DOCSLIB.ORG

Recent Developments in Russian Arctic Oil & Gas Ben Seligman

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Recent Developments in Russian Arctic Oil & Gas Ben Seligman Society of Naval Architects & Marine Engineers (SNAME) Arctic Section Westin Hotel th 16 October 2019 1 Overview • Focus of this presentation is on the emergence of Russian Arctic oil and gas projects, over the past decade or so, that move hydrocarbons to market by sea (e.g. taking advantage of the Northern Sea Route) versus more traditional pipelines • Won’t spend much time looking at Russian Arctic projects that are connected to the ‘South’ by pipeline • Geographically, we’ll spend most time on the West Siberian Arctic, which has been Russia’s gas industry powerhouse for half a century • Oil production in the Russian Arctic started more recently (~25 yrs ago) • Also spend some time looking at what’s happening in Russia’s European Arctic and East Siberia, as well as a few other Russian Arctic locations • A few slides on ‘Arctic-like’ Sakhalin • We’ll look at two LNG projects in depth, particularly one that received a positive final investment decision (FID) a month ago • The importance of the Northern Sea Route (N.E.Passage) to these new Russian Arctic oil and gas projects will become very apparent • Along the way, we’ll identify some of the main reasons why the Russian Arctic oil and gas industry is booming, in spite of depressed oil prices 2 Russian Arctic / sub-Arctic regions we’ll focus on today Chukotka Kola Peninsula West Siberian Arctic East Siberian Arctic Kamchatka (Yamal, Gydan) (Evenkiyskiy, Taymyr) Pechora Sea Sakhalin 3 Northward trend from traditional West Siberian Arctic Heartland In the past 10– 15 years: - Less reliance on new pipelines, especially in West Siberia - Emergence of oil and LNG export via Northern Sea Route 4 Russian Arctic Marine Oil/LNG/Condensate Loading Facilities (Non-Arctic) Map source: Google 5 Pechora Sea (Russian European Arctic) Pechora Sea 6 Varandey Oil Export Facility • Location: Pechora Sea, 22.5 km offshore, 17 m water depth • Operator: Lukoil • Start-up: 2008 • Fixed Offshore Ice-Resistant Offloading Terminal (FOIROT), SPM • Substructure designed for 3m thick rafting ice • Linked to onshore tank farm and pipeline to oil fields in Russia’s European Arctic • Includes accommodation module and helipad • Loads up to 88 million bbls per year • Served by icebreaking support vessels and three dedicated icebreaking shuttle tankers • Shuttle tankers move oil year-round to storage at Murmansk, then conventional oil tankers to Europe Sources: PortNews.ru, • First cargo in 2008 delivered to Come Barents by Chance refinery, Nfld Observer 7 Varandey Oil Export Facility • First delivery to Asia (China) via the Source: MarineTraffic.com Northern Sea Route (NSR) of oil produced in the Russian Arctic took place last month, using Sovcomflot’s LNG-powered tanker, the ‘Korolev Propsect’ • The oil was Varandey blend, taken to Murmansk using one of the dedicated Varandey shuttle tankers, then loaded on to the ‘Korolev Prospect’ for the journey to China • Favourable ice conditions on the NSR and firmer prices of the key Russian blend ESPO (similar to Varandey blend), preferred by Chinese independent buyers, made the arbitrage via the Arctic route work • Expect more Russian Arctic oil deliveries to Asia via the NSR next year 8 Prirazlomnaya Oil Production / Storage Platform • Location: Pechora Sea, 60 km offshore, ~20 m water depth • Operator: