© Gastech 2005 Gastech 2005 MEDGAZ Pipeline: Ensuring Energy

Gastech 2005
MEDGAZ Pipeline: Ensuring Energy Security for the Iberian Peninsula
by
Jay Chaudhuri, MEDGAZ S.A.
www.medgaz.com
16th March 2005
© Gastech 2005
SUMMARY
90,00
The paper details the design, operation and environmental
considerations which have governed the project
development strategy to-date. The proposed pipeline is
expected to be commissioned during 2008.
80,00
70,00
60,00
b c m /y e a r
It is accepted by the energy economists that for short to
medium distance gas transportation; high pressure trunk
lines are the safest and cheapest way of transporting gas
to market. The proposed ultra-deep water natural gas
pipeline linking Algeria and Spain is designed to transport
up to 16 BCM/year gas into the Iberian and European
energy markets. When commissioned, the proposed
pipeline will be well placed to meet the demand for gas in
the Iberian market which has shown compound annual
growth rates of 17%. Extensive technical studies
conducted by Medgaz have already validated the proposed
deepwater pipeline design and the associated offshore
route, which will traverse the Mediterranean Sea at water
depth in excess of 2000 metres. Internal and external
studies indicate that the proposed Medgaz pipeline will be
the most economic solution for enhancing and ensuring
energy security for the Iberian Peninsula.
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
GME
Larrau
Medgaz
Barcelona
Cartagena
Huelva
Bilbao
Mugardos
Sagunto
Annual demand
Peak demand
Fig. 1 – Spanish Gas System Capacity (Source : CNE,
2004)
240
mcm/day
200
1.- GAS CONSUMPTION & SUPPLY COSTS : IBERIAN
PENINSULA
•
•
•
•
•
Iberia’s fast growing energy market poses challenges
to the existing infrastructure. Spanish gas
consumption has grown from 21.4 BCM in year 2002
to 28.3 BCM in year 2004. It is anticipated that in the
year 2011 annual demand will exceed 44 BCM (Fig. 1).
Manufacturing growth and need to switch to ‘Kyoto
Protocol’ friendly fuels is increasing gas demand at
17% compound rate; while system capacity has barely
managed to keep in pace with the demand growth.
There are a number of gas and power infrastructure
projects underway but peak capacity shortages
currently being experienced will stretch to year 2010
(Fig. 2).
Delays in increasing infrastructure capacity will harm
the development of the Iberian energy market in the
short to medium term and growth potential of the
economy.
‘Average to peak’ capacity margin lower than OECD
average.
© Gastech 2005
160
120
80
40
0
2003
Demand
2003
Supply
2005
Demand
2005
Supply
2010
Demand
2010
Supply
FirmDemand
Interruptible Demand
Indigenous Production
Contracted Supply
Storage (*)
Additional Capacity
Fig. 2 – Spanish Peak Day Gas Supply & Demand
(Source : Wood Mackenzie, 2003)
The Long Run Marginal Cost (excluding producing
country royalty) for potential gas supply to Spain has
been studied extensively by independent energy
consultants OME and Wood Mackenzie. The studies
indicate clearly the economic benefits of the proposed
MEDGAZ gas pipeline, since this is the lowest cost
supply option for Spain (Fig. 3).
Chaudhuri 2
of 2155 m and an approximate length of 200 km (Fig.
6).
The proposed route is characterized by:
- non-steep continental slopes on either side of the
Alboran Sea;
- quaternary clay soil for the major part of the
route;
- stable sea-bed conditions.
Two onshore terminals will assure the safe and
efficient transportation of gas:
- BSCS: Beni Saf Compressor Station, near Sidi
Djelloul in Algeria
- OPRT: Offshore Pipeline Receiving Terminal, near
Almería in Spain
Phase 1: Construction of the east offshore pipeline
and the short onshore sections for the second west
pipeline, the compressor station at Beni Saf and the
receiving terminal at Almería – Capacity 8 billion
m³/year.
