ULTRA DEEP WATER PIPELINE CAPABILITIES

and CHALLENGES

Mons HaugeStatoil R&D

DEEP WATER AREAS

NORWEGIANSEA

– 17th: 900m– 18th: 1500m

CASPIAN– 600m

NIGERIA NNWA:– 1400m

BRAZIL– ~3000m

VENEZUELA– 300m– (1000m)

DEEP WATER PIPELINESCHALLENGING PROJECTS

Gazprom BlueStream 24"

Shell Mars 18"Shell Ursa 15"

Amoco Aquaba 30"

Exxon Diana 18"

Shell Auger 12"

NH Ormen L 30"

Nansen/Boomv. 18"BP/TFE/Marathon Canyon Express 12"

Shell Popeye 6"Petrobras Campos 10"

Petrobras Marlin 12"Petrobras Roncador 10"

Shell Na Kika 20"BP Mardi Gras 28"

Diana 20"

Allegheny 14"

ÅTP 42"

Europipe II 42"

TOR II 20"

Haltenpipe 16"

SNAM Transmed 26"

TOR I 16"

Zeepipe IIb 40"

Shell Malampaya 24"

Shell Malampaya 16"

Statpipe 30"

SNAM Sicily 20"

SNAM Mesina 20"

Shell Mensa 12"

Crazy Horse 28"

Caesar 24"

Okeanos 24"

Iran –India 20"

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005INSTALLATION YEAR

Dep

th x

Dia

met

er2

J-layReelS-layPlannedStatoil

DIFFICULTY: (DEPTH x DIAMETER2)

THE RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES TO INSTALL ANDOPERATE DEEP WATER PIPELINES ARE:

DEEP WATER CHALLENGES

• DESIGN FRAMEWORK• GEOHAZARD ASSESSMENT• DEEP WATER LAYING• MAPPING• FREE SPANS• SEABED INTERVENTION• HOT TAP AND REPAIR TECHNOLOGY• RISK MANAGEMENT & PROJECT

ORGANISATION

DEPTH ITSELF IS NOT MOST IMPORTANT

DNV PIPELINE RULES & GUIDELINES USED WORLD WIDE

STATOIL EXPERIENCE AND R&D HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE DESIGNRULES AND REQUIREMENTS E.G.:

– Buckling capacity in service (HOTPIPE)– Free span fatigue assessment (FATFREE)– Integrated materials requirements and design rules

STATOIL DEVELOPS RULES PRIOR TO AND DURING CHALLENGINGPROJECTS E.G.

– Troll Oil– Åsgard Transport

THROUGH CO-OPERATION WITH DNV THE EXPERIENCE ISIMPLEMENTED IN THE DESIGN RULES

Challenge 1DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Challenge 2SLOPES / GEOHAZARDS

SLOPES (20–30O) + SEDIMENTS +EARTH QUAKES => GEOHAZARDS

SOLUTIONS•routing to avoid slides•quantify load on pipeline•assess risk

Soil investigations Geological models

SLOPE STABILITY•when does movement occur?•when => gross mass flow?•how far do slides move?

Challenge 3DEEP WATER LAYINGS-laying

– SubmergedWeight

– Deformationon stinger

– Sag bendcollapse

– Routingflexibility

J-laying– Pipe diameter– Sag bend

collapse

Statoil Experience with challenging pipeline projects– Statpipe, Zeepipe IIb, Europipe II: leading wrt. depth/size– TOR I: leading wrt. difficult terrain

DEEP WATER LAYINGJ-LAYING:

E. G. SAIPEM 7000, MODIFIEDCRANE BARGE

– J-ramp with main line welding,NDT and tensioners

– prefabrication of quad-joints(48m)

S-LAYING:

E. G. STOLT OFFSHORE LB 200– S-lay stinger– Prefabrication of double joints

Challenge 4SEABED MAPPING ANDPIPELINE ROUTING

ACCURATE MAPPING IS A PREREQUISITEFOR ROUTING AND DETAILED DESIGNMAPPING HAS BEEN CRITICAL FOR MANYPROJECTS

– Troll Oil (Troll to Kollsnes)– Åsgard Transport (Åsgard to Kårstø)– Vestprosess (Kollsnes to Mongstad)

RECENT AND ON-GOING DEVELOPMENTS– Seismic equipment for geotechnical

characterisation– Scanning of seabed surface– Autonome vechiles (AUV)

HUGIN 600, HUGIN 3000

VESTPROSESS VIDEO

RETURN MAPPING RETURN

Video-clip removed

Challenge 5FREE SPANS

SPANS MUST BE LIMITEDDUE TO RISK OF

– OVERSTRESSING– FATIGUE

SPAN ASSESMENT ISINTIMATELY DEPENDENTON MAPPING

Challenge 6SEABED INTERVENTION

Objectives– Reduce free spans– Ensure pipe stability and avoid upheaval or lateral buckling– Protect pipe for fishing gear

Technologies– Trenching (plough or water jet)– Rock dumping

Challenges– Intervention is costly and has environmental impact– Design for free lateral movements (HOTPIPE design) will reduce

amount of intervention work– Geotechnical impact of intervention work (e.g. shear strength after

trenching)

Challenge 7DIVERLESS HOT TAP AND REPAIR

PIPELINE RAPAIR SYSTEM (PRS)– Diver assisted system for North Sea

modifications and repair operated byStatoil

– Hot tap on prepared T established– Diverless operations established for

diameter up to 20”New challenges

– Maximum depth for diver assistedoperations will be reduced from 360–250 min 2005 (HSE policy)

– Deeper water operations– Hot tap on unprepared pipe– Diverless hot tap and repair for diameter

above 20”

PIPELINE REPAIR SYSTEM (PRS)INCLUDES :

COMPLETE REMOTE REPAIRSYSTEM FOR DEEP WATER

– PLUGS, CLAMPS, COUPLINGS– LIMITED TO 600m– IN REGULAR USE !

