SPE-180835-MS

Effective Flare and Vent Management

J. Siu, and A. Perseval, Massy Wood Group

Copyright 2016, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Trinidad and Tobago Section Energy Resources Conference held in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, 13–15
June 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
As the world reacts to a low commodity and oil price markets, energy companies are forced to seek more
efficient ways of operating. This paper addresses the impacts of improperly managed gas disposal systems
including lost revenue potential as well as the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. It is tailored to
the energy industry of Trinidad and Tobago which aims to achieve a reduction in overall emissions by
15% by 2030 from BAU (Business As Usual baseline) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change.
The study highlights and evaluates the major opportunities for emissions reduction including, but not
limited to, conversion from cold vents to flares, implementation of hybrid flare-vent systems, conversion
from natural gas to inert gas purge systems and proper monitoring and optimization of flaring rates.
Supporting calculations and case studies are based on actual and theoretical data (from mass balances or
otherwise) from local oil and gas operators.
The lack of reliable measurement data and trends for flare volumes was indicative of an industry that
has grown callous to wastefulness. Findings revealed that significant value can be extracted through
modest monitoring improvement projects, optimization of existing operations and increased operator
conscientiousness.

Introduction
Trinidad and Tobago’s intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) under the UNFCC is based
on its strategy to reduce carbon emissions from the three major contributing sectors (transport, power
generation and industry) by 30% before 2031. The cumulative emissions are referenced against a 2013
baseline in which the total emissions from these sectors amounted to an estimated 34,234,032 tCO2e.
Efficiency is a primary concern for all industries. Every business wants to increase its operational
capacity without incurring extra costs or large capital investment on a new modernized facility. Within the
sphere of energy efficiency is now the potential legislative requirements from government to drive
business and private sectors into carbon emission reduction under the Paris Agreement.
The problem of emission reduction for industry is generally one of capital expenditure without
solidified return on the investment particularly, for Trinidad and Tobago, where there are currently no
active CDM projects which benefit from carbon trading. One of the major criticisms of the carbon trade
2 SPE-180835-MS

market is the volatility of the price of emissions permits which fluctuates along with the cost of energy
commodities. Without a stable carbon price as incentive, investors may be dissuaded from making long
term low-carbon investment decisions.
A further opportunity exists for emission reduction within effective vent and flare management in that
the hydrocarbon can be recaptured and utilized to generate revenue in supply of fuel gas for subsequent
power generation/ammonia/methanol/refinery production and operations. There are a number of processes
and mechanisms to eliminate/reduce hydrocarbon emissions that are further explored within this paper.
Background
In 2015, Trinidad reported an average difference of 257 MMSCFD between natural gas production and
natural gas utilization. This difference is reported by the Ministry of Energy as being due to liquid
production, utilization by upstream companies for gas lift purposes and general losses. This figure
represents a massive potential for optimization in the industry or at the very least an opportunity for more
accurate monitoring of its non-renewable resources. Although the exact splits between these categories are
not known, an unmonetized value of even 10% (25.7 MMSCFD) of this total amounts to over 18M USD
per annum at the current gas price of $2.00 USD/MMBtu (not accounting for value added potential from
downstream processing). The environmental impact of venting the same 10% results in approximately 3.8
million tCO2e.

Table 1—Average Natural Gas Production and Utilization Rates (MMSCFD) for 2015 in Trinidad & Tobago
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg

Production 4,117 4,058 3,987 3,648 3,831 3,842 3,704 3,871 3,815 3,498 3,763 3,888 3,835
Utilization 3,857 3,819 3,748 3,420 3,601 3,578 3,441 3,587 3,538 3,268 3,498 3,583 3,578
Difference(1) 260 239 239 228 230 264 263 284 277 230 265 305 257

1. The difference between production and utilization is reported as losses, liquid production and gas lift utilization.

In 2015, the average onshore oil production was roughly 20,000 bopd with a GOR of about 500 scf per
bbl. The bulk of this associated gas total of 10 MMSCFD was vented into the atmosphere with an
unmonetized potential of 7.3M USD per annum and the equivalent of roughly 1.5 million tCO2e. Offshore
oil production accounted for roughly twice the onshore production.

