You are on page 1of 19

TECHNIP -COFLEXIP

TECHNIP-COFLEXIP

LNG PLANT PRICING


CONSIDERATION
BRIEF HISTORY OF LNG

???? : first liquefaction of methane by ???


1917 : Liquefaction of gas to extract helium (Texas)
1920/30s : LNG produced to store natural gas in USA
1944 : major accident in Cleveland peak shaving
1950s : start of new era of development
1959/60 : trial runs of Methane Pioneer from USA to UK
1964 : Camel plant (Algeria) commissioned, first
commercial deliveries to UK and France
2001 : annual LNG trade of 107 mt (+ 7.5% over last 20 years)
NATURAL GAS AND LNG TRADE

2500

NG Consumption
2000
Billion cm/y

1500

1000

NG International Trade
500

LNG Trade
0
70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 '00
LNG DEMAND VERSUS INSTALLED CAPACITY

200

180

160

140
INSTALLED CAPACITY
120
Mta

100

80
DEMAND
60

40

20

0
70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08 '10
LOCATIONS OF LNG PLANTS

Existing
Under construction
EVOLUTION OF TRAIN CAPACITY

6,00

5,00
Million tonnes per year

4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00

0,00
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
TYPICAL BLOCK DIAGRAM

C3 C4 Gasoline

FRACTIONATION

DEHYDRATION LNG STORAGE


ACID GAS NITROGEN
AND MERCURY LIQUEFACTION
REMOVAL REMOVAL AND LOADING
REMOVAL

SULPHUR REFRIGERATION
RECOVERY
MAIN LIQUEFACTION TECHNOLOGIES

A.P.C.I. - C3/MR : 57 trains in operation + 7 under construction


PHILLIPS - Optimised Cascade : 3 trains in operation (Trinidad &
Tobago) + 1 under construction (Idku Egypt)
STATOIL/LINDE - MFCP : 1 train under construction (Snohvit - Norway)
AXENS - LIQUEFIN : No reference
SHELL DMR : 2 trains in project (Sakhalin)
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
LNG PRICES

Plant cost $/tpy versus year of commissioning

Unit cost $/tpy versus year of commissioning

Plant Cost s/tpy versus train capacity

Price Break down of a two train liquefaction plant


PLANT COST $/TPY VERSUS YEAR OF COMMISSIONING

400

300
$ per tpy

200

100
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year
PLANT COST $/Tpy VERSUS TRAIN CAPACITY

400

300
$ per tpy

200

100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Train Capacity in MMTpy


TRAIN COST VERSUS YEAR OF COMMISSIONING

150

100
$ per tpy

50

0
1990 1995 2000

Year
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT

2 TRAINS 45 % to 65 %
UTILITIES 8% to 15 %
OFF SITE 20 % to 40 %
COMMON 7% to 10 %

TOTAL LNG PLANT 100 %

OTHERS 15 to 30 %

TOTAL LNG PROJECT


115 % 130 %
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
2 TRAINS
Mini Maxi Criteria

Common/inlet facilities 1% 10 % Project Definition


Acid Gas removal 3% 8% Gas composition
Dehydration 2% 3%
Mercury removal 1% 1%
Refrigeration/Liquefaction 25 % 40 % Cooling system
Compressors configuration
Fractionation 1% 3%
Sulphur recovery/prilling 0% 3%
_____ ______
TOTAL 45 % to 65 %
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
UTILITES

Mini Maxi Criteria

Power Generation : 3% 7% Gas or steam turbine

Cooling water : 2% 6% Cooling system


(air water seawater)

Other Waters, Steam, Project definition,sparing


Fuel, Air, Nitrogen : 3% 6% philosophy
_____ ______
TOTAL 8 % to 15 %
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
OFF SITE
Mini Maxi Criteria

LPG Storage & Loading 10 % 20 % Storage capacity & tank


specification
LPG Storage & Loading 0% 13 % Project definition
Condensate Storage
& Loading 0% 2% Project definition
Loading Jetty 4% 8% Sea and Site conditions
Flare & Liquid blow-down 3% 5%
Others Fire protection
Drainage, Waste tr. 3% 4%
_____ ______
TOTAL 25 % to 40 %
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
COMMON
Mini Maxi

Site infrastructure, road & fences 2% 4%

Control room - Substations 2% 2%

DCS, ESD,FG & Telecom 2% 3%

Administration, maintenance buildings 2% 3%


_____ ______
TOTAL 7 % to 10 %
TYPICAL PRICE BREAK DOWN OF A TWO TRAIN
LIQUEFACTION PLANT
OTHERS
Mini Maxi Criteria

Gas pipeline 1MM$ per Km On project definitions

Site Preparation 2% 5% Site conditions


Material Off Loading Airport 2 % 6% Remote area
Residential area 4% 8% Client requirement
Spare parts 2% 5% Client requirement
Movables 2% 4% Client requirement
Training & Start-up 1% 2% Take over definition
_____ _____
TOTAL 15 % to 30 %
THE TRENDS
CONTINUOUS INCREASING OF THE UNIT CAPACITY :
8 Mty are now considered

New Process developments : APCI APX, AXENS, Others


New Driving Machines
Frame 9 Gas Turbine (3,000 rpm)
Electric Motors
New 3,000 rpm compressors
New Unit lay out

TANKS CAPACITY UP TO 200,000 m3 ARE CONSIDERED


ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN
Acid Gas Re-injection
LNG FLOATING PLANT ON BARGE (FLNG)