Phase 2 : Construction of the west pipeline – Total
capacity of the two pipelines 16 billion m³/year
Onshore connecting pipelines (to be constructed by
others):
- Algerian section: 550 km.
- Spanish section: 285 km.
Supply costs* for potential gas supply for SPAIN (2010-2020)
ALGERIA via Medgaz
•
ALGERIA via GME
NETHERLANDS
ALGERIA-LNG
NORWAY-North Sea Troll
EGYPT LNG
LIBYA LNG
NORWAY-North Sea Medium fields
VENEZUELA-LNG
TRINIDAD &TOBAGO-LNG
QATAR LNG
•
NIGERIA LNG
IRAN LNG
UAE LNG
OMAN LNG
YEMEN LNG
NORWAY- LNG Snohvit
NORWAY-Norwegian Sea
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2
2,2
2,4
2,6
* Long Marginal Cost excluding producer country's royalty
2,8
3
$/MBTU
3,2
•
Fig. 3 – LRMC supply cost (source: OME)
2.- OVERVIEW OF THE MEDGAZ PROJECT
•
MEDGAZ project was initiated by Cepsa and Sonatrach in
2001. Current partnership structure of the project is shown
in Fig. 4.
•
TOTAL
12%
ENDESA
12%
GdF
12%
SONATRACH
20%
MEDGAZ - Transportation System
OFFSHORE SECTION
ALGERIA
CEPSA
20%
IBERDROLA
12%
SPAIN
0
-100
-200
-300
BP
12%
-400
-500
-600
-700
Water Depth (m)
-800
Fig. 4 MEDGAZ Partnership Structure
-900
-1000
-1100
-1200
-1300
-1400
-1500
-1600
-1700
-1800
-1900
-2000
Schematic of the pipeline routing is illustrated in Fig. 5.
-2100
-2200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
KP (km)
Fig. 6 – Pipeline Route Profile
3. TECHNO – COMMERCIAL DATA
Gas transportation build-up profile:
Year
Flow
[BCM/y]
Number of
pipelines
Fig. 5 - Medgaz Offshore Pipeline Route
The principal features of the Medgaz system are outlined
below:
•
•
Capacity to supply 16 billion m³/year of gas to the
Iberian Peninsular and Europe via two 24 inch
diameter submarine pipelines planned for construction
in two phases.
Two offshore pipelines will directly connect the
Algerian gas fields and Spanish gas network across
the Mediterranean (Alboran Sea) at a maximum depth
© Gastech 2005
1
2
3
4
5
15
6
7
8
8
8
16
1
1
1
1
1
2
Design Pressure
= 220 barg
Maximum temperature = 60º C
Minimum temperature = 0º C
Design Code
Steel Grade X70
Pipe Thickness
Chaudhuri 3
= DnV OS F101
= SAWL 485 I DUF
= 22.9 / 28.5 / 29.9 mm
4. MARINE SURVEY CAMPAIGNS
7. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Several marine surveys were performed during 2002 –
2004 period;
•
•
•
•
•
•
Geological inspections of the proposed route
Environmental survey of marine flora/fauna on the
offshore and onshore sections on the Algerian and
Spanish sides.
Geophysical investigations close to coast at 25m
depth isobathe
Onshore inspection of the shore approach
in
Algeria and Spain
High resolution seismic survey of the route for
better evaluation of the geological risks.
Bathymetry, environmental, visual and magnetic
surveys
5. ROUTE SELECTION
The information provided by the survey campaigns has
permitted selection of the definitive pipeline route to meet
the following objectives:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
During 2002, CSIC performed a comprehensive study of
the geo-morphology and seismic risks of the proposed
offshore route which helped to focus the critical zones of
the route for subsequent detailed study and geotechnical
investigations (Figs. 8 and 9).