Table 2—Crude Oil and Condensate Production Rates (BOPD) for 2015 in Trinidad & Tobago
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg

Onshore 24,330 24,143 23,415 23,521 22,071 22,743 22,209 22,404 21,507 21,991 22,260 21,089 22,640
Offshore 59,553 59,589 57,915 57,191 56,115 58,495 55,979 52,835 54,387 54,757 53,479 52,042 56,036
Total 83,883 83,732 81,330 80,712 78,186 81,238 78,188 75,239 75,894 76,749 75,739 73,131 78,668

The environmental and economic benefits of addressing these inefficiencies are undeniably attractive
from a macroscopic perspective. Although it is preferable to utilize or conserve waste gas streams rather
than to simply vent or flare them without benefit, utilization or conservation is not always practicable.
On-site power generation for example is one of the primary uses of recovered gas for facilities in remote
locations. However due to the prevalence of inexpensive and clean electricity in Trinidad it is generally
not worthwhile to undertake such a project.
The majority of Trinidad’s oil producing fields is located mainly off of the west coast of the island
where there is currently no central gas processing hub. In these areas gas re-injection for enhanced oil
SPE-180835-MS 3

recovery and flaring are preferred to atmospheric venting. Flaring is largely considered to be less harmful
to the environment than venting due to the global warming potential (GWP) of methane, the primary
component of natural gas, as compared to that of the products of natural gas combustion. When compared
over a 100 year lifespan, methane gas is 21 times more impactful than CO2 when it comes to global
warming potential.
Based on the existing pipeline infrastructure and downstream demand for natural gas in Trinidad, gas
recovery and delivery to a nearby gas gathering system is the most obvious solution to the problem. Low
production onshore fields may need to explore options for pooling of gas resources or clustering gas from
several batteries into a single location to achieve volumes sufficient to justify conservation or utilization
schemes.

Management and Optimization

Opportunities for capitalization and emissions reduction include conversion from cold vents to flares,
implementation of hybrid flare-vent systems, conversion from natural gas to inert gas purge systems and
proper monitoring and optimization of flaring rates.

Purging
Purging of flare and vent headers is necessary to avoid the formation of a flammable mixture within relief
and vent piping by preventing air ingress. To understand the types of purge gas used it is important to
understand the flammability envelope within which the vented gas can be ignited. The flammability
envelope is bounded by the UFL (Upper Flammability Limit), the LFL (Lower Flammability Limit) and
the LOC (Limiting Oxygen Concentration). When fuel gas is used as the purging medium, the mitigation
strategy is to maintain a fuel rich environment above the UFL. By contrast, Nitrogen purges are used to
maintain a fuel concentration in the vent at a level below the LFL. Throughout the industry, the most
popular method of determining the required purge rate is via the Husa equation which was originally
developed in 1977. The Husa equation calculates the purge rate required to limit the oxygen concentration
to 6% at a distance of 25 feet from the end of the vent stack based on the purging medium and the pipe
diameter. API has since acknowledged the conservative nature of the equation, citing experimental
research (Buss and Tromans 1995) which recommends a ten-fold reduction in purge rates calculated by
Husa.
Table 3 presents the calculated purge rates for natural gas (QNG) and nitrogen (QN2) based on a range
of vent diameters along with the Cost Avoidance and Reduction in CO2e that could be realized by
optimizing the purge rate based on a 10-fold reduction (QNG*) as well as switching from an existing fuel
gas purge to nitrogen. The natural gas composition is conservatively assumed to be pure methane for the
CO2e calculations.
4 SPE-180835-MS

Table 3—Cold Venting Purge Gas Rates

Reduction in
Cost Avoidance CO2e by Cost Avoidance Reduction in
by Optimizing Optimizing by Switching to CO2e by
D QNG QN2 QNG* Purge Rate Purge Rate N2 Switching N2

in scfh scfh scfh $/yr tonne/yr $/yr tonne/yr

4 1.0 0.7 0.1 15.7 3.2 17.4 3.5
6 4.0 3.0 0.4 63.8 12.8 70.9 14.3
8 10.9 8.0 1.1 172.6 34.8 191.8 38.6
10 23.7 17.4 2.4 373.5 75.2 415.0 83.6
12 44.5 32.6 4.5 701.9 141.3 779.9 157.0
14 75.9 55.6 7.6 1,196.5 240.9 1,329.5 267.7
16 120.4 88.3 12.0 1,899.2 382.4 2,110.3 424.9
18 181.0 132.8 18.1 2,854.7 574.8 3,171.9 638.7
20 260.7 191.1 26.1 4,110.4 827.7 4,567.2 919.6
24 489.9 359.2 49.0 7,724.2 1,555.3 8,582.5 1,728.2
30 1060.2 777.4 106.0 16,717.2 3,366.2 18,574.7 3,740.2

From Table 3 it can be seen that eliminating purge gas alone does not contribute significantly to the
reduction in GHG emissions. Furthermore, if nitrogen is not readily available at an existing facility then
a nitrogen package would need to be installed at additional cost. In such an instance, switching from
natural gas to nitrogen would not be immediately cost effective. For example, a payback period of
approximately 1.5 years was calculated for a membrane nitrogen generator designed for the 30 inch vent
based on the original Husa rates. Compared to the industry capacity for GHG reduction, optimization of
vent purge systems offers only modest returns albeit for minimal effort and expense.

