Flaring, Venting and Greenhouse G

BOEMRE Workshop

March 30, 2011

New Orleans 

Holly Hop

Policy Advisor, U

1
2

Topics for Discussion

API Introduction TimelineNew RequirementsThe impact of flaring versus venting on greenhou(GHG) emissions GHG emissions reductionExisting worldwide best practices that could reduemissions from flaring and ventingConclusions
American Petroleum Institut

Founded in 1919Covers all segments of the industry:

 Upstream  Downstream Pipeline Marine Service and Supply 

Over 470 MembersPrincipal roles – Standard Setting, Certifications, Advocacy and Education

3
4

Timeline

July 2004 GAO issues a report Natural Gas Flaring and VOpportunities to Improve Data and Reduce EmissionsMarch 6, 2007 MMS publishes a Proposed Rule on proporevisions to 30 CFR part 250, subpart K, Oil and Gas ProRequirementsApril 19, 2010 MMS/BOEMRE publishes Final Rule ameCFR part 250, subpart K, Oil and Gas Production Requireeffective May 19, 2010 October 15, 2010 BOEMRE issues NTL No. 2010-N09 –Guidance on Flare/Vent Meter Installation 
5

New Requirements 

Rule clarifies limits on the amount of natural gas be flared or vented during certain situations Improves collection of data on flaring and ventinrequiring operators to report gas flared separategas vented Require operators to install flare/vent meters on platforms These regulatory changes provide more accuratmeasurements of GHG emissions
6

Venting vs. Flaring

What is Venting?

 Controlled release of gases into the atmosphere in the 

oil and gas production operations.

 GHG released: CH4, CO2 and water vapors

What is flaring?

 Controlled burning of natural gas and other hydrocarbo

the course of routine oil and gas production operations

 This burning occurs at the end of a flare stack or boom

 GHG released: CO2 and water vapors

Global Warming Impact

 CH4 in the atmosphere has a higher degree of radiativ

impact when compared to CO2

 One ton of CH4 released to the atmosphere is equivale

global warming impact of the release of 21-25 tons of 
7

Global Perspective on Venting and Fla

EIA global energy outlook estimate

 97 Billion cubic meters (m3) natural gas 

flared worldwide

 About 2.7% of natural gas production 

GAO findings for offshore federal leases, 

 Venting and flaring of natural gas is 

estimated to be in the range of 0.5 –2.3% of the natural gas produced 

World Bank is leading a Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership

 A catalyst for reducing wasteful and 

undesirable practices of gas flaring and venting through policy change, stakeholder facilitation and project implementation

In

2000 

Flaring

Site-

“

Source: ECON at “Global Gas Fla

Conference, Holmenkollen, Norw
8

Domestic Venting and Flaring Da

GAO Report (GAO-11-34, October 2010)

 Concludes that current reporting guidance might not acc

all sources of natural gas lost by venting and flaring

GOADS-2011 monthly activity data (due April 2012)

 operating hours; total fuel used; processed throughput; 

flared; volume vented

GOADS-2011 data will be compared to data submitt

companies through the Oil & Gas Operations Rep(OGOR)

 GOADS data will be the basis for reporting to EPA from 

operations under the GHG Reporting Program
9

Industry Guidelines for GHG Emis

Reduction Projects

Part I – General Project GuidelinesPart II – Carbon Capture and Storage Part III – Flare Reduction

Guidelines Goals Identify, assess, and develop candidate 

projects that would lead to credible emission reductions

 Develop a framework for emissions 

reduction assessment for specific project “families”

 Regime neutral for global applicability
10

Flaring and Venting GHG Emis

Reduction Projects

Best opportunity for flaring and venting reduction projects are in 

production sector

GHG emission reductions are realized when,

 CH4 emissions are reduced where gas that was previously vent

 CH4 and CO2 emissions are reduced when gas previously vent

is captured for energy use, 

 CH4 and CO2 are reduced when gas previously vented is captu

injected underground for long-term storage or for enhanced oil 

UN Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) GHG reduction projec

 Individually designed projects to fit site-specific needs and crite Emission reduction credits provided by the UN based on adher

methodology guidelines

 Emission reduction credits incentivize operators to develop and 

projects

 Currently 8 projects approved at oil production facilities, and 2 p

refineries
11

Natural Gas STAR: CH4 Mitigati

(USEPA, SPE 126964, April 2010)

Gulf of Mexico based example for cost-effective CH4 reduction

Theoretical platform based on the most common equipment on oil production platforms in the U.S. 

 63,000 Barrels of oil with 2 million m3 of natural gas per day

 Vapor recovery system to capture storage tank venting emissions Centrifugal compressors with wet seals are used for gas compression

 Vents from the dehydrator, wet seal degassing, compressor blowdown

launcher are released to the atmosphere

 Platform has a flare gas system for handling well venting and upsets

Main sources of CH4 emissions for this platform

 Centrifugal compressor wet seal oil degassing, gas emitted from the c

venting from the glycol dehydrator

Prioritization of reduction options 

Marginal abatement costs developed from Natural Gas STAR eRanking of cost-effective options for this theoretical platform

1. CH4 recovery from the glycol dehydrator vent using the existing vapor 

2. Implementation of a directed inspection and maintenance program3. Conversion of compressors from wet seals to dry seals
CONCLUSIONS

Addressing venting and flaring from oil & gas opemay contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emisNew systems and requirements to collect more ddata for offshore oil and gas production activities GOADS 2011New data enables Operators to evaluate their owoperations and develop plans for implementing memission reduction projects that are cost-effective specific operationsRushing to implement projects would not allow prranking of potential actions, sometimes the largesemission sources are not necessarily the ones thmost cost-effective to control

12
Flaring, Venting and Greenhouse G

Thank you!

Holly Hopkins 

American Petroleum Institute

1220 L Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

hopkinsh@api.org

202-682-8439 phone

202-682-8426 fax

13