300 likes | 464 Views
Public Symposium on LNG Bowdoin College Brunswick, Maine. Office of Energy Projects - Functions. OEP has the engineering and environmental expertise to: certificate new gas pipeline projects Authorize LNG terminals license and monitor hydroelectric projects, and
E N D
Office of Energy Projects - Functions • OEP has the engineering and environmental expertise to: • certificate new gas pipeline projects • Authorize LNG terminals • license and monitor hydroelectric projects, and • analyze energy infrastructure needs and policies. • OEP focuses on: • project siting and development, • balancing environmental and other concerns, • ensuring compliance, • safeguarding the public, and • providing infrastructure capacity information.
NPC Study • Align the conflicting policies • Policies that encourage consumption • Policies that inhibit gas supply
Gas Facts • Natural gas is the economic/ environmental fuel of choice. • 96% of natural gas reserves are outside North America. • 25% of World natural gas consumption occurs in the US.
Historic and ProjectedUS Gas Productionand Consumption Source: EIA AEO 2004
Some Production AreasAre Not Accessible * Approximately 29 TCF Of The Rockies Gas Resources Are Closed To Development and 108 Tcf Are Available With Restrictions. Source: NPC
What is the answer? Imports • Imports must make up the difference between domestic production and consumption • Delivered in two ways: • Gaseous form by pipeline • Liquid form by tanker (LNG)
NORTH AMERICA RESERVES 4% WORLD PROVED RESERVES 2002: 6,270 TCF How Much Natural GasIs Out There? Global LNG Supply Facilities Global LNG Supply Existing Under Construction Proposed • LNG supply growing • Multiple LNG supply proposals announced • Long term LNG supply outlook robust Source: Cedigaz, NPC 8 Office of Energy Projects
LNG Importsby Country Source: EIA
FERC Economic Oversight – Access to LNG Terminal Liquid to Vapor Flow LNG Buyers A LNG Suppliers B B Open Access At Delivery of Vapor into Interstate Pipeline System A Open Access At Delivery of Liquid to Terminal 10 Office of Energy Projects
Benefits of theNew LNG Policy • Stimulates development of new LNG terminals • Accommodates various business models • Increases gas supplies to the U.S. • Maintains FERC’s responsibility for environmental and safety reviews.
FERC Existing Terminals with Approved Expansions A. Everett, MA : 1.035 Bcfd (Tractebel – DOMAC) B. Cove Point, MD : 1.0 Bcfd (Dominion – Cove Point LNG) C. Elba Island, GA : 1.2 Bcfd (El Paso – Southern LNG) D. Lake Charles, LA : 1.2 Bcfd (Southern Union – Trunkline LNG) Approved Terminals 1. Hackberry, LA : 1.5 Bcfd, (Sempra Energy) 2. Port Pelican: 1.6 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 3. Bahamas : 0.84 Bcfd, (AES Ocean Express)* 4. Gulf of Mexico: 0.5 Bcfd, (El Paso Energy Bridge GOM, LLC) 5. Bahamas : 0.83 Bcfd, (Calypso Tractebel)* 6. Freeport, TX : 1.5 Bcfd, (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev.) Proposed Terminals and Expansions – FERC 7. Fall River, MA : 0.8 Bcfd, (Weaver's Cove Energy/Hess LNG) 8. Long Beach, CA : 0.7 Bcfd, (Mitsubishi/ConocoPhillips – Sound Energy Solutions) 9. Corpus Christi, TX : 2.6 Bcfd, (Cheniere LNG Partners) 10. Sabine, LA : 2.6 Bcfd (Cheniere LNG) 11. Corpus Christi, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Vista Del Sol - ExxonMobil) 12. Sabine, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Golden Pass - ExxonMobil) 13. Logan Township, NJ : 1.2 Bcfd (Crown Landing LNG – BP) 14. Lake Charles, LA: 0.6 Bcfd (Southern Union – Trunkline LNG) 15. Bahamas : 0.5 Bcfd, (Seafarer - El Paso/FPL ) 16. Corpus Christi, TX: 1.0 Bcfd (Occidental Energy Ventures) 17.Providence, RI : 0.5 Bcfd (Keyspan & BG LNG) 18. Port Arthur, TX: 1.5 Bcfd (Sempra) Proposed Terminals – Coast Guard 19. California Offshore: 1.5 Bcfd (Cabrillo Port – BHP Billiton) 20. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Gulf Landing – Shell) 21. So. California Offshore : 0.5 Bcfd, (Crystal Energy) 22. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Main Pass McMoRan Exp.) 23. Gulf of Mexico: n/a (Compass Port - ConocoPhillips) 24. Gulf of Mexico : 2.8 Bcfd (Pearl Crossing - ExxonMobil) Planned Terminals and Expansions 25. Brownsville, TX : n/a, (Cheniere LNG Partners) 26. Mobile Bay, AL: 1.0 Bcfd, (ExxonMobil) 27. Somerset, MA : 0.65 Bcfd (Somerset LNG) 28. Belmar, NJ Offshore : n/a (El Paso Global) 29. Altamira, Tamulipas : 1.12 Bcfd, (Shell) 30. Baja California, MX : 1.0 Bcfd, (Sempra & Shell) 31. Baja California - Offshore : 1.4 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 32. California - Offshore : 0.75 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 33. St. John, NB : 0.5 Bcfd, (Canaport – Irving Oil) 34. Point Tupper, NS 1.0 Bcf/d (Bear Head LNG - Access Northeast Energy) 35. Pleasant Point, ME : 0.5 Bcf/d (Quoddy Bay, LLC) 36. Quebec City, QC : 0.5 Bcfd (Project Rabaska - Enbridge/Gaz Met/Gaz de France) 37. Lázaro Cárdenas, MX : 0.5 Bcfd (Tractebel/Repsol) 38. Mobile Bay, AL: 1.0 Bcfd (Cheniere LNG Partners) 39. St. Helens, OR: 0.7 Bcfd (Port Westward LNG LLC) 40. Cove Point, MD : 0.8 Bcfd (Dominion) 41. Puerto Libertad, MX: 1.3 Bcfd (Sonora Pacific LNG) 42. Offshore Boston, MA: 0.8 Bcfd (Northeast Gateway – Excelerate Energy) 43. Kitimat, BC: 0.34 Bcfd (Galveston LNG) 44. Prince Rupert, BC: 0.30 Bcfd (WestPac Terminals) *US pipeline approved; LNG terminal pending in Bahamas Existing and Proposed North American LNG Terminals 44 43 36 34 33 35 39 A 42 17 27 7 28 13 B 40 19 8 21 C 32 30 26 15 18 31 D 1 38 10 3 5 41 14 6 12 23 9 24 16 22 11 4 25 2 20 US Jurisdiction FERC US Coast Guard 29 37 July 2004 Office of Energy Projects