During 2003, an in-depth geotechnical investigation was
performed involving soil sampling and in-situ tests at more
than 130 locations along pipeline route. Work programme
included;
• Sampling by piston corer
• Cone penetration test (CPT)
• Seismic CPTs
• T-bar test
• Water temperature and chemical assay in laboratory
• Geotechnical laboratory tests including shear cyclic
loading and carbon dating
Minimisation of environmental impact
Protection of marine flora/fauna on the offshore and
onshore sections on the Algerian and Spanish sides.
Avoidance of natural obstacles that exist along the
route
Low geological and geotechnical risks
Minimal number of cable crossings
Ensuring the feasibility to employ S-and/or, J-lay
construction method
Minimisation of ‘free-span’ risks
6. ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Length of offshore route 198.3 km
Maximum water depth 2155m (49% > 1000m)
19 curvature points
5 crossings of telecommunications cables (all at
water depth greater than 1000m )
1 geological fault crossing : Yusuf Fault
Critical zone KP71 – KP77: Slopes <14 degrees
More than 95% of the route: slopes less than 4
degrees (Fig. 7)
Critical zone KP71 – KP77: Habibas escarpment
Source: CSIC
Fig. 8 Bathy-Morphological Characteristics of Pipeline
Route
Fig. 7 Slopes of the Spanish Continental Shelf
© Gastech 2005
Chaudhuri 4
• Phase 1 conditions for operation of a single offshore
pipeline:
40.0
LEGEND
MAGNITUDE SCALE Ms
10
39.0
9
IBERIAN FO RELAND
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
Pipeline Route
8
38.0
11
SY
BE TIC
Granada
Basin
ST EM
6
37.0
36.0
4
W estern A lbor an
Basin
Faults
Eastern Alb or an
Basin
e
id g
nR
ra
bo
Al Sou thern Albo ran
Basin
3
15
20
M otr il
B asin
2
2
TE
1
ORAN
YUSUF
LA
16
S
14
DL
E
A
TL
: 8 BCM/year
- 3 compressors in service
: 2 LP+1 HP
• Phase 2 conditions for operation of two
pipelines:
13
M ID
2
AT
RIF
34.0
18
AS
SA
33.0
1
LL
1
35.0
- Capacity
17
South Bal ear ic Ba sin
5
12
14 Province number
7
HA
R
A
19
A
TL
AS
AFRICAN F ORELAND
- Capacity
: 16 BCM/year
- 5 compressors in service
: 3 LP+2 HP
offshore
HIGH ATLAS
32.0
-6.0
-5.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
LONGITUDE
Fig 9 Seismic Risk Source Distribution
8. GEOHAZARD EVALUATIONS
Based on the results of various surveys conducted by
MEDGAZ and subsequent technical studies, it can be
concluded that the proposed`pipeline route will benefit
from;
•
•
•
Absence of significant geological and seismic risks;
Ideal seabed conditions for pipelay and long-term
operation of the pipeline;
The steepest slopes encountered at the Habibas
escarpment (KP71 - KP77) will not affect pipeline
stability and long-term operation.
•
The critical slopes of the route are stable for seismotectonic events with return periods of 475 years.
•
The design of the pipeline is demonstrated to be
extremely robust for safe operation in conceivable
earthquake conditions.
Fig. 10 BSCS – 3D Visualisation
11. DESIGN BASIS FOR RECEIVING TERMINAL
• OPRT Arrival Pressure
: 82 barg
• OPRT arrival temperature
: 0º C (min)
• Energy requirement for gas heating :
- 0 MW for steady state operation
- 12, 6 MW during re-start from marine pipeline
packed condition
•
Spanish pipeline entry pressure : 80 barg
9. MEETING THE ENVIRONNEMENTAL CHALLENGES
The pipeline design incorporates the following features;
•
To minimize the problems of environment during
construction, shore approach sections of the second
24 inch pipeline will be built during Phase 1 of
construction of the first pipeline. Thus, when the
second offshore pipeline is constructed, there will be
no significant onshore construction activity in Algeria
and Spain.