Gazprom-Neft • Start-up: 2013 • Bottom founded GBS, with drilling, production, storage, offloading capabilities • Sits atop the Prirazlomnoye oil field • Platform has two loading arms • Loads ~40 million bbls per year • Two dedicated icebreaking support vessels serve the platform • Two dedicated ice-capable shuttle tankers, operated by Sovcomflot Pt. Thomson Central Pad • Shuttle tankers move oil year-round to storage at Murmansk, then conventional oil tankers to Europe 9 Sources: Barents Observer, Gazprom West Siberian Arctic West Siberian Arctic (Yamal, Gydan) 10 Arctic Gates Oil Export Facility • Location: East coast Yamal Peninsula, 3.5 km offshore in Ob Bay, ~12 m water depth • Operator: Gazprom-Neft • Start-up: 2016 • Single Point Mooring Facility (SPM) • Substructure designed for 2m thick ice • Linked to onshore tank farm and 100 km pipeline to Novoportovskoye field • Loads ~40 million bbls per year (62 mm bbls peak) Pt. Thomson Central Pad • Served by two icebreaking support vessels and eventually six dedicated Sovcomflot Arc 7 icebreaking shuttle tankers (4 in service) • Shuttle tankers move oil year- round to storage at Murmansk, then conventional Sources: Gazprom-Neft oil tankers to Europe 11 Yamal LNG / Sabetta Port Pt. Thomson Central Pad Source: Alten / Anotech 12 Yamal LNG / Sabetta Port Sources: Barents Observer, TechnipFMC • Location: Northeast coast of Yamal Peninsula • Operator: Yamal LNG JV (Novatek, Total, CNPC, Silk Road Fund) • Start-up: December 2017 • Resource base: S.Tambey • Three trains of 5.5 mtpa each • Train 4 (using Russian-made equipment only): 0.9 mtpa, start up in next few months • Served by Sabetta Port • Port and approaches required extensive dredging: Pt. Thomson Central Pad • 2015: 1.6 million m3 • 2016: 17.5 million m3 • 2017: 7.2 million m3 • Dredging contractors: DEME and Jan de Nul • Port used to load in construction materials and VLMs • Now used to export LNG13 and condensate Yamal LNG Modular Construction Approach Module fabrication in China Source: CGTN Source: Total Asian yards to Yamal Pt. Thomson Central Pad • ~150 modules fabricated off-site in Asia, many of them in Chinese yards. Up to 8000 tons each. • Heavy-lift ship delivery via eastern Northern Sea Route in summer (or via Suez and Kola Peninsula in winter) to Yamal site • Audax and Pugnax Arc 7 icebreaking module carriers made deliveries in winter 14 Yamal LNG Modular Construction Approach • Modules offloaded via MOF (Module / Material Offloading Facility) using 1718 axle lines of SPMTs • Taglu and Parsons Lake (Mackenzie Gas Project) would have used this approach, on a smaller scale Source: Total From Asian yards to Yamal Pt. Thomson Central Pad Module offloading at Sabetta site 15 Source: Mammoet Yamal LNG Dedicated ice-breaking LNG carrier fleet Christophe de Margerie Arc 7 LNG carrier (Sovcomflot) • 15 Arc 7 ice-breaking LNG carriers dedicated to Yamal LNG, of which 13 are in service (each can carry 172,000 m3 of LNG) • Two more to be in service by year end • Also one Arc 7 condensate carrier in service (another one coming) (43,000 tons condensate capacity) • All carriers are double-acting (proceed stern first in heavy ice (1.5-2m thick), bow first in moderate ice) • ~75% of LNG cargoes are currently westbound, and all condensate (year- round) Pt. Thomson Central Pad • ~25% of LNG cargoes are eastbound (7- 8 months/yr) • Share of eastbound cargoes to increase in future • Most LNG cargoes trans-shipped (ship- to-ship), e.g. near Murmansk, to conventional