Gas Flaring

Exploring economically feasible and environmentally friendly solutions

• Flaring Issues • Technologies available • Proposed program to address issues

Today

Focuses on field trials, documenting and reporting.

EFD Field Trials Program

since 2012

Leverage EFD Powered by Natural Gas

Power Options ● Bi-fuel Diesel

● All-Gas Reciprocating

● Turbine

● Electric

Fuel Options ● CNG

● LNG

● Pipeline Gas

● Field Gas

Relationships ● Fuel Volumes

● Btu Delivery

● Gas Quality

● Engine Performance

● Overall Footprint

Issues ● Operational

Requirements

● Engine Technology

● Gas Quality

● Fueling Technology

● Engineering Barriers

● Logistics/Supply

Regulatory ● Engine Certification

● Fugitive Methane

● Fuel Storage & Transport

Utilizing Natural Gas as a Primary Source for Equipment Used in Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing

New EPA Regulations

NSPS, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart OOOO (“Quad O”) NESHAP, 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart HH (“HH”)

• New Control Technologies (CT) required

• Target Areas: New performance standard for VOC’s New performance standard for SO2

Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) standard for oil & gas production HAP standard for gas transmission & storage Recording and reporting for well completions Fugitive Emissions from compressors

• Performance test results required by EPA • Demonstration of compliance 24/7 365 days 2

EPA Completions Requirements

Gas Wells

• Reduced emissions completion ‘REC’ or ‘Green Completion’

• Public notification • Reduce VOC emissions by 95%

(Reduced Emissions Completions or REC) Until Jan 1st, 2015 – still flare at some sites

After Jan 1st, 2015 – REC’s or Complete Combustions Device

3

US QUAD ‘0’ Requirements Dehydrators & Storage Tanks

Need Control Technology for: HAP, VOC’s, Methane

1. New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart 0000 (“Quad 0”) Storage Tanks VOC’s(> 6 tons/yr or > 0.82 mcfd hydrocarbon) Reduce VOC’s by 95%

2. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)

NESHAP, 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart HH (“HH”) Benzene from Glycol Dehy (>3 MM scfd or Benzene > 1 Ton/yr) Reduce HAP by 95% or reduce Benzene to < 1 ton/yr

Focused on reducing smog, GHG emissions, ozone formation, PM2.5

4

COMBUSTION OF HYDROCARBONS

CH4 + 2 O2 = heat + CO2 + 2 H2O

Poor combustion results in the creation of:

CH4, CO, black carbon soot particulates

Over 250 compounds

Volatile organic hydrocarbons or VOC’s - benzene

Sulfur compounds - H2S, carbon disulfides, mercaptans

+ over 250 other compounds identified in research

99.99% Combustion efficiency requires the right mixture of fuel and air

Destruction efficiency is not the same as combustion efficiency

Methane + Oxygen = heat + Carbon Dioxide + Water

FLARING

• Difficult to measure efficiency and varies from site to site

• Heavily influenced by crosswinds allowing gases to escape unburned

• Difficulty burning rich gases often producing soot deposits and black smoke (BTEX, VOC, PAH)

• Entrained liquid droplets decrease combustion efficiency

• Poor efficiency with low heat content gas

• Visible flame Based on ARC and U of A Findings:

INCINERATION

Measured independently at 99.99% consistently

Combustion occurs in a closed chamber unaffected by winds

High temperatures efficiently burn rich gas. Air pre-mixed with the waste gas prior to combustion

Not effected by liquid droplet size

Use 80% less fuel gas with 99.99% combustion efficiency

No visible flame

99.99% EFFICIENT COMBUSTION

Italy, Europe Calgary, Canada Texas, United States

Well Testing O&G Processing Acid gas

Flaring Issues, Solutions and Technologies (F.I.S.T.)

• Operators are flaring produced natural gas because there is no infrastructure to support production

• State regulations are increasing to decrease the amount of gas flared

• Several new technologies have been developed in an attempt to monetize gas that is usually flared

Overview

• Wasted resources: North Dakota flared 10.3 bcf in April (~$50 million)

• Emissions: Equivalent of 1 million cars on North Dakota roads

Issues With Flaring

Issues With Flaring

Flare near Pittsburgh Mills Mall Photo: Caelan Borowiec

Four flares at a Range Resources site in SW PA Goettel Unit near Avella, Pa.

