Progress on AMSO AMSO s s RD&D RD&D Progress on Pilot - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Progress on AMSO AMSO s s RD&D RD&D Progress on Pilot Test Program Pilot Test Program Presentation to the 30 th Oil Shale Symposium Golden, CO October 18-20, 2010 Alan K. Burnham Chief Technology Officer 1 Outline of talk
1
Presentation to the 30th Oil Shale Symposium Golden, CO October 18-20, 2010 Alan K. Burnham Chief Technology Officer
2
10/20/2010
Who is AMSO? AMSO’s process in brief Preparations for our Pilot Test in 2011 Supporting R&D Return on invested energy
3
10/20/2010
EGL Resources obtained a BLM
IDT acquired EGL Oil Shale in
In March 2009, TOTAL acquired a
Upon demonstration of
*Using the USGS 2-million barrels per acre estimate (see map), this area contains an estimated 10 billion barrels of potential resource
4
10/20/2010
Field Operations
Oil and Gas expertise
by TOTAL
Permitting
Business Operations
Process Design & Construction
R&D Experiments & Modeling
5
10/20/2010
AMSO’s patent-pending
Faster heat transfer in our
* Conduction, Convection and Reflux
6
10/20/2010
Minimal surface footprint Protection of aquifers Low water usage High energy efficiency Low gas emissions High-value jobs
7
10/20/2010
TM process
shale
~45o incline
Pilot test interval (2015-2135 ft) Nahcolitic oil shale
Surface processing facility heater well
(electrical cables only)
monitoring wells
Better water quality
heater
Saline water Dissolution surface
2000 ft 1000 ft
Wasatch (no producible water) Mahogany zone
production well
Aquifer system
Triangular convection loop
8
10/20/2010
Test Pad has an Test Pad has an exploration well exploration well and will hold the and will hold the Heater Well and Heater Well and the Surface the Surface Processing Processing Facilities Facilities MWP 2 has MWP 2 has three hydrology three hydrology wells wells HB Pad has a HB Pad has a hydrology well hydrology well MWP 1 has a MWP 1 has a hydrology well hydrology well and staff trailers and staff trailers TM Pad currently has an TM Pad currently has an exploration well and a exploration well and a geophysical monitoring geophysical monitoring well over the retort area. well over the retort area. The Production Well and The Production Well and five monitoring wells will five monitoring wells will be added in 2011. be added in 2011. 3 MW power line 3 MW power line installed Feb 2010 installed Feb 2010 Facilities were Facilities were located to minimize located to minimize surface impacts surface impacts
9
10/20/2010
Tank farm Process building Control room Fire control system
10
10/20/2010
Geology, hydrology and geochemistry of the illitic oil shale in
Modeling of microseismic, CASSM and ERT methods to be
Pyrolysis of the illitic oil shale under conditions relevant to
Rock mechanics at relevant temperatures and confinement Heat transfer characteristics of boiling and condensing oil Integration of chemical and physical processes into an overall
11
10/20/2010
The original definition of
The Garden Gulch member is
The term “oil” has always
Parachute Creek Member Garden Gulch Member
FTIR analysis by Herron et al. at SDR
Carbonates Quartz + Feldspar Clay Minerals
12
10/20/2010
A well was completed
Only 7’ of water and
Water is brackish
Hydrostatic pressure is
100 200 300 4 8 12 16 20 24 Week from shut-in Pressure, psi
Measured gas pressure for the R1 interval 9-week time constant towards 325 psi
13
10/20/2010
Apparatus patterned after
Burnham-Singleton (1983)
Our yields are consistent with
those results
70-90 vol% FA oil yield achieved for 150-750 psi at 2 oC/h
Effects of pressure modeled by
adaptation of Burnham-Braun model (1985, 1990)
Metals and N content lower
than previously reported for Green River shale oil
As, Fe, Ni, V below detection
H2 and CH4 yields indicate in-
situ hydrotreating
Back- pressure regulator To GC then vent Collected Oil (~1 L) scale Ar N2 sweeps annulus around shale can Condenser Flexible lines to enable real-time measurements
Pressure relief valve To vent
14
10/20/2010
10 30 50 70 90 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Oil yield, wt% FA Pour point,
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 H/C atomic ratio Nitrogen, wt% 150-750 psi kinetic model 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Oil yield, vol% FA (C1-C4)/(C5+ oil), g/g AMSO 2010 LLNL 1983 kinetic model 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Oil yield, wt% FA API gravity AMSO 2010 LLNL 1983 kinetic model
15
10/20/2010
Expected API gravity is 35-40o with no residuum Low pour point and metals content mean pipeline restrictions
Low nitrogen content (¼ of conventional shale oil and only
Pyrolysis gas contains enough hydrogen for much of the final
16
10/20/2010
3500 Total in final fuels 230 Total External 3680 Total exported 5 Reclamation (ext) 480 Gas exported (C3, C4) 215 Surface Ops (ext) 675 Gas consumed 675 Retorting (int) 3200 Premium shale oil 10 Field Ops (ext) Estimated NER (EROI) Energy Output (MJ/tonne) Total Internal Energy Input (MJ/tonne) 3.9 675
This is one possible conservative estimate using process assumptions yet to be engineered Retorting energies are for wet shale on a dry shale basis Lower heating value (H2O-g) used for heats of combustion Produces a nominally pure CO2 stream from combustor available for sale or sequestration About 60% of the surface ops power demand is for the O2 plant that enables CO2 sequestration Retorting energy input assumes 15% thermal inefficiency and no heat recovery Assumes combustion of produced hydrogen and no on-site upgrading Electric power for surface ops as thermal input, assuming off-site generation at 40% efficiency
The NER should be used with caution, as optimizing it optimizes neither process economics nor CO2/final fuel delivered, which are the two important quantities
17
10/20/2010
Our site characterization activities confirm the suitability of
Most of the permits and agency approvals are in place Most of the infrastructure is in place Surface processing facilities are under construction Designs for the heater and production wells are nearly
Our concurrent R&D will provide a basis for evaluation and