LNG carriers Boris Sokolov Arc 7 condensate carrier (Dynacom) 16 Sources: Aker Arctic and DSME Yamal LNG Dedicated ice-breaking LNG carrier fleet Year-round 15 eastbound shipments in Q3 2019 Pt. Thomson Central Pad 17 Source: Maritime Executive Yamal LNG Dedicated ice-breaking LNG carrier fleet • Four of the LNG carriers (and a further two due in service shortly) operated by Teekay LNG may be impacted by US sanctions on COSCO Shipping affiliates Pt. Thomson Central Pad Source: Reuters Both now in operation Source: Novatek 18 Arctic LNG 2 Project Source: Novatek Arctic LNG 2 Project • Location: Russian Arctic, Yamal Nenets Autonomous District (first development on the outer Gydan Peninsula) • Resource base - Utrenneye field: • ~70 TCF gas reserves • 770 MM bbls liquids / condensate • Planned Production: • Up to 2.9 BCF gas/day (~1 TCF per year) • 19.8 million tonnes LNG/year (6.6 MT/yr from three trains) • Up to 1.5 million tonnes condensate/year • First production: late 2023 (all three trains on stream by 2026) • Partnership: Novatek (60%), Total (10%), CNPC (10%), CNOOC (10%), Mitsui/JOGMEC JV (10%) • EPC contractors: TechnipFMC, Saipem, NIPIgaz • Final Investment Decision (FID) taken 5th Sept 2019 • Total project cost estimate: US$21 billion • Significant pre-investment in early works: • Construction of Belokamenka fabrication site • Utrenneye site prep 20 Arctic LNG 2 Project Arctic LNG 2 Concept: • Three concrete gravity base structures (CGBS), each of which will serve as the foundation for a single LNG train • CGBS dimensions: 300 m x 150 m x 30 m • CGBS weight: 480,000 tonnes (each CGBS will require 420,000 tonnes of concrete and 55,000 tonnes of reinforcement) • Each CGBS will include 213,000 m3 of LNG storage capacity and 75,000 m3 of condensate storage capacity • Topsides / LNG train on top of CGBS: • LNG train weight: 120,000 tonnes • Each train will consist of ~15 modules, each one weighing between 5000 and 12,500 tonnes • Total weight ofPt. each Thomson LNG ‘platform’: Central Pad 600,000 tonnes • Topsides fabrication: • Train 1 topsides to be built in China and transported to the Belokamenka fabrication site, where they will be integrated with the CGBS • Topside modules for subsequent trains will built primarily in Russia, including at Belokamenka • LNG platforms then transported to Utrenneye field • First completed LNG platform to be delivered to Utrenneye in 2022 21 Arctic LNG 2 Project : Google : Source Locations www.total.com Source: Source: Arctic LNG 2 Project Site / Utrenneye Belokamenka fabrication site Murmansk / Belokamenka to Utrenneye: ~1500 km 22 Source: Google Arctic LNG 2 Project Belokamenka Fabrication Site: • Located close to Murmansk, Kola Peninsula (Russian European Arctic) • Under construction since 2017 • Will serve as site for fabrication of ‘large-tonnage marine structures’ for Arctic LNG 2 • Two dry docks, each 415 m x 175 m x 20 m, for construction of Concrete Gravity Base Structures (CGBS) • First dry dock to be completed by Fall 2019 • Second dry dock to completed in 2020 • Concrete batching plant • Pipe spool fabrication • Topsides fabrication yard • Topsides / CGBS integration • Six mooring berths, for delivery of freight and workers • Camp for 15,000 workers, most of whom will work on a rotation 23 Arctic LNG 2 Project Belokamenka Fabrication Site – Artist’s Impression Pt.
Recommended publications
  • Environmental Impact Assessment for the Baydaratskaya Bay Crossing of the Yamai - West Europe Gas Pipeline System