Gas Flaring-Hopkins Co., KY

www.oilandgasbmps.org

Oil and gas companies rushing to drill in the Eagle Ford Shale since 2009 have burned and wasted billions of cubic feet of natural gas - enough to meet the heating and cooking needs of 335,000 Texas homes for a year. The only practical way to transport the natural gas that bubbles to the surface with more profitable crude oil in the Eagle Ford is through pipelines to processing plants.

News Articles By John Tedesco and Jennifer Hiller, San Antonio Express-News August 23, 2014 | Updated: August 24, 2014 12:46am

Analyzing millions of records, the newspaper found that the volume of wasted gas in Texas has reached levels not seen in decades - and the South Texas shale field is largely to blame. Among the findings: • No region in Texas flared as much gas as the Eagle Ford Shale. Since the early

days of the energy boom in 2009, statewide flaring and venting in Texas surged by 400 percent to 33 billion cubic feet in 2012. Nearly two-thirds of the gas lost that year - 21 billion cubic feet - came from the Eagle Ford.

• The rate of Eagle Ford flaring was 10 times higher than the combined rate of the state's other oil fields.

• The total volume of wasted gas in the shale from 2009 to 2012 was almost 39 billion cubic feet - enough to meet the annual heating and cooking needs for all 335,700 residential customers who relied on gas last year in CPS Energy's service area, which includes San Antonio.

News Articles By John Tedesco and Jennifer Hiller, San Antonio Express-News August 23, 2014 | Updated: August 24, 2014 12:46am

Energy firms operating Eagle Ford wells lost more than 35 billion cubic feet of gas that year - a 65 percent increase from 2012, when flaring and venting totaled more than 21 billion cubic feet. "That amount of gas is horrible," said Sister Elizabeth Riebschlaeger, a nun with the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word who lives in South Texas and speaks out for residents who believe they've been harmed by rising levels of pollution in the Eagle Ford. "I would use the word 'disastrous.' "

News Articles By John Tedesco and Jennifer Hiller, San Antonio Express-News August 23, 2014 | Updated: August 24, 2014 12:46am

Thirsty for oil, energy companies wasting less valuable byproduct: natural gas Amid pipeline shortage in rural South Texas, wells flaring natural gas directly into the air By John Tedesco and Jennifer Hiller, San Antonio Express-News August 23, 2014 | Updated: August 24, 2014 12:46am http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/science-environment/article/Thirsty-for-oil-energy-companies-wasting-less-5708495.php?cmpid=email-premium&t=5722ea0a5bd38687e4#/0 Eagle Ford flares pollute the air more than oil refineries Reports show deteriorating air quality in the area of oil boom By Jennifer Hiller and John Tedesco, San Antonio Express-News August 24, 2014 | Updated: August 25, 2014 12:09am http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/Eagle-Ford-flares-pollute-the-air-more-than-oil-5709627.php?cmpid=email-premium&t=cc55514ceed38687e4#/0 Oversight of oil patch gas flaring lax By John Tedesco and Jennifer Hiller, San Antonio Express-News August 25, 2014 | Updated: August 25, 2014 6:11pm http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/article/Oversight-of-oil-patch-gas-flaring-lax-5711512.php?cmpid=email-premium&t=64511c8962d38687e4#/0

News Articles

• Location: How far is the well from infrastructure? • How much gas is the well producing? • What is the composition of the gas? • What deliverables are desired? • How portable is the system? • Regulatory barriers/incentives? Permits?

Allowances? • Barriers/incentives for electric or pipelines

FACTORS TO CONSIDER

Project Goals

1. Decision management system to screen technologies to mitigate flaring

2. Evaluation of technologies that mitigate flaring 3. Analysis of field results of a selected technology that

producers may use to mitigate flaring, including emissions measurement

4. Transformation of otherwise wasted gases into salable products

5. Reduced emissions in a cost effective manner 6. Further reduction of need to import hydrocarbon

commodities

Study will look at technologies outside of current applications for stranded/flared gas

Green Completions

Refinery

CBM Landfill Gas

Associated Gas (offshore)

A web-base decision management system to assist in the technology screening process will be developed

• Phase 1 of the project is to develop a prototype screening tool and begin screening technologies in various regions in the US.

– Conduct a Technical Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment on each of the technologies identified.

• Phase 2 consists of performing an initial evaluation of various technologies and to refine the screening tool. (this is a stage gate for going forward).

– Selection criteria – Site selection for test sites – A budget for Phase 3 and 4 will be developed.

• Phase 3 will include detailed engineering and design for field demonstrations as selected by the sponsors.

