OTC-27686-MS

A Revolutionary Hybrid Solution to the Grand Challenge of Developing

Deepwater Stranded Gas

Richard Moore, SubCool Technologies Pty Ltd

Copyright 2017, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 1–4 May 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC 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 Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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 OTC copyright.

Abstract
Many deepwater gas fields remain stranded in the current economic environment. Conventional surface
solutions result in large facilities that are heavy and costly. Subsea solutions are challenged when confronted
with long distance tie-backs. While the FLNG option initially looked promising, high CAPEX and very
high OPEX have limited its potential application, with four potential FLNG projects being cancelled in
Australasia in the last two years.
A revolutionary new solution, a proprietary ‘Hybrid Concept’ has emerged to solve this grand challenge
of developing deepwater gas fields. It is not surface, not subsea, but the ultimate combination of both,
offering fundamentally more efficient and hence lower cost processing.
The concept incorporates several principals that have been overlooked to date, namely:-
1. Fundamental differences in cost between surface liquids and surface gas processing
There is a key distinction and granularity between the costs for surface processing of liquids
and surface processing of gas. Liquids can be processed on the surface relatively efficiently. It is
the high pressure surface gas systems that have a disproportionate impact on size, weight and cost
of surface facilities.
2. Fundamental Processing differences for liquids and gas
Cold temperatures are required for gas processing and this is efficiently found near the seabed. In
contrast, liquids processing requires heat both to efficiently separate and stabilise the components.
3. Subsea Dehydration
Dehydration is the core unit operation to allow long distance pipeline transfer by preventing
hydrates and corrosion. Dehydration has been almost universally applied to onshore and fixed
platform processing facilities, thus allowing dry, single phase pipeline transfer.
Existing subsea gas developments rely on either adding chemicals or heat and insulation to avoid
hydrate formation and reduce corrosion. While successful across short to medium distances, across
longer distances and in deeper waters these methods prove far less efficient and much more costly.
The Hybrid Concept fully processes the high pressure gas on the seabed in two stages. The first stage
includes active cooling and bulk water separation and removal. In the second stage, the gas is processed
with liquids removed to achieve full subsea dehydration. All liquids are directed to a simple and compact,
2 OTC-27686-MS

low pressure surface unit. This surface unit provides support to the subsea processing, reducing complexity,
costs and project risk.
The result is significantly lower development CAPEX and lower OPEX, with a minimum of complexity,
giving an acceptable project risk. Importantly all components are proven and require a minimum of technical
development. Safety is significantly improved with no high pressure gas on the surface and a significantly
reduced permanent offshore workforce required.
The details of this concept, along with its significant advantages are discussed in this paper.

Introduction
In the current economic climate, many deepwater gas projects have been deferred or remain stranded. This
is despite the best efforts to make these projects ‘fit for purpose’, lean and with the lowest possible cost.
Business as usual is no longer an option and new solutions are required.
One new solution meets these commercial requirements by being fundamentally more efficient in the way
gas and associated liquids are processed. This is based on fully processing the gas subsea, including subsea
dehydration, while incorporating a compact, low pressure, surface facility. Importantly all components are
proven and require a minimum of technical development.
This revolutionary ‘Hybrid Concept’ is uniquely different. It is not surface, not subsea, but the ultimate
combination of both. The concept and its advantages are described herein.

Background
Standard Unit Operations for Processing Gas
The fundamental requirement for the oil and gas industry has been to process raw wellhead fluids such that
the hydrocarbons may be safely transported to markets at the lowest possible cost.
The standard unit operations to allow gas to be transported to market have included an initial bulk
separation stage, cooling, and dehydration. Other unit operations may include sweetening (CO2 & H2S
removal) and hydrocarbon dew-pointing.
Dehydration is at the core of this process, preventing hydrates and corrosion, to allow long distance
pipeline transfer. Dehydration has been almost universally applied to onshore and fixed platform processing
facilities, thus allowing dry, single phase pipeline transfer.
Where it has not been convenient to separately export the condensate, the condensate can be de-watered
and re-injected into the gas stream. This creates a multiphase pipeline; however it is still a dehydrated dry,
multiphase pipeline, and hence still permits low cost, long distance transfer of gas hydrocarbons to markets.

Subsea and Deepwater

When the oil and gas industry moved into deeper waters in the 1990s, subsea processing operations were
not available.
Instead techniques were developed to prevent hydrates and corrosion including addition of chemicals,
including glycol, Mono-Ethylene Glycol or MEG, insulation and techniques such as ‘Insulate and
blowdown’. More recently this has included heating in the form of direct electric heating (DEH) or trace
heating in specially constructed pipe-in-pipe type pipelines.
These techniques have proved very successful in shallow waters and moderate tie-back distances.
However, with the industry moving to deeper waters and greater distance, these same techniques are proving
too expensive. The lack of first stage bulk produced water separation greatly adds to the costs, resulting in
both large volumes of glycol and water, as well as salt in the glycol which requires expensive regeneration
methods.
OTC-27686-MS 3

Long distances are also a key issue for subsea compression. Power transmission and variable speed
control are viable for short distances, but are challenged over long distances; for example greater than
100km.