    Environmental Impact Assessment for the Baydaratskaya Bay Crossing of the Yamai - West Europe Gas Pipeline System

    Proceedings of the Seventh (1997) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference Honolulu, USA, May 25-30, 1997 Copyright © 1997 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers ISBN 1-880653.-28-1 (Set); ISBN 1-880653-29-X (Vol. I) Environmental Impact Assessment for the Baydaratskaya Bay Crossing of the Yamai - West Europe Gas Pipeline System Alexander V. Beloshapkov, Vladimir B. Leschinsky and Alexander S. Tsvetsinsky EPS EcoSystem Moscow, Russia Konstantin A. Kashunin JSC Petergaz BV Moscow, Russia ABSTRACT BOVANENKOVSKOE GAS FIELD~ The Baydaratskaya Bay crossing in the Kara Sea is a part of the Yamal - West Europe gas system project, It is the fast ° experience of the large-diameter gas pipeline engineering in the Russian Arctic seas. The Environmental Impact Assessment of the construction for the fast two lines of the crossing is based on the results of six-year scientific program of Baydaratskaya r YAMAL Bay environmental studies. Laws, rules and regulations MARRE-SALE applicable to Environmental Impact Assessment in the Russian Federation are considered. The sources and types of possible impact during construction and operation stages are shown. % q4} KEY WORDS: Environment, impact, assessment, pipeline, underwater crossing, ecological examination. O q/. INTRODUCTION URAI \, B s ° The development of the Bovanenkovskoye gas field on the Z~ 20 40 km Yamal Peninsula in Northwest Siberia by JSC Gazprom, the Russian Gas company, requires a gas transport system to be PIPELINE i laid across the Baydaratskaya Bay in the Kara Sea. The .... PIPELINEUNDERWATER CROSSING i underwater crossing of main gas pipeline will connect the Yamal gas fields and onshore pipelines in the Yamal Peninsula with the Ural - West Europe pipeline system.
  • Transits of the Northwest Passage to End of the 2019 Navigation Season Atlantic Ocean ↔ Arctic Ocean ↔ Pacific Ocean

    Transits of the Northwest Passage to End of the 2019 Navigation Season Atlantic Ocean ↔ Arctic Ocean ↔ Pacific Ocean

    TRANSITS OF THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE TO END OF THE 2019 NAVIGATION SEASON ATLANTIC OCEAN ↔ ARCTIC OCEAN ↔ PACIFIC OCEAN R. K. Headland and colleagues 12 December 2019 Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge, United Kingdom, CB2 1ER. <[email protected]> The earliest traverse of the Northwest Passage was completed in 1853 but used sledges over the sea ice of the central part of Parry Channel. Subsequently the following 314 complete maritime transits of the Northwest Passage have been made to the end of the 2019 navigation season, before winter began and the passage froze. These transits proceed to or from the Atlantic Ocean (Labrador Sea) in or out of the eastern approaches to the Canadian Arctic archipelago (Lancaster Sound or Foxe Basin) then the western approaches (McClure Strait or Amundsen Gulf), across the Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea of the Arctic Ocean, through the Bering Strait, from or to the Bering Sea of the Pacific Ocean. The Arctic Circle is crossed near the beginning and the end of all transits except those to or from the central or northern coast of west Greenland. The routes and directions are indicated. Details of submarine transits are not included because only two have been reported (1960 USS Sea Dragon, Capt. George Peabody Steele, westbound on route 1 and 1962 USS Skate, Capt. Joseph Lawrence Skoog, eastbound on route 1). Seven routes have been used for transits of the Northwest Passage with some minor variations (for example through Pond Inlet and Navy Board Inlet) and two composite courses in summers when ice was minimal (transits 149 and 167).
  • Sanctions Intelligence Update