– This will be a continuous process as new and novel solutions are identified. – More data, more case studies = updates

• Phase 4 will include field trials, documentation and the continuation of the program to maintain the web site, additional field testing, provide training.

Variables and Options

• Quantity at well site • Access to other wells

• Proximity to Infrastructure • (Pipeline) (Grid)

• Cost to Produce (associated) • Cost (stranded) • Solution OPEX • Solution CAPEX • Regulatory

• BTU • Gas Quality • Separation Costs

El. power for

grid/ops GTL

CNG (ops)

CNG (sale)

Gas to Monetize

Site Selection Issues

Economic Factors

Gas Volume

Phase 1 • PTTC will host, and document, multiple, play specific problem

identification workshops around the country. – Workshops will include presentations from experts about flaring and

stranded gas options and discussions about the specific needs of operators, identify opportunities.

• Solicit project sponsors • A White Paper will be produced that discusses regional specific

findings from the workshops. • The project team will develop protocols (TRL assessments) to

screen technologies that may be used at the well site to address gas flaring and emissions associated with gas production, and monetize the unwanted emissions into: electric power, CNG for operations use, or valuable liquid products that are in demand by U.S. consumers.

Background

Each problem identification workshop was conducted in similar fashion beginning with opening remarks aimed at introducing the topic, operator question and answer where operators shared their specific issues related to flaring, industry presentations aimed at the evaluation of existing technologies, and regulatory presentations.

Problem Identification Workshops • Houston

– GE Oil and Gas – Questor Technologies – Bingo Interests

• West Virginia – Questor Technology – Wellhead Energy Systems – NEOgas North America, Inc. – WVU Department of Occupationall and Environmental Health Sciences – Panel discussion featuring Robert Keatley from the West Virginia DEP, Scott

Kell, OH DNR and Marvin Combs from the KY DNR • Denver

– Holland and Hart – Questor Technology – ElectraTherm – Mesa Natural Gas Solutions LLC

Key Findings • Dealing with the liquids is very expensive when

thinking about transportation, stability and price. • For significant horsepower needs, operators still need

diesel, the CNG does not deliver the necessary power • Multi-well drilling and production pads are

advantageous because gas produced from one well can be converted to CNG and used for drilling successive wells.

• Need a steady stream of production. • Need for modeling software to deal with multiple wells

with flow variations and variations in consumer requirements.

Phase 2

• Upon completion of Phase 1, EFD will develop an online calculation system and resources library that can assist operators to select the best option for them.

• Engineering and design of the selected technologies will be performed.

• A more detailed engineering evaluation will be also conducted in Phase 3 on the technology(s) selected by the steering committee.

Engineering Studies

After discussions and approvals by the steering committee, detailed engineering studies of the selected technologies will be performed. These studies include: • design and engineering of the selected processes to

meet the needs of the application (gas specification, site location, feed pressure, etc.).

• evaluation of pre-treatment requirements (if any) such as sulfur removal, liquids removal, compression requirements and O2 systems.

The Technologies

There are various technologies that will be identified and screened as potential applications. Any of these technologies may be more applicable under conditions identified in our study. Based on a detailed review, technologies will be selected for potential application at a well site. Other technologies that will be identified and vetted by the project team/steering committee will be included in a web-based system for future applications.

Examples of potential technologies

Electratherm Supplied Equipment

237 F T-2

213 F Return T-1

Flow meter 1

V-12

V-2

Low NOx Flare Boiler

Air cooled condenser

Expansion tank

Natural Gas source for flare

• Gas to wire technologies convert gas to electricity using an engine or turbine

• Operators can sell electricity back to power companies for /kwh rates

• Better for smaller quantities of gas • Rates from power companies not always enough

to make economic sense • 500 kWh to 2 MW

scalable gas to electricity units

GRID POWER

Downstream Generation Systems

Self Contained – Modular Design

• Natural gas to the box – customer utility outputs • Below EPA emissions standards • Sound management based on site requirements • Safeguards / Security / SCADA / Protocols • Applications

– Local Grid Support, Baseline Industrial, or CHP.