Flaring
Based on the theoretical model of perfect combustion of a pure methane gas waste stream, an 87%
reduction in GWP is achieved as compared to continuous flaring for an equivalent period. In this model,
the methane is assumed to be in perfect stoichiometric ratio with oxygen and the additional gas required
for flare pilots (typically 70 scfh per pilot) is not included. The combustion equation for a methane stream
is given in Equation 1.
Eq (1)

Computer simulations have shown that combustion of natural gas streams based on actual gas
compositions result in lower reductions due to the greater CO2 production based on the stoichiometry
involved in combusting the longer chain hydrocarbons. At equilibrium, Gibbs free energy of the reacting
system is at a minimum and is used to calculate the product mixture composition. For the range of
compositions examined (95-99% methane), the reduction in CO2e due to flaring was always greater than
70%. Interestingly, incomplete combustion simulated by a negative excess air flow resulted in a slightly
lower GWP overall when compared to the complete combustion cases. This was because the production
of CO has a less adverse effect with respect to GWP. Under this condition the flare would not be
compliant with smokeless operation requirements.
SPE-180835-MS 5

Figure 1—Combustion Model in Aspen HYSYS

Additional excess air was found to have no impact on the efficiency of the flare to achieve complete
combustion. In general it was found that the leaner the waste gas, the lower the burning temperature and
the greater the reduction in comparative GWP for venting.
In a hybrid flare/vent system, the normal operating configuration will be cold venting with a nitrogen
purge. With a typical continuous flare system, the vent must be purged with fuel gas and the pilots
continuously maintained. These fuel gas consumers account for the difference between a continuous flare
and a hybrid flare/vent system. The added benefit of implementing a hybrid system is the extended flare
tip life and periodic replacement costs.

Table 4 —Comparative GHG Emissions for Cold Venting, Continuous Flaring and Hybrid Systems
Continuous Relief Rate(1) Emergency Relief Rate (2)
Venting Flaring(3) Hybrid(4)

MMSCFD MMSCFD tCO2e tCO2e tCO2e

0.015 100 5,577 1,673 1,007
0.015 200 8,932 2,680 2,013
0.015 300 12,287 3,686 3,020
0.015 400 15,642 4,693 4,026
0.015 500 18,997 5,699 5,033

1. Continuous flow from two pilots (70 scfh each) plus purge gas (490 scfh).
2. Based on emergency/abnormal relief events lasting a cumulative 2 hours per year.
3. Based on 70% reduction in GWP due to combustion of waste gas stream.
4. Nitrogen purge during normal operation with flare being ignited during emergency/abnormal relief.

Measurement
Many installations experience losses due to valves that leak process gas or fuel gas into the flare header.
Often times these losses exceed the desired purge rate and it is not necessary to add purge gas. Although
there are modest savings from eliminating the purge gas flow, there are far greater savings from
eliminating leaks into the flare header or to the atmosphere (fugitive emissions). These losses usually
6 SPE-180835-MS

persist due to inappropriate measurement and control technologies. A survey of several offshore facilities
revealed that most installations rely on mass balance calculations, GORs and process simulations to
determine their flared/vented quantities.
Flow capacity, rangeability and cost are the major considerations when selecting an appropriate meter.
Historically, one of the main types of flow meter technologies used was differential-pressure however
these types of meters are limited by low rangeability and are sensitive to changes in gas composition.
Ultrasonic technology, because of its superior performance in these aspects, is the widely preferred choice
in most new applications.

Table 5—Measurement Technologies

Economics
Continuous gas flaring is a classic case of failing to account for the real costs of energy production on local
populations coupled with failures in government policy (or lack of policy) that have allowed the problem
to continue. The economics can be marginal and the options to sell gas are often limited in some countries.
Furthermore, since associated gas is a byproduct of crude oil or condensate recovery, costs and contract
terms around oil developments, and ultimately potential oil revenues, dictate investment economics.
In Trinidad, gas infrastructure exists for associated/flared gas to be contained, utilized or sold. In most
cases, the gas is lean (98% methane) with low contaminants that do not require special technologies for
treatment, driving down costs. However, many smaller and isolated flares at older sites continue to burn
across the country and contribute to global CO2 emissions.
The costs of flare reduction are contained in data submitted for carbon credits within the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) CDM program. Looking at a selection of
projects ranging in size and location, three general observations were made:
1. Flare project economics without credits show that they are below typical investment retruns. Many
oil companies look for internal rate of return (IRR) thresholds of 20 percent or higher to justify
expenditure depending on the risk profile of the investment.
2. The price used for certified emissions reductions (CER) has a large impact on the viability on the
SPE-180835-MS 7

flare project economics.