    Sanctions Intelligence Update

    July 17, 2014 SANCTIONS INTELLIGENCE UPDATE GENNADY TIMCHENKO & VOLGA GROUP adapting BUSINESS FOLLOWING U.S. & Canadian sanctions Overview In March and April, the US government sanctioned Russian businessman Gennady Timchenko, his Luxembourg-registered holding company Volga Group, and ten related subsidiaries. Timchenko was identified as a “member of the Russian leadership’s inner circle,” whose involvement in the energy sector was “directly linked to [President] Putin.” To date, Canada has sanctioned Timchenko, Volga Group, and nine Volga Group subsidiaries. The European Union has not acted against Timchenko or Volga Group. Since the announcement of US and Canadian sanctions, Timchenko and Volga Group- controlled firms have announced new projects in Asia, Europe, and Syria with reported financing from Chinese and Russian banks, including institutions sanctioned by the US on July 16. Financial institutions engaged in global business should consider the implications for AML and sanctions risk management. Timchenko’s post-sanctionS business ventures in China In late April 2014, President Putin appointed Gennady Timchenko to lead the Russia-China Business Council (RCBC), a body created in 2004 to expand partnerships between the two countries. Timchenko told reporters after President Putin’s RCBC announcement: “You know what Putin said? He introduced me by As head of RCBC, Timchenko is advancing Volga Group interests in saying Mr. Timchenko is the head of our business council. In other China. words – it is my words here – he is our main man for China.” • In late May 2014, Volga Group is constructing a terminal for announced a joint-venture with coal and iron ore shipments in the state-owned China Harbour Russia’s Far East.
  • Annual Report 2010

    Annual Report 2010

    ANNUAL REPORT 2010 Annual Creportontent 2010 s 1 2 Key performance indicators 92 board of directors and management board 4 message to shareholders 92 Governing bodies structure of JsC Gazprom Neft 9 highlights 93 Membership of the Board of Directors 100 Membership of the Management Board 12 development strategy 105 Total compensation for members of Board 18 Company history of Directors and Management Board 20 Company structure 22 Geography of operations 106 environment and innovations 26 Competitive state of the company 106 Environmental protection and safety 114 Innovation activity 31 company Key performance indicators by type of operation 119 energy and energy saving in 2010 31 Oil and gas exploration and production 122 social responsibility 41 Oil refining and regional policy 45 Production of petroleum products 122 Personnel, occupational safety, and health 46 Sales of petroleum products management 48 Premium business segments 127 Social responsibility in areas of operations 52 Export of crude oil and petroleum products 129 to shareholders and investors 54 analysis of the company’s 129 Authorised capital shareholder capital financial results of activity structure by the management 130 Share market and capitalisation 54 Definitions and recalculation methodology 132 Participation in the Depositary Receipt 54 Forecast statements Program 55 Key performance indicators for 2008–2010 134 Dividend history 56 Key financial and performance indicators 135 Observing the Corporate Code of Conduct 57 Result of activities for 2010 compared to 2009 138 asset management and 57 Production segments corporate structure 58 Changes in structure of the group 60 Performance indicators and analysis 140 credit ratings and debt portfolio 66 Results of activities management 76 Financial appendices 140 Credit rating 77 Financial indicators 141 Debt obligations 78 Additional information 142 glossary of Key terms 84 investment program and definitions 86 Key risK factors 145 appendix.
  • Zeszyt 10. Morza I Oceany