• System Life 18-20 years before engine replacement

35

Economics

Stranded Gas model • 1 megawatt (1000KW) generator • Uses 200 MCF per day • Sells electricity to Grid on long term contract • Average price per KW is $0.072

• Total yearly Revenue $ 604,800

• Maintenance Cost $ 100,000 • Yearly Lease Cost $ 145,000 • Net Profit $ 359,800 • Yearly Gas Usage 70,000 MCF

Net Price per MCF $ 5.14 on-going

36

New Flare to Energy (FTE) Solutions

37

Gas Stripping Systems 250 MCF and up

Mobile CNG Stations 1200 GGE of CNG

WES 500 KW and Up

Flexibility for developing profits from your stranded gas or flare

• Operators can use produced natural gas to provide electricity for on site operations

• Reduces the need for diesel to power operations • Can sell any excess electricity to power

companies • Organic Rankine Cycle could

produce 35-110 kWh, emissions free

SITE POWER

SITE POWER

EVAPORATOR

CONDENSER

Clear Power Organic Rankine

Cycle (ORC)

Power Plant

Pump

Pump

Heat Exchanger

EXPANDER

Generator

Waste gas Combustion

Power for: • Compressor • Pumps/motors • Amine regenerator

P-Tank

Flow back/well test

Well Head

• Technologies available to process gas into liquid resources like methanol, ethanol

• Easier to transport and usually more valuable • Larger quantities of gas • 1 mscf of gas creates 6.2 gal methanol, 5.1 gal

formaldehyde, 0.4 gal ethanol • Fewer current applications, and most operators do

not want to be the first to test new technologies • Suitable for smaller gas production rates when syngas

reforming isn’t economical

GAS TO LIQUIDS (NGLs)

• Raw natural gas is compressed and then dehydrated. • Dry compressed gas is then refrigerated, liquefying high

molecular weight components. • Separation systems dissociates gas into:

– Lean Methane: for power generation/equipment ops – Residue Gas: generates onboard power – Y-Grade Liquids: onsite storage and transportation to market

• Large scale gas production (2-6 mmscfd)

Gas Processing at Well Site

• Another way of getting larger quantities of gas to consumers

• Can be combined with NGL processes

CNG

A General Electric compression box costs about $1.1 million, and the mobile processor costs about $500,000, according to Statoil executives. First pilot started up in January 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/business/energy-environment/applying-creativity-to-a-byproduct-of-oil-drilling-in-north-dakota.html?_r=2&

• Blend with produced crude for easy transportation • Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) process • Fischer Tropsch synthesis • Large scale operations

SYNCRUDE

Compiling Information on Technologies

Company Production Factors Gas Factors Applications

Production Rates Products Distance to Line Gas Treatment Composition Tolerance Use Technology Currently Used? Where can It be used? Additonal Support required? Additional Notes

Alcor Energy Solutions Up to 30 MW Electricity -

Gas needs to treated before entering, they can treat if needed ?

Zero Emmisson power to power everything on site

Yes, has several in use. Domestic and International

Anywhere, designed to be used in remote areas. Can be placed on a trailer and haule anywhere Not sure yet Uses Turbine Generator, claims more reliable

BluBox Energy 250 KW for one Unit, It is scalable with more units

Electricity, either for on site power or for sell to grid Quarter Mile would be Ideal

Only been tested on wet gas, will accommodate for H2S

Zero Emission, elimate flare, produce electricity for onsite or sell

2 Units have been build, sort of tested

Current Operations are in Colorado, willing to expand anywhere

They handle all support and maintenance , computer monitored

Units are small compared to others, transported by pickup to remote locations. 43 MCF is required to operate. Power companies like the idea of these. Catapillar Generator

Velocys Liquids Gas-to-Liquids

GasTechno Process* Methanol, Formalin, Ethanol - accepted "as-is"

Up to 100% Methane, 60% CO2, 25% N2, 25% H2S Sell produced fluids No

SMR Fischer Tropsh* Synthetic Crude BJC Power 120 kW Electricity N/A

DynaGen Oilfield Energy 20kW - 1MW of electicity. Electricity ?

Gas need to be treated before entering. Can install de-hydration modules to increase quality ?

Focusing on producing electricity for the oil field, either drilling or production operations

The technology is currently being test on a pilot well in Mississippi, it is currently powering the entire well-site

Anywhere. Units can be either permanent fixtures or on mobile truck beds.

They can provide support, or are willing to train

Focused on the enviornment! They have been in contact with lots of international companies. Wants to gain interest in the US.

Recapture Solutions

Can create 50kw - 400kw, able to add larger units though Electricty, liquids

Close, only if producing electricity to sell to grid

Will install treatment technology as needed ?

Electrical power to either sell to grid or power production equipment. Can also purchase flare to strip liquids out of and sell Yes, mostly located in Texas Texas for now, willing to expand

No, Recapture will handle everything.

They offer two services; natural gas power generation and flare gas purchasing.

