Deep Panuke Project Description - Encana

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 2.15Acid Gas Injection Location AlternativesAlternative Technical Suitability Cost* Commercial RiskTechnically andEconomicallyFeasibleConcept Deliverability Safety Environmental ImpactD-70 Technically feasible Base case for cost (as perTable 2.12)Extremely low risk ofsouring the Panukesands,Yes Least risk Least risk Lower impactH-82 Technically feasible Additional cost from basecase of approximately $1-2MM for installation of extralength (approx. 3.1 km) offlowline and umbilicalRisk of souring thePanuke sands extremelyunlikely (slightly lowerthan D-70)YesIncreased operational risk Increased safety riskassociated with longer flowline associated with unlikely(primarily increased risk of rupture of acid gas injectionhydrate formation)flowline due to largervolume of acid gas inflowline (4.8 km flowlineinstead of 1.7 km)Higher impact due to longestflowline resulting in:• larger benthic footprint(greater area of benthicdisturbance)• larger safety zone area andimpact on fisheries(especially quahog) andother ocean users• increased impact to airquality in unlikely event ofacid gas flowline rupturedue to larger volume of acidgas in flowlineDeep Panuke Volume 4 (Environmental Assessment Report) • November 2006 2-82
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 76 and 77: Therefore, injection into an annula
Page 78 and 79: Use of a dedicated condensate pipel
Page 80 and 81: is taken offshore on a special lay
show all

Deep Panuke Project Description - Encana

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?