3. A rough measure of CO2 abatement costs, the capital investment per annual CO2 equivalent
reduction calculation shows a wide range: from $52 to $110 per annual million metric tons of CO2
reduced.

Conclusions
The lack of emphasis on accurate flare and vent measurement presents a significant opportunity for the
reduction in unmonetized gases being wasted through disposal since what gets measured gets managed.
As the industry adapts to lower profit margins, it will become ever more necessary to properly quantify
the capacity for optimization and simultaneously satisfy our environmental obligations.
The three main barriers to flare gas utilization in Trinidad & Tobago are:
1. Lack of baselining and effective measurement in industry to determine effective emission reduc-
tion.
2. Lack of policy and subsequent regulatory oversight.
3. Financing challenges for investment in existing technologies without perceived benefit.
These are the industrial challenges that Trinidad has to address from both Government and industry
level to help reduce emmissions by 15% by 2030 from BAU (Business As Usual baseline) under the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Nomenclature
BAU –Business as Usual
CDM –Clean Development Mechanism
CER –Certified Emissions Reduction
CO2e –Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
DNA –Designated National Authority
GHG –Green House Gases
GOR –Gas to Oil Ratio
GWP –Global Warming Potential
INDC –Intended Nationally Determined Contribution
IRR –Internal Rate of Return
LFL –Lower Flammable Limit
LOC –Limiting Oxygen Concentration
MEEI –Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries
PoA –Programme of Activities
T&T –Trinidad & Tobago
tCO2e –Metric Tonnes of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
TTEITI –Trinidad and Tobago Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
UFL –Upper Flammable Limit
UNFCCC –United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

References
1. G. Buss and P. Tromans, Reduced Purge Rates in Natural Gas Vent Stacks, paper presented at the Major Hazards On-
and Offshore Conference, UMIST, Manchester, October 24 –26, 1995, IChemE Symposium Series No. 139, pp.
595–607, 1995
2. I. Ali. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Associated Gas Recovery and Utilization Project, Petroleum Company
of Trinidad & Tobago.
8 SPE-180835-MS

3. M. Farina. Flare Gas Reduction, Recent global trends and policy considerations, GE Energy Global Strategy and
Planning
4. R. Blanton. Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Flare Gas Recovery Projects in Petrochemical Facilities,
John Zink Company LLC
5. T. Hope. The Zero Continuous Flaring Technology, Statoil EPN ONS Brage.
6. R. Aegerter. Flare System Optimization, Equistar Chemicals, L.P., ESL-IE-03-05-06
7. Clearstone Engineering Ltd. Technical Report Guidelines On Flare And Vent Measurement Prepared For The Global
Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership (GGFR) And The World Bank, Clearstone Engineering Ltd.
8. R. Espinasa and M. Humpert, Energy Dossier: Trinidad & Tobago, Inter American Development Bank
9. K. Persad. 2011. Carbon Reduction Strategies for Trinidad and Tobago, KPA Associates, Trinidad & Tobago
10. NGC. 2016. Energy Map of Trinidad & Tobago, http://ngc.co.tt/wp-content/uploads/pdf/publications/energy-map-of-
tnt-2015-ed.pdf (accessed 03 March 2016)
11. American Gas Association. Purging Principles and Practice Catalog No. XK0101 Third Edition, American Gas
Association, Washington, DC 20001
12. TUV SUD Ltd. Summary Report – A Review of Flare and Vent Gas Emissions Monitoring and Reporting Methods,
An Overview of Methods Used by Industry, TUV SUD Ltd., East Kilbride, Scotland.
13. Trinidad And Tobago Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) Under The United Nations Framework
Convention On Climate Change
14. IPIECA & OGP, Preparing effective flare management plans - Guidance document for the oil and gas industry
15. UNEP RISØ. Report Of The First National Workshop And The First Sectoral Workshop For The Capacity Building
For The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM Sub-Component Of The Capacity Building Related To Multilateral
Environmental Agreements (MEAs) In African, Caribbean And Pacific Countries Project, Trinidad And Tobago,
UNEP RISØ.
16. TTEITI Report 2013 – Promoting Transparency of Our Energy Revenues
17. UNEP RISØ. Emissions Reduction Profile Trinidad & Tobago, UNEP RISØ, 2013