    Zeszyt 10. Morza I Oceany

    Uwaga: Niniejsza publikacja została opracowana według stanu na 2008 rok i nie jest aktualizowana. Zamieszczony na stronie internetowej Komisji Standaryzacji Nazw Geograficznych poza Granica- mi Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej plik PDF jest jedynie zapisem cyfrowym wydrukowanej publikacji. Wykaz zalecanych przez Komisję polskich nazw geograficznych świata (Urzędowy wykaz polskich nazw geograficznych świata), wraz z aktualizowaną na bieżąco listą zmian w tym wykazie, zamieszczo- ny jest na stronie internetowej pod adresem: http://ksng.gugik.gov.pl/wpngs.php. KOMISJA STANDARYZACJI NAZW GEOGRAFICZNYCH POZA GRANICAMI RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ POLSKIEJ przy Głównym Geodecie Kraju NAZEWNICTWO GEOGRAFICZNE ŚWIATA Zeszyt 10 Morza i oceany GŁÓWNY URZĄD GEODEZJI I KARTOGRAFII Warszawa 2008 KOMISJA STANDARYZACJI NAZW GEOGRAFICZNYCH POZA GRANICAMI RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ POLSKIEJ przy Głównym Geodecie Kraju Waldemar Rudnicki (przewodniczący), Andrzej Markowski (zastępca przewodniczącego), Maciej Zych (zastępca przewodniczącego), Katarzyna Przyszewska (sekretarz); członkowie: Stanisław Alexandrowicz, Andrzej Czerny, Janusz Danecki, Janusz Gołaski, Romuald Huszcza, Sabina Kacieszczenko, Dariusz Kalisiewicz, Artur Karp, Zbigniew Obidowski, Jerzy Ostrowski, Jarosław Pietrow, Jerzy Pietruszka, Andrzej Pisowicz, Ewa Wolnicz-Pawłowska, Bogusław R. Zagórski Opracowanie Kazimierz Furmańczyk Recenzent Maciej Zych Komitet Redakcyjny Andrzej Czerny, Joanna Januszek, Sabina Kacieszczenko, Dariusz Kalisiewicz, Jerzy Ostrowski, Waldemar Rudnicki, Maciej Zych Redaktor prowadzący Maciej
  • The Myth of Cheap Russian Gas

    The Myth of Cheap Russian Gas

    Founded by H.S.H. Prince Michael of Liechtenstein The myth of cheap Russian gas Dr. Frank Umbach Russia & Central Asia Sept. 05 2017 The desolate Arctic landscape of Gazprom’s Bovanenkovo gas field on the Yamal peninsula, 4,300 kilometers away from West European customers (source dpa) A frequent but unquestioned claim about the controversial Nord Stream 2 (NS-2) gas pipeline and the latest round of American sanctions against Russia is that Russian natural gas is much cheaper than that of rival suppliers. This particularly applies to liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from shale producers in the United States. According to this argument, the European Union should leave it to the market price to determine which gas suppliers European importers choose. But Russia’s cheap gas from its mature fields in Western Siberia are rapidly dwindling, while output from the new gas fields in the Yamal peninsula must be heavily subsidized to offset higher production and transport costs. This question is far from academic at a time when gas prices in Europe and Asia are declining rapidly, and the LNG exports from the U.S. are getting cheaper. In fact, Europe is now entering a new era when Russian gas (if not subsidized) is no longer cheap, and LNG from the U.S. and other producers is no longer expensive. Different product From 2012 to 2016, the average price of Russian natural gas exports to Europe dropped from more than $400 per 1,000 cubic meters (cm) to just $167. That significantly undercut prices at Europe’s main gas hubs (the Netherlands’ TTF and Germany’s NCG), which averaged about $243-$245 per 1,000 cm last year.
  • Nornickel and the Kola Peninsula

    Nornickel and the Kola Peninsula

    THE BELLONA FOUNDATION Nornickel and the Kola Peninsula Photo: Thomas Nilsen ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE YEAR OF ECOLOGY JANUARY 2018 The Bellona Foundation is an international environmental NGO based in Norway. Founded in 1986 as a direct action protest group, Bellona has become a recognized technology and solution- oriented organizations with offices in Oslo, Brussels, Kiev, St. Petersburg and Murmansk. Altogether, some 60 engineers, ecologists, nuclear physicists, economists, lawyers, political scientists and journalists work at Bellona. Environmental change is an enormous challenge. It can only be solved if politicians and legislators develop clear policy frameworks and regulations for industry and consumers. Industry plays a role by developing and commercializing environmentally sound technology. Bellona strives to be a bridge builder between industry and policy makers, working closely with the former to help them respond to environmental challenges in their field, and proposing policy measures that promote new technologies with the least impact on the environment. Authors: Oskar Njaa © Bellona 201 8 Design: Bellona Disclaimer: Bellona endeavors to ensure that the information disclosed in this report is correct and free from copyrights, but does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, interpretation or usefulness of the information which may result from the use of this report. Contact: [email protected] Web page: www.bellona.org 1 Table of Contents 1 Introduction: ......................................................................................................................
  • Arctic Marine Transport Workshop 28-30 September 2004

