715 14.93538 0.1559 64.7728 1.4797 Ethane 2.995833 0.747498 0.474937795 15.85% 0.474938 0.900847 0.1428 4.168007 0.6662 CO 2 1.911667 0.988652 0.62815969 32.86% 0.62816 0.841325 0.2765 1.32982 0.4378 Propane 0.735833 0.100856 0.064080962 8.71% 0.064081 0.324503 0.0283 1.535612 0.1373 i-Butane 0.1025 0.00866 0.005502463 5.37% 0.005502 0.059573 0.0032 0.28521 0.0164 n-Butane 0.135833 0.010836 0.006885023 5.07% 0.006885 0.078946 0.0040 0.377961 0.0206 i-Pentane 0.040833 0.006686 0.004247814 10.40% 0.004248 0.029461 0.0031 0.142025 0.0151 n-Pentane 0.030833 0.006686 0.004247814 13.78% 0.004248 0.022246 0.0031 0.107244 0.0149 C6+ 0.0675 0.055942 0.035544067 52.66% 0.035544 0.058172 0.0306 0.281732 0.1485 Total 99.13417 17.25045 73.00041 Sum uncertainty (abs) 0.350567 1.693261 Sum uncertainty (rel) 2.03% 2.32% For sample size of n=12, the Student’s t distribution value is 2.201. Note, the resulting estimates are not rounded to show the comparison. Pilot Version, September 2009 4-25
. EXHIBIT 4-6: Uncertainty Example for Statistical Sampling, continued o The uncertainty associated with this value is calculated by applying Equation 4-4, using the absolute uncertainties for each molar compound. ∑ U 2 ( abs ) = ( ) ( % ) mole% MW ∑ U abs mole × MW × 2 2 2 (0.0104× 14.93538) + (0.1585× 0.900847) + (0.3286× 0.841325) = + (0.0871× 0.324503) + (0.0537× 0.059573) + (0.0507× 0.078946) 2 2 + (0.1040× 0.029461) + (0.1378× 0.022246) + (0.5266× 0.058172) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 (0.1559) + (0.1428) + (0.2765) + (0.0283) + (0.0032) + (0.0040) = = 0.350567 2 2 2 + (0.0031) + (0.0031) + (0.0306) Urel 0.350567 ( ) = × 100% = 2.03% ∑( mole% × MW ) 17.25045 The weight percent carbon of the average composition is calculated by applying the following equation: Wt% C ∑ lbmole x lbmole C 12 lb C 1 i Total = × × × 100 lbmoletotal lbmole i lbmole C MWTotal This equates to 73.00041% C, as shown in Table 4-9. The uncertainty associated with this value is calculated by applying Equation 4-1, using the absolute uncertainties for the weight percent carbon of each molar compound. o The uncertainty associated with this value is calculated by applying Equation 4-1, using the absolute uncertainties for each molar compound: 2 U ( abs) = U ( abs) ( %) wt % ∑ wt ∑ 2 2 2 (0.0228× 64.7728) + (0.1598× 4.168007) + (0.3292× 1.32982) = 2 2 2 + (0.0894× 1.535612) + (0.0574× 0.28521) + (0.0546× 0.377961) = 1.693261 2 2 2 + (0.1060× 0.142025) + (0.1393× 0.107244) + (0.5270× 0.281732) o o 1.693261 Urel ( ) = × 100% = 2.32% ∑( wt%) 73.00041 The average annual CO 2 emissions factor is then calculated by applying the following equation: 6 lb CTotal 44lb CO 2/lbmole CO 2 lbTotal lbmoleTotal 10 scf tonne CO2 × × × × × lbTotal 12lb C/lbmole C lbmoleTotal 379.3 scf MMscf 2204.62 lb CO2 =55.2180 tonnes CO 2 /MMscf. The uncertainty for this quantity is calculated by applying Equation 4-6 for the relative uncertainties of MW Total and wt% C Total 2 2 2 ⎛UX ⎞ ⎛UY ⎞ Urel ( ) = ⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ = 2.03 + 2.32 ⎝ X ⎠ ⎝ Y ⎠ 2 2 = 3.08% Pilot Version, September 2009 4-26
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 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: Two methods are compared. The first
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 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?