# Profitable Use of Vented Emissions in Oil & Gas Production

Howard Malm REM Technology Inc.
Greg Brown PIC/Spartan

Andrea Lamond Encana

Thanks goes to the C limate C hange and E missions M anagement C orporation (CCEMC) for financial support

# Profitable Use of Vented Emissions in Oil & Gas Production

Part 1

– SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Howard Malm REM Technology Inc.



## Part 2

– Experience and Results with SlipStream

Andrea Lamond Encana

SlipStream ® is a registered trademark; patents and patents pending in USA, Australia and Canada Replacement of Natural Gas Engine Fuel with Vented Hydro

- Carbon Gases Using SlipStream ®

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Outline

– Part 1

1. 

# Vent Gas Sources

2. 

# Benefits of Combusting Vented Gas in Engines

3. 

# SlipStream Technology

4. 

# Results

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Vent Gas Sources Instrument gas

 

### Actuators

– valves, regulators

 Variable


###  

### Transducers

 Variable


###  

### Pumps

 Pulsed; on/off


###  

### Membrane driers

 Steady

Typical total system (engine

- compressor unit)
vents 4 to 30 m 3 /h (140 to 1000 scf/h)

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Vent Gas Sources

 

## Compressor packing

• ReCip packing glands

• Steady

• Mixed with lubrication oil


###  

## Liquid storage tanks

• Oil storage

• Scrubber dump collection

• Separator dump collection

• Highly Variable (heating/cooling effects) 

#  Other

• Dehydrators

• Centrifugal compressor wet seals 0.8 to 4.2 m 3 /h (29 to 147 scf/h) 4 cylinders

0 to 20 m 3 /h (0 to 700 scf/h)

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Benefits of combusting vented gas in natural gas engines

 

### Fuel replacement

• One typical 1000 HP (750 kW) engine uses ≈180 kg/h (260 m 3 /h) of NG fuel

• Vented gas available from 4 to 30 m 3 /h

• At $3.50/GJ the value = $4300 to $32,000 /y

 

### Methane destruction; GHG reduction

• Typical methane % = 95%

• At $15/t, the value = $7900 to $52,000 /y
 

### VOC destruction

• > 99%

 

### BTEX destruction

• > 99% 

## Annual Fuel saving + Carbon credits = $12,200 to $84,000

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

SlipStream® Technology

 Can use multiple vent sources

 Does not require gas compression

 Measures vent gas flows and provides totals

 Can provide up to 50% of engine fuel needs

 Minimal pressure on vent gas source(s)

 No effects on engine up

- time

Shutoff Valve

Demister Flow Meter Control Valve Air Intake Filter

Engine Relief Devices

Vent
gases Vent

For meter calibration Pressure Sensor

HV

HVs Hand Valve (HV)

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

SlipStream® Technology

 

## Dual engine arrangement

• Vent gas destruction time increased

• Allows packing vent collection from units pressurized, but not running Engine

REMVue SlipStream Control Panel Engine / Compressor Control Panel

Flow Meter Control Valve Pressure Sensor

Shut

- Off

Valve Compressor Outside Vent

Demister

1 kPa relief Block Valves

Compressor Engine / Compressor Control Panel Compressor Packing Vent Collection Automated 3 Way Valve / w Switches

Block Valves Compressor Packing Vent Collection

1 kPa relief

Engine Compressor

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

SlipStream® Technology

 

### Safe

• Has undergone numerous Process
Hazards Reviews



###  Reliable

• Does not affect engine operation



###  Adaptable

• Variable flow



### • Variable gas heat content 

###  Needs electronic engine air

- fuel control

• Stoichiometric

– OEM, third party,
REMVue

• Lean

– OEM, third party, REMVue



###  Needs minimal engine scavenging

• Carbureted engines ideal

• Not suitable for 2 cycle stroke engines



###  Certain gases are unsuitable

• H 2 S < 1%

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Results

 

# Field results are averages/site for > 60 sites

Vent Source Average Flow kg/h Methane %

Instrument Gas 8.1 95

Compressor Packing 2.7 95

Liquids Tank 7.3 30 to 50%

* 1 Car

- year ≈ 5 t

Typically 20 to 40% non

methane, non

- ethane volatile organic compounds (VOC) Annual Fuel Replacement CO 2 (e) t/y Car

- year Equivalent* > $500,000 > 55,000 > 11,000 Totals CO 2 (e)t/h CO 2 (e) t/y

0.16 1372

0.05 457

0.06 524 Car

- year Equivalent*

275

91

105

# SlipStream® Technology and Field Results

Results

 