    Arctic Marine Transport Workshop 28-30 September 2004

    Arctic Marine Transport Workshop 28-30 September 2004 Institute of the North • U.S. Arctic Research Commission • International Arctic Science Committee Arctic Ocean Marine Routes This map is a general portrayal of the major Arctic marine routes shown from the perspective of Bering Strait looking northward. The official Northern Sea Route encompasses all routes across the Russian Arctic coastal seas from Kara Gate (at the southern tip of Novaya Zemlya) to Bering Strait. The Northwest Passage is the name given to the marine routes between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans along the northern coast of North America that span the straits and sounds of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Three historic polar voyages in the Central Arctic Ocean are indicated: the first surface shop voyage to the North Pole by the Soviet nuclear icebreaker Arktika in August 1977; the tourist voyage of the Soviet nuclear icebreaker Sovetsky Soyuz across the Arctic Ocean in August 1991; and, the historic scientific (Arctic) transect by the polar icebreakers Polar Sea (U.S.) and Louis S. St-Laurent (Canada) during July and August 1994. Shown is the ice edge for 16 September 2004 (near the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice for 2004) as determined by satellite passive microwave sensors. Noted are ice-free coastal seas along the entire Russian Arctic and a large, ice-free area that extends 300 nautical miles north of the Alaskan coast. The ice edge is also shown to have retreated to a position north of Svalbard. The front cover shows the summer minimum extent of Arctic sea ice on 16 September 2002.
  • LNG Plant Cost Reduction 2014–18

    LNG Plant Cost Reduction 2014–18

    October 2018 LNG Plant Cost Reduction 2014–18 OIES PAPER: NG137 Brian Songhurst Research Associate, OIES The contents of this paper are the author’s sole responsibility. They do not necessarily represent the views of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies or any of its members. Copyright © 2018 Oxford Institute for Energy Studies (Registered Charity, No. 286084) This publication may be reproduced in part for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgment of the source is made. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. ISBN: 978-1-78467-120-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26889/9781784671204 i LNG Plant Cost Reduction 2014–18 – October 2018 Acknowledgements My thanks to fellow OIES colleague Claudio-Steuer for his contributions during the drafting of this paper. My thanks also to the following industry colleagues for their review and comments on the draft: Toby Chancellor-Weale, Chair, IChemE Oil and Natural Gas Special Interest Group (SONG) Chris Spilsbury, LNG Specialists Ltd John Rushbrook, Consultant ii LNG Plant Cost Reduction 2014–18 – October 2018 Preface In his recent papers for OIES on the future of gas in Europe and the global energy economy, Jonathan Stern identified affordability as a key factor in determining whether gas would play a major role in Non-OECD countries. As the majority of traded gas will be LNG, the key question is therefore whether the cost of developing new liquefaction projects can be low enough to allow the gas to be competitive when it reaches the end consumer.
  • Radioactivity in the Arctic Seas