LNG TerminalSiting Issues • Safety • Take Away Capacity • Local acceptance • Federal and State approvals
Safety • Proximity to residential and commercial areas raises public safety concerns • Exclusion zones • DOT/OPS enforces security. • FERC performs pre- and post-certificate reviews of LNG terminals • Biennial reviews continue for life of terminal. • Coast Guard enforces offshore ship safety
Takeaway Capacity • Is there an existing pipeline with takeaway capacity? • Does the project require new pipeline construction? • NEPA requires an analysis of the cumulative effects. • Can not have an LNG terminal without takeaway capacity
Local Acceptance • Has the project sponsor interacted with the local population? • Entertain concerns • Make adjustments or accommodations to the project.
Federal and StateApprovals • Must get approvals: • FERC – NGA Approval • DOT/OPS – Exclusion Zones • Coast Guard – Vessel Operating Plan • Corps of Engineers – Dredging, Wetland Filling, Alternative Sites • NMFS, FWS – Endangered Species Act • Coastal Zone Consistency Determination • State Agency Requirements
Primary federal authorization processes for LNG terminals • FERC Review Process • Pre-Filing Process • Coast Guard Process
FERC Review Process Public Notice Data Gathering/Analysis DEIS Public Meeting Final EIS Commission Order
Traditional vs. Pre-Filing Process Develop Study Corridor File At FERC Announce Open Season Prepare Resource Reports Traditional - Applicant Conduct Scoping Issue Draft EIS Issue Final EIS Issue Order Traditional - FERC Announce Open Season Develop Study Corridor File At FERC Prepare Resource Reports Pre-Filing - Applicant Conduct Scoping Review Draft Resource Reports & Prepare DEIS Issue Draft EIS Issue Final EIS Issue Order Pre-Filing - FERC 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (months)
Benefits of Pre-Filing • More interactive NEPA process, no shortcuts • Earlier, more direct involvement by FERC, other agencies, landowners • Goal of “no surprises” • Time savings realized only if we are working together with stakeholders • FERC staff is an advocate of the Process, not the Project!
The FERC Process: We Issue Notice of the Application Project Sponsor Sends Landowner Notification Package SCOPING = We Issue Notice of Intent to Prepare the NEPA Document Public Meeting(s) Public Input: File an Intervention Contact the project sponsor w/questions, concerns; contact FERC Send letters expressing concerns about environmental impact Attend scoping meetings Opportunities forPublic Involvement
The FERC Process: Issue Notice of Availability of the DEIS Public Meetings on DEIS Issue a Commission Order Public Input: File comments on the adequacy of DEIS Attend public meetings to give comments on DEIS Interveners can file a request for Rehearing of a Commission Order Opportunities for PublicInvolvement
Maritime Security Actof 2002 (November 2002) • Amendment of the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 • Transferred jurisdiction of offshore natural gas facilities from FERC to Maritime Admin-istration and Coast Guard • Lowers Regulatory Hurdles • No requirement for open access to terminal • Decision required within 365 days
LNG – Where the Action Is • What is FERC Doing? • New LNG Branch at FERC to focus on and enhance LNG review, inspection programs • Provide for Seamless Review of LNG Facilities • Interagency Agreement on Safety and Security • Development of FERC Model for LNG Tanker Release Consequences • Participating in Conferences/Seminars/Tours
The FERC Staff Studyand Its Positive Impacts • A number of studies gave rise to controversy • FERC contracted with ABSG to identify models • Gives FERC the ability to do more site specific modeling and reviews in EISs • Provides a solid theoretical foundation from which to build on as new information becomes available • Assumptions in the study are conservative
LNG Supply Stream -- From Production to Distribution Natural Gas Pipelines Dock Dock Natural Gas Production Storage and Vaporization Facility Liquefaction and Storage Facility
Outlook/Issues Associatedwith LNG Development • States attempting to assert economic jurisdiction in the post-Hackberry environment • Public safety information • Interchangeability • Importance of timing