# Value

Vent Source Average Flow kg/h Annual fuel replacement

Instrument Gas 8.1 $12,914

Compressor Packing 2.7 $4,304

Liquids Tank 7.3 $11,715

Fuel Value = $3.50 / GJ Annual CO 2 (e)
credits
$20,574

$6,857

$7,858

CO 2 (e) credit = $15 / tonne Total

$33,488

$11,161

$19,573

# Profitable Use of Vented Emissions in Oil & Gas Production

Part 2

– Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Andrea Lamond Encana

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Outline

– Part 2

1. Introduction to Encana Corporation

2. Regulatory Environment

3. Encana Scope of Operation

4. Expected Benefits of SlipStream ®



## 5. Adopting the Technology

6. Installing and Commissioning

7. Results

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Introduction to Encana Corporation

Leading North American energy producer focused on growing its strong portfolio of resource plays producing natural gas, oil and natural gas liquids

 

### Encana’s Environment Policy

• Adopt technically sound, economically practicable measures to mitigate environmental impacts

• Reduce emission intensity and increase energy efficiency of our operations

• Continual improvement of environmental programs

 

### Encana’s Environmental Innovation Fund (EIF)

• Internal investments in projects that economically improve environmental performance of our operations

• External venture capital investments in start

- up technology companies

To learn more on the EIF go to: http://www.encana.com/environment/innovation

- fund/

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Regulatory Environment

• 

## This project was executed in Alberta and partially funded by the Climate Change Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC) technology fund

. The funding helped overcome project hurdle rates and promoted the implementation of this technology

.

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Encana Scope of Operation

 

### SlipStream® Vent Gas Capture Project

• Climate Change Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC) grant $2.4 million

• AB based, not

- for

- profit organization with mandate to reduce GHG emissions by implementing clean technology

• CCEMC announces two expressions of interest every year

• 52 site roll

- out across Clearwater Business Unit (Clearwater South)

• 25 Caterpillar 3512 engines

• 27 Waukesha H24 engines Calgary Edmonton

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Expected Benefits of SlipStream ®

*Based on expected AECO 2013 natural gas prices Typical compressor building in the Clearwater Business Unit 

### Off

- grid Sites  Compressors operated remotely, electricity not available

 Reduce methane (CH 4 ) venting from pneumatic devices

 Reroute CH 4 to compressor engine to be used as fuel

 Fuel gas savings estimate of $550,000 annually upon full roll

- out*

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Expected Benefits of SlipStream®

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Objectives

 Capture and combustion achieves direct reduction of GHG emissions



### Project eligible to generate GHG credits in Alberta

 Current value ≈ $ 15/tonne of reduced CO 2 (e )

 Encana personnel were lead authors for government

- approved GHG Quantification Protocol for Vent Gas Capture Projects in 2008

- 2009

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Adopting the Technology

Proof of Economical and Environmental Benefits

 Installed 2 pilots in 2011

 1 Cat 3512 engine and 1 Waukesha H24 engine



### Instrumentation & Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) Modifications

 Embed REMVue logic into existing PLC

 Easier operational maintenance



### Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) conducted

 Examination of process/operation to identify and evaluate risks

 Proposed outcomes and solutions to mitigate risks

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Installing and Commissioning

V alve train had too much pressure drop

 Large amount of back pressure

 Modified valve train piping



### Installation process

 First few installs took ≈ 1

- 2 days

 Later installs, 2 mechanical installations per day 

### Reliability

 Designed to be reversible
 If SlipStream® fails, back to original venting system

 SCADA system alerts through notification email

 ≈ 48 hours to check issue SlipStream® valve train redirects previously vented gas into engine’s air intake as fuel

# Experience and Results with SlipStream®

Results

Current projected savings
(based on 17 units commissioned in 2012)

 1,479 e 3 m 3 (52 MMscf ) fuel gas annualized

 20,378 tonnes (22,476 tons) CO 2 (e) emission reductions annualized


### Estimated savings after full roll

- out (2013)

52 units total
 $550,000 fuel savings per year*

 67,355 tonnes (74,261 tons) of CO 2 (e) reduction per year

 $1million in Alberta carbon credits per year / available to
offset other Encana Alberta based emissions 

### Future plans

 Install remaining 27 Waukesha H24 units in 2013 Caterpillar 3512LE

- air intake and turbo chargers (rear view)

SlipStream ® gas injection point to engine *Based on expected AECO 2013 natural gas prices

# Profitable Use of Vented Emissions in Oil & Gas Production

Summary

 

## The SlipStream® technology is field proven

 

## Is environmentally beneficial AND is revenue positive ($)

 

## Meets GHG protocols; destructs VOCs and BTEX

 

## Is straight

- forward to install / commission

 

## Meets all of the necessary safety and reliability requirements