Enhanced Earth Technologys N/A CO2 for EOR purposes N/A N/A N/A

Uses waste heat to process heat from various sources. Can produce CO2 for EOR or to make electricity or fertilizer

None, currently in design phase. Looking for funding

Wants to used in remote areas where infrastructures to handle natural gas have yet to built. They havn't made it that far yet

Not sure if he wants to be involved. Is really focused on the CO2 aspect, not so much flaring.

Ecovapor Recovery Systems

GridFox

Anywhere from 500kW to 2MW per unit, depends on needs Electricity

Close, only if producing electricity to sell to grid

Gas needs to be treated before entering. Gridfox can be outfitted with a treater N/A

Will produce 3 phase electricity at 480 Volts with 24/7 base load operation. Can be used to power site, provide back up power, or sale to grid

They attempted a test run by drilling their own well, the well did not produce required production rates. Still looking for a pilot well. Anywhere in the US Provide by them

Appear to be more in the business of selling power to the grid.

Credence Gas Services

250 MCFD - 7.5 MMCFD plants are standard, they can constuct higher capacity plants

Quality gas/ Natural gas liquid N/A

Plants are designed to strip and clean the Natural Gas for sold or stored

Processing Capacities 200 MCFD to 10 MMSCFD Processed gas and NGL

Yes, appear to be all over the US

Based in Houston, but has experience in gas processing services throughout the United States ?

WellPower Inc 40-70 kwh of produced electricity and 10 BPD Electicity and Crude N/A

Treated before entering generator ?

It can have two simultaneous uses. One for producing electricity to power onsite equipment, and for the production of crude oil to sell

Not yet, still looking for a piolet well to try it on.

Research is being perfomed out of a University in Montreal. In talks with several US producers for a pilot well to test on. Not sure yet

Uses the fisher tropes method mixed with SMR to generate gas to liquids. This allows for the Unit to be a lot smaller and thus caried on a small trailer. They also have plans for mass production of units.

Primus Green Energy

Specific numbers were not given, but product is designed to be economical with lower production rates

Various Liquid fuels, will work with customer to produce fuels that work form them. N/A ? ?

Converts gases into various liquid fuels that can be sold or put to use at the rig site. ?

Designed to be used in remote areas away from the proper infrastructure to handle natural gas production

Primus can provide for additonal fee, or operator can handle it themselves

Technology can convert !MMBTU of Natural Gas into 5 U.S. gallons of liquid fuel, this is amoung highest documented conversion efficiencies

Pioneer Energy

Can produce 10,800 kWh/Day and 1,700 gal/Day Electricity, liquids

N/A, electricty produces is meant for drilling or production operations

Very flexible, will install gas treatement if necessary. ?

Each unit can process over 200,000 scf/day of gas. The unit will simultanously produce liquids for sale and electricity for on site power Still in test phase

Meant to be mobile, installed in a shipping container and can be trasported by truck anywhere.

Additional support is provided by Pioneer either remotely or onsite

Is looking for a pilot well to test technology. Technology has been highly published

Phase 3

• Working with Sponsors, detailed engineering and design will be performed on selection technology(s).

• Field trials will then be conducted in which operators can partner with our team to test different approaches. Field results will be documented and made available to sponsors.

• Technology solutions will be entered into the web based tool.

Engineering Studies Complete documentation set will be provided including:

(a) process flow diagrams (PFD), (b) piping and instrumentation drawings (P&ID), (c) fabrication diagrams, (d) equipment lists, (e) estimated project costs (+/- 10%), (f) production volumes (g) options for highest and best use of any products. The study includes detailed financial projections addressing CAPEX, OPEX and cost of production for scales ranging from 2, 5, 10 and 30 million standard cubic feet of gas. Also included will be an analysis of environmental issues including water usage, air emissions and footprint. A safety analysis will also be performed.

Phase 4 • Phase 4 will include additional field trials,

documentation and the continuation of the program to maintain the web site, additional field testing, provide training.

• PTTC will provide technology transfer/training to sponsors.

• A key to all these new technologies is finding test sites

• So far many of these technologies have not been tested – hard to know what works

• Operators will keep looking for more efficient and economical ways to reduce flaring

Summary

It’s not so hard to be green

Questions? (later)

Thank you

www.efdsystems.org www.efdvirtualsite.org www.efdscorecard.org www.environment247.org www.oilandgasbmps.org www.lawatlas.org/oilandgas www.facebook.com/EFDSystems

For more Information:

Rich Haut HARC

rhaut@harc.edu 281-364-6093