Costs of Surface Processing Facilities

Both conventional gas surface processing and FLNG facilities have shown to result in large ‘mega-facilities’
which are challenged on a cost basis. As well, they have high OPEX and operational and safety challenges
due to the number of people required offshore.
The cost impact is greater for surface facilities in deeper water beyond fixed platform depth. In these
cases, deepwater risers and flow assurance facilities add to a more ‘weight sensitive’ floating substructure.

Key differences for Liquids and Gas Processing

To date, it is the large cost of the surface facility which was seen as providing the driver for long distance
subsea tie-backs.
However, there is a key distinction and granularity between processing liquids and processing gas. This
distinction, though innately clear, has not been widely considered, debated, nor published.
Liquids can be processed on the surface relatively efficiently. It is the high-pressure surface gas systems
that have a disproportionate impact on size, weight and cost of surface facilities. Importantly, in countries
like Brazil and West Africa, using an FPSO to produce liquids is not questioned. Processing liquids offshore
on an FPSO in clearly seen as more cost efficient than bringing the liquids to shore.
This cost difference is partial shown in commonly used metrics, such as ‘unit cost per tonne’. For example
when an average topsides cost might be US$50,000 per tonne, the cost of a high pressure gas processing
topsides, with significant gas compression, would be more in the range of US$ 70,000 – 80,000 per tonne.
This relatively higher price for gas facilities has shown up is several large gas processing facilities in the
past decade. The lower cost of a non-gas, low pressure, liquids processing facility is not typically available,
due to the fact that these facilities are currently not common. As mentioned most oil processing systems
still have significant gas processing often with gaslift or gas re-injection systems. The result is shown in an
average cost metric, which effectively conseals the differentiation in cost between high pressure gas systems
and the low pressure liquids processing systems. Obvious the actual cost will vary depending on market
pressures and these figures are quoted for illustrative purposes only.

Subsea Gas Processing - The Subsea Dehydration Process

Two possible schemes of the hybrid concept are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Scheme 1 includes a low pressure
FPSO surface facility with condensate storage and export, while Scheme 2 includes a low pressure semi-
sub for de-watering the condensate, and then re-injection into a water-dry multiphase export gas pipeline.
The exact type and shape of the surface facility can be varied to suit the local requirements and operator
preferences.
4 OTC-27686-MS

Figure 1—Hybrid Concept with Low Pressure FPSO including Condensate Storage and Export

Figure 2—Hybrid Concept with Low Pressure Semi-Sub Including Condensate De-watering and Re-Injection

The Subsea Dehydration Processes

The high pressure gas is processed subsea in two stages. The first stage uses an active cooler with
temperature control followed by gas-liquid separation. The gas is cooled to a temperature above the hydrate
and wax formation temperatures. This stage removes the vast majority (>80%) of the condensed water,
and importantly any produced water with associated salts. A dramatically lower volume of glycol is then
injected prior to the second stage.
OTC-27686-MS 5

In the second stage, the gas is further cooled to as close to ambient as reasonably possible. This cooler
may either be an active cooler or a passive cooler. The second stage process may be located remote from
the 1st stage, at a central location, which could aid cooling. The first stage could be located at the major
drill centres.
The gas is then passed through a gas-gas heat exchanger where it is further cooled. This heat exchanger
is a pressure vessel, likely to be shell and tube type, and its design will be virtually unchanged from onshore
units. The gas then passes through a JT valve, and after a small pressure drop, flows to a second separator.
Those experienced in gas processing will recognize this innovative application of this process from onshore/
surface practices with the gas-gas heat exchanger effectively doubling the temperature drop.
Liquids from the two separators are directed to the low pressure surface processing unit. Subject to water
depth, pressures should be adequate for natural flow in most cases with no subsea pumping required.
To understand the process, it is very important to understand the thermodynamics with respect to water
removal at these temperatures and pressures. The bulk of the dehydration ‘effort’ is achieved by the first
cooler, decreasing the gas stream to close to ambient conditions, removing much of the water from the gas
stream to the liquid phase. The JT valve and gas-gas exchanger only add a final ‘trimming’ to the water
content of the gas stream.
Another part of the innovation is processing at high pressures; in the order of 140 – 180 bara. At these
higher pressures, only a small temperature drop is required to achieve effective dehydration. Note somewhat
similar onshore arrangements process gas at lower pressures, 60 – 80 bara to achieve hydrocarbon dew-
pointing. In most cases this will not be the aim, as the requirement is for dehydration only.
This subsea dehydration process is shown in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3—Subsea Dehydration Incorporating two stage cooling with gas-gas heat exchange

