Observations on the Tamar Project Leslie Nichols July 4, 2010
Leslie Nichols Professional Biography § 20 years as senior oil and gas consultant § 28 years with Shell in E&P becoming operations manager in major operations. § Sample experience: § BG: design and development of a new offshore gas platform (Trinidad) § Shell: Operations Manager for Shell Companies Malaysia (300, 000 bpd oil, 2. 5 Billion cfd gas, 140 offshore structures, 3 loading terminals) § Shell: Operations Manager Brent Field (UK) § Mossgas, Offshore Operations Advisor (South Africa)
Gas Processing Onshore/Offshore § Operators always prefer onshore where possible § operating costs, logistics § But onshore not always a reasonable option § Land use/availability, population, master plan § In this case, I believe offshore more practical § Onshore: lack of reasonable sites § Offshore: unlimited site options, industry standard
Why not onshore (in Israel) § Inspected 5 Carmel Coast sites § None appear suitable unless absolutely no alternative § Land scarcity/Population density/Transport infrastructure § Pollution/Disturbance/Safety/Security § Residents resistance (Corrib) § Undesirable industrial spread & expansion threat § Insufficient safety and risk analysis (QRA) § Extremely high gas arrival pressure § Reduce offshore (as per PDC) ? § Reduce on beach (as per IGA) ? § To what pressure (150 or 250) ?
Offshore is a viable alternative (1) - development time as an issue - Example - Poinsettia: 3 years FEED to EPIC (in a very tight development market)
Offshore is a standard alternative (2) - Virtually as reliable as onshore operationally § § When designed and managed properly As much built in redundancy (ie, maintenance, hot standby) as required Example – Shell Sarawak: no unplanned downtime in 5 years (across 3 large offshore facilities)
Offshore is an equally viable choice (3) - Minimum onshore real estate requirement • Small tie-in area • Landing pressure low Source: PDC ~ 10 Dunam
Observations on Planning Documents § Some questionable assumptions: § § § 17 – 20 months statutory planning ? 40 – 48 months development ? 18 days out per year ? 60 dunam onshore facility ? Israel goes dark if Tamar goes down ? (what about an onshore failure ? ) § Absence of basic documentation § Onshore site QRA ? § Independent offshore evaluation ?
Recommendations (1) § Independent specialist QRA report for onshore options § Objective detailed evaluation of the offshore option § Timing § Onshore requirement or FSO § Planning approvals readily forthcoming
Recommendations (2) § Comprehensive Master Plan § Back-up to Tamar § irrespective of offshore or onshore § Future development plan § § § export plans (pipeline, LNG) ? domestic liquid fuels (Fischer Tropsch) where will these plants go? § Infrastructure security § Line looping and the security that it offers ? § Explore options for covering near-term supply while conducting proper planning. § EMG issues ? § “Lateral thinking” eg, near-term supply through Mary B.
“Lateral Thinking” Example concept to solve possible Mary B shortfall before full Tamar development 2015 Provide backup supply 2013 Cover supply shortfall Proposed Tamar Development Tamar Platform
Thank You
Скачать презентацию Observations on the Tamar Project Leslie Nichols July
0af71368d4a531b2fc7e2d69540e080a.ppt