•
The width of the offshore corridor is minimized; while
allowing sufficient space for the installation of the
future second line.
•
The program of work is planned to avoid significant
construction installation activities close to the coastal
zones during the peak tourism periods of the summer
months.
•
Dredging and rock-dumping is minimized to reduce
the disturbance of sea-bed flora and fauna.
Fig. 11 OPRT – 3D Visualisation
12. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS FOR DESIGN OF
ONSHORE TERMINALS
The MEDGAZ project has applied proven environmental
principles for the design of the terminals. Some of the
design features considered to minimise environmental
impact include:
Specification of dry low emission turbines
compressor drives;
• Selection of BSCS compressor configuration
10. DESIGN BASIS FOR COMPRESSOR STATION
optimum fuel consumption at projected
transportation rates;
• BSCS inlet pressure : 45 barg
• Use of air for actuation of BSCS valves;
• Use of flaring (instead of venting) during planned
• BSCS outlet pressure : 200 barg (max.)
pressurisation of either terminal;
© Gastech 2005
Chaudhuri 5
•
for
for
gas
de-
•
Specification of low NOx burners for OPRT gas reheaters.
15. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
13. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The author wishes to thank the companies which have
participated in the Medgaz project to-date, for their
technical contribution to the project e.g.:
The current execution schedule is shown below in Fig.
12.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S 1S 2S
-
Project Launch
Feasibility Study
Route Confirmation & FEED1
Transition to Construction Company
Commercial Agreements
Permitting
Investment Decission (FID)2
Project Execution
Start-up (First Gas)
1
Front End Engineering & Desing
Decision
C&C Technologies Inc.
Snamprogetti s.p.a.
CSIC
Fugro b.v.
Fugro (UK) Ltd.
INTEC Engineering (UK) Ltd.
Rambøll A/S
Initec S.A.
D’Appolonia s.p.a.
Geoconsult A/S
JP Kenny Ltd.
2 Firm Investment
Fig. 12 MEDGAZ Project Schedule
Abbreviations:
14. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Technical summary:
•
•
•
Route selection is based on results of exhaustive
geophysical and geotechnical investigation, which has
minimised project technical risks.
MEDGAZ project has implemented latest and proven
deepwater pipeline construction technologies to
overcome the technical challenges; ensuring minimum
transport costs for the proposed new route of gas
supply to the Iberian peninsula.
In-depth ‘baseline’ studies and proven environmental
principles have been adopted to ensure environmentfriendly project implementation. In addition, the
Medgaz project will contribute significantly towards
the implementation of sustainable development
strategies of an integrated energy plan for the Iberian
peninsula.
BSCS
OPRT
BCM
DnV OS
FEED
EIA
FID
ROW
SAWL
LP
HP
LRMC
KP
MCM
Economic and commercial summary:
•
•
•
•
•
Enhancement of security of energy supply for Spain
and Europe.
The most economic method of gas supply to the
Iberian peninsula.
Promotes competition in the Spanish and Southern
European energy markets.
Approved as ‘Quick Start’ Priority Project under the EU
TEN-E programme (Decision 1229/2003/CE).
On 12th January, 2005 the Spanish Government
advised that priority rating “A” will be accorded to the
MEDGAZ project, ensuring project implementation to
progress for ‘First Gas’ delivery in 2009.
© Gastech 2005
Chaudhuri 6
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Beni Saf Compressor Station
Offshore Pipeline Receiving Terminal
Billion Cubic Metres
Det Norske Veritas Offshore
Front End Engineering Design
Environmental Impact Assessment
Firm Investment Decision
Rights of Way
Submerged Arc Weld Longitudinal
Low Pressure
High Pressure
Long Run Marginal Cost
Kilometre Point
Million Cubic Metres