A second option that is available would be to replace the gas-gas heat exchanger and JT valve with a
second glycol injection point and enhanced contacting device within the 2nd separator. This scheme is shown
in Figure 4 below.
6 OTC-27686-MS

Figure 4—Subsea Dehydration Incorporating two stage cooling with enhanced glycol contacting

The enhanced contacting device would only need to be a minimal design to achieve the required degree
of contact, and would obviously be a design of an extremely robust nature appropriate to its subsea location.
Note such a contacting device is feasible as the gas has already been cooled close to ambient. Otherwise
any condensation in such a device may lead to foaming and mal-operation. Again, the primary dehydration
method is that of cooling.

Advantages
By separately processing the gas and liquids at the optimal location for each fluid, overall efficiency is
improved and costs lowered. At the same time, excessive technology complexity, which creates both cost
and project risk, is avoided.
High pressure gas is fully processed on the seabed. Cold temperatures are required for gas processing
and this is efficiently found near the seabed. Separation of a two-phase gas-liquid fluid is a proven subsea
operation.
Liquids processing requires heat both to separate and stabilise the components. This is most efficiently
undertaken on the surface. The fundamentals of liquid-liquid separation are based on droplet coalescence.
This is greatly aided by lower viscosities at high temperatures. Liquid-liquid separation or three phase
separation is not proven subsea, and currently is most efficiently performed on the surface.
The surface facility also incorporates local subsea support functions to minimise cost & risk and provide
unlimited distance capability. Subsea compression (when and if required) can be provided at much lower
cost and reduced technical risk, with power, control and variable speed drives located on the surface.
This surface facility is dramatically smaller than traditional gas processing units and operates at much
lower pressures; 20 bara to 40 bar, with the higher pressure only required for fuel gas. The low-pressure
surface facility allows for a significant reduction in utilities size in systems such as the high pressure flare
and seawater cooling.
This hybrid concept minimises the number of people permanently offshore. More construction and
maintenance activity may occur with subsea construction vessels, however these maintenance vessels are
based in a safe port location.
OTC-27686-MS 7

Further Enhancements
The use of in-line compact pipe type separators offers huge potential advantages. This is expecially so for
the first stage separation, where the design can be made robust to less then perfect separation, simply be
ensuring there is adequate glycol injected downstream.
The is some natural concern with the complexity of subsea processing. Significant effect will be required
to ensure the process are as simple as possible with the minimum of intermediate valving. Reducing
complexity and lowering the cost of subsea processing is something the entire industry is working towards.
A major part of the high costs associated with subsea processing to date is due to the fact that
subsea processing has been ‘one-offs’ incurring significant development costs. Already subsea processing
equipment suppliers are reporting significant cost reductions on the next generation of equipment. With
repeatability and standardization, there will be a natural reduction in costs as the number of installation
increase, with less development needed.
There is also significant innovations in the area of remote operations and minimal manning. This will
allow minimal and even unmanned options for the surface facilities, enhancing cost competitiveness.

Application - Market
In the area of subsea processing, while there has been significant technical development, there is often a
challenge as to why subsea processing is not applied more often. The answer of course has been the lack
of a compelling business case.
For short tie-backs, conventional technology can be used without any advanced processing, and this will
always be the best option. To date, long tie-backs present both cost and technical risk challenges. Hence
most of the subsea processing applications have been to overcome specific bottlenecks within a relatively
narrow distance range.
The hybrid concept with subsea dehydration is primarily a ‘deepwater surface platform replacement’
gas development concept. Its potential covers a lot larger distance range and hence its potential application
market size is much larger. In the right circumstances, it is also likely to be very competitive against the
more complex, long distance subsea options and against FLNG. Further engineering studies may reveal
more applications for these technologies. An idealised schematic showing possible applications is provided
in Figure 5.

Figure 5—Envelope of Application – Idealised Schematic

8 OTC-27686-MS

Summary and Conclusions

A new solution has been identified to develop deepwater gas fields, more efficiently and for lower CAPEX
and OPEX costs.
This revolutionary solution is a ‘Hybrid Concept’. It is not subsea, not surface, but a truly unique and
optimal combination. The hybrid concept is based on fully processing the gas subsea, including subsea
dehydration. The concept incorporates a compact, low pressure, surface facility for liquids processing, and
providing unlimited distance capability.
Importantly all components are proven and require a minimum of technical development.
Safety is improved with no high pressure gas on the surface and a significantly reduced permanent
offshore workforce

NOTES/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Note the process and concepts described herein are the subject of filed patents and all rights are retained by
the developing company, SubCool Technologies Pty Ltd.