    Radioactivity in the Arctic Seas

    IAEA-TECDOC-1075 XA9949696 Radioactivity in the Arctic Seas Report for the International Arctic Seas Assessment Project (IASAP) ffl INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCA / Y / 1JrrziZr^AA 30-16 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Radiometrics Section International Atomic Energy Agency Marine Environment Laboratory B.P. 800 MC 98012 Monaco Cedex RADIOACTIVITY IN THE ARCTIC SEAS IAEA, VIENNA, 1999 IAEA-TECDOC-1075 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1999 Printe IAEe th AustriAn y i d b a April 1999 FOREWORD From 199 o 1993t e Internationa6th l Atomic Energy Agency's Marine Environment Laboratory (IAEA-MEL s engage IAEA'e wa ) th n di s International Arctic Seas Assessment Project (IASAP whicn i ) h emphasi bees ha sn place criticaa n do l revie f environmentawo l conditions in the Arctic Seas. IAEA-MEe Th L programme, organize framewore th n dIASAi e th f ko P included: (i) an oceanographic and an ecological description of the Arctic Seas; provisioe th (ii )centra a f no l database facilitIASAe th r yfo P programm collectione th r efo , synthesi interpretatiod san datf nmarino n ao e radioactivit Arctie th n yi c Seas; (iii) participation in official expeditions to the Kara Sea organized by the joint Russian- Norwegian Experts Group (1992, 1993 and 1994), the Russian Academy of Sciences (1994), and the Naval Research Laboratory and Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (1995); (iv) assistance wit d n laboratorsiti han u y based radiometric measurement f curreno s t radionuclide concentrations in the Kara Sea; (v) organization of analytical quality assurance intercalibration exercises among the participating laboratories; (vi) computer modellin e potentiath f o g l dispersa f radionuclideo l s released froe mth dumped f assessmeno wast d associatee ean th f o t d radiological consequencee th f o s disposals on local, regional and global scales; (vii) in situ and laboratory based assessment of distribution coefficients (Kd) and concentration factor sArctie (CFth r c)fo environment.
  • Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage

    Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage

    Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 10 Issue 2 1989 Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage Donat Pharand University of Ottawa Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the International Law Commons, and the Law of the Sea Commons Recommended Citation Donat Pharand, Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage, 10 MICH. J. INT'L L. 653 (1989). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol10/iss2/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CANADA'S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE Donat Pharand* In 1968, when this writer published "Innocent Passage in the Arc- tic,"' Canada had yet to assert its sovereignty over the Northwest Pas- sage. It has since done so by establishing, in 1985, straight baselines around the whole of its Arctic Archipelago. In August of that year, the U. S. Coast Guard vessel PolarSea made a transit of the North- west Passage on its voyage from Thule, Greenland, to the Chukchi Sea (see Route 1 on Figure 1). Having been notified of the impending transit, Canada informed the United States that it considered all the waters of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago as historic internal waters and that a request for authorization to transit the Northwest Passage would be necessary.
  • The 1994 Arctic Ocean Section the First Major Scientific Crossing of the Arctic Ocean 1994 Arctic Ocean Section

    The 1994 Arctic Ocean Section the First Major Scientific Crossing of the Arctic Ocean 1994 Arctic Ocean Section

    The 1994 Arctic Ocean Section The First Major Scientific Crossing of the Arctic Ocean 1994 Arctic Ocean Section — Historic Firsts — • First U.S. and Canadian surface ships to reach the North Pole • First surface ship crossing of the Arctic Ocean via the North Pole • First circumnavigation of North America and Greenland by surface ships • Northernmost rendezvous of three surface ships from the largest Arctic nations—Russia, the U.S. and Canada—at 89°41′N, 011°24′E on August 23, 1994 — Significant Scientific Findings — • Uncharted seamount discovered near 85°50′N, 166°00′E • Atlantic layer of the Arctic Ocean found to be 0.5–1°C warmer than prior to 1993 • Large eddy of cold fresh shelf water found centered at 1000 m on the periphery of the Makarov Basin • Sediment observed on the ice from the Chukchi Sea to the North Pole • Biological productivity estimated to be ten times greater than previous estimates • Active microbial community found, indicating that bacteria and protists are significant con- sumers of plant production • Mesozooplankton biomass found to increase with latitude • Benthic macrofauna found to be abundant, with populations higher in the Amerasia Basin than in the Eurasian Basin • Furthest north polar bear on record captured and tagged (84°15′N) • Demonstrated the presence of polar bears and ringed seals across the Arctic Basin • Sources of ice-rafted detritus in seafloor cores traced, suggesting that ocean–ice circulation in the western Canada Basin was toward Fram Strait during glacial intervals, contrary to the present