Deep Panuke Project Description - Encana

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Therefore, injection into an annular space was rejected on the basis of high risk of deliverability of thisconcept.2.10.2.9 Condensate HandlingThe method employed for condensate handling is directly tied to the export tie-in alternatives. For theM&NP Option, three options were investigated for handling condensate. The preferred option is to usethe condensate as primary fuel for the turbine drivers offshore. The rationale for this selection isdescribed below.For the SOEP Subsea Option, the condensate is transported to SOEP via the export pipeline andcommingled with the export gas. Final condensate handling is done onshore at the SOEP gas plant atGoldboro and the fractionation plant at Point Tupper.Handling of the condensate stream either as the primary fuel on the platform or processing at the SOEPfacilities are both technically feasible. Final selection of the condensate handling alternative will bemade when discussions between EnCana and ExxonMobil are concluded.The following three options for condensate handling were evaluated for the M&NP Option:1. the use of a dedicated pipeline to shore;2. use of condensate as a fuel; and3. condensate storage and shipment by tanker.The three alternatives were identified as technically feasible with different types and levels of risk (referto Table 2.14); however, options 1 and 3 were deemed not to be economically feasible. After reviewingthe alternatives, it was determined that use of condensate handling as the primary fuel is the preferredalternative for the M&NP Option.The maximum expected volume of condensate that will be produced with Deep Panuke gas at peakproduction is approximately 220 m 3 /day [1400 bpd].Deep Panuke Volume 4 (Environmental Assessment Report) • November 2006 2-76
Table 2.14Condensate HandlingAlternativeDedicatedpipeline to shoreTechnicalSuitabilityCostCommercial RiskTechnically andEconomicallyFeasibleProven technology High capital costs No significant concerns NoConceptDeliverabilitySafetyEnvironmental ImpactUse ofcondensate as afuelTri-fuel usage(gas/condensate/diesel) notwidely used in offshoreproduction, but feasibleLeast expensive No significant concerns Yes Specialized equipmentwhich is not available inCanada has long leaddeliveryRequires special designconsiderations however,technically achievableReduced transfers of diesel(required as a backup fuel)since a tri-fuel system will bein useStorage andshipment bytankerProven technology High capital costs No significant concerns NoDeep Panuke Volume 4 (Environmental Assessment Report) • November 2006 2-77
Page 1 and 2:
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThis section p
Page 3 and 4:
Potential Radioactive Components: T
Page 5 and 6:
2.2.2 Subsea Wells and FlowlinesThe
Page 10 and 11:
2.2.3.1 M&NP OptionThe proposed pip
Page 12 and 13:
The onshore portion of the pipeline
Page 14 and 15:
2.3 Construction and Installation2.
Page 16 and 17:
2.3.2 Export PipelineA proposed pip
Page 18 and 19:
A dedicated subsea umbilical will b
Page 20 and 21:
Table 2.2 Construction MethodsCateg
Page 22 and 23:
These subsea structures may be fast
Page 24 and 25:
For the new production and injectio
Page 26 and 27: Figure 2.8Typical Production Well S
Page 28 and 29: 2.3.8.1 Drilling Fluid ProgramWater
Page 30 and 31: Table 2.4 Hydrostatic Fluid Dischar
Page 32 and 33: Acid GasInjectionFeed GasCompressio
Page 34 and 35: Although the M&NP Option is the onl
Page 36 and 37: Spent TEG has no measurable H 2 S a
Page 38 and 39: Table 2.7 Water CompositionComponen
Page 40 and 41: 2.4.2 Utilities2.4.2.1 Electrical P
Page 42 and 43: will be designed considering emerge
Page 44 and 45: zones over the pipeline although th
Page 46 and 47: 2.7 Emissions and DischargesEnCana
Page 48 and 49: Table 2.8 Routine Project Emissions
Page 50 and 51: 2.7.1.1 Air PollutantsThe following
Page 52 and 53: esult in eye irritation, respirator
Page 54 and 55: Typically, a re-entry and completio
Page 56 and 57: 2.7.5.3 Deck DrainageDuring constru
Page 58 and 59: 2.9.2 Pipeline Leak PreventionThe p
Page 60 and 61: 2.9.5 Subsea Protection StructuresT
Page 62 and 63: • consider concept alternatives f
Page 64 and 65: Table 2.10Centre Substructure Type
Page 66 and 67: is much more weather-dependent than
Page 68 and 69: Table 2.11 Processing Location Alte
Page 70 and 71: After carefully considering the con
Page 72 and 73: Flaring acid gas consists of direct
Page 74 and 75: Table 2.13Produced Water Disposal A
Page 78 and 79: Use of a dedicated condensate pipel
Page 80 and 81: is taken offshore on a special lay
Page 82: Table 2.15Acid Gas Injection Locati
show all

Deep Panuke Project Description - Encana

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

Delete template?

Save as template?