STATOIL IS OPERATOR OF THE INTERVENTION & REPAIRSYSTEMS AT THE NORWEGIAN CONTINENTAL SHELF

12” COUPLING (VIGDIS)

SUCCESSFULLY INSTALLED 07.04.2002 00:15

SUCCESSFULL SYSTEM PRESSURE TEST08.04.2002 10:00

42” REMOTE PLUG

12” REPAIR CLAMP

Challenge 8RISK MANAGEMENT AND PROJECT ORGANISATION

HOW TO BE COMPETITIVE ?IN-HOUSE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE ON CORE TECHNOLOGIES:– Pipeline design and installation– Materials and fabrication– Seabed mapping and pipeline routing– Geotechics and seabed interventionRISK MANAGEMENT OF LARGE, COMPLEX PROJECTS– Logistics– Hazards– Time scheduleCONTRACTING STRATEGY– Contract packages (not EPCI)– Interface responsibility

TOTAL LENGTH OF NORTH SEA GAS TRANSPORT PIPELINES: 6000 kmTYPICAL LENGHT OF PREVIOUS PIPELINE PROJECTS: 700 kmNEW PIPELINE FROM ORMEN LANGE TO ENGLAND: 1200 km

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Ener

gy lo

ss [%

]

PipeLNGElectricity MethanolGTL

The way forward:How to make pipelines competitive for longdistance transport ?

Is it possible to makepipelines attractive for largevolumes when the distanceexceeds 3000 km ?Is it possible to install largediameter pipelines at 3000-4000 m water depth ?

– Long distance transportwill in many cases requirecrossing of deep waterareas

– New resources are foundin deep water areas

GSm3/year

10.0

1.0

5.0

2.0

LNG

Gas to Liquids

PIPELINE

UNECONOMIC

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Electricity(HVDC)

Snøhvit

Åsgardtransport LNG

Gas to Liquids

PIPELINE

UNECONOMIC

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Distance from field to market - km

Electricity(HVDC)

SnøhvitFuture

pipelines

0.5

0.2

20.0Åsgardtransport

Case study:A 2800 km pipeline from Venezuela to Florida

4 different pipeline routes consideredMaximum water depth about 4000 mDesign pressure increased to 400 bargRequired inner diameter:

– 30 MSm3/d require approx. 28” ID (10 GSm3/year)– 60 MSm3/d require approx. 36” ID (20 GSm3/year)

Limitations for J-vessels with an available tension forceof 1050 tonnes: (current vessels have 525 tonnes, but can easily beupgraded to 1050)

40040140030240024

360020

Water depth(m)

Diameter OD(inches)

Alternativepipeline routes

Florida

Venezuela

Haiti

Cuba

Puerto Rico

DominicanRep.

New solutions 1:Pipe-in-pipe with structural filler material

A ”sandwich” composite structure made of two concentric pipes with afiller material in between will increase the external pressure capacitysignificantly, and less steel is needed for the same capacity.As the total volume of the pipe increases, the submerged weight will alsodecrease (as long as the filler material has density below 1000 kg/m3)The capacity is directly depending on material strength (X70 is assumed incase study)

This concept leads to reduced tensionon the installation barge

M M

P

x

y

P

x

y

fys

fys

fyf ⇒ Mp

Pipe-in pipe filler materials

Polymers and polymer foam (polypropylene)– Used for thermal insulation– Low weight (900 kg/m3 for solid PP)– Low stiffness (E = 1,5 GPa for solid PP )

Concrete– Used for weight coating of pipelines– High weight (2500 kg/m3)– High stiffness ( E > 20 GPa )– Very cheap 75 $/m3

Lightweight concrete– Low weight (800 - 1000 kg/m3)– Moderate stiffness ( E = 4 – 7 GPa)– 225 $/m3

Pipe-in pipe cost estimate

Material cost for a sandwich pipe-in-pipe will be approximately twice that ofa pipeline with wall thickness similar to each one of the two shells.The lay rate will be around 2/3 of a normal lay rate mainly due to more workat each field joint.

The pipe-in-pipe solution will only be used at the portion of the pipelinewhere the water depth require this solution (e.g. deeper than 1000 m)

The inner diameter of this solution can be kept constant

Engn. + + Constr.

Cost ofOffshorePipelines

PIP

Steel pipe $ 1250 /m

$ 1875 /mMaterial

Material

Engn. + + Constr.

New solutions 2:Subsea pipe splitting

Two parallel pipes with reduced diameter is already used in the Black SeaBlue Stream project with onshore splitting.Subsea splitting require either

– That all pigging can be avoided or– Manifold that allow for RFO and regular pigging

Pigable manifolds are available, but developmentwork is needed to qualify for the actual dimensions

New solutions 3 :Reduced diameter on limited part of pipeline

If the extremely deep section has limited length, hydraulic loss in thissection can be accepted.Multi-diameter pigging technology is capable to take a 30% diameterreduction. (28” to 42” pig is developed for Åsgard Transport)To achieve the required benefit of this solution a 50% diameter reduction isneeded. Preliminar investigations show that this is possible, butdevelopment work is needed.

New solutions 4

Deep water S-layingAllowance for increased strain over stinger will provide a steeper departureangle and reduced tension requirement to S-lay vesselLower shear stiffness in P-I-P annulus reduces the strain in outer shellLower submerged weight leads to lower tension requirement

Qualification of deep water S-laying will increase the availability of lay vessels and reduce laying costs

Technological challenges:Contact forces on stingerFracture capacity due to bending on stinger and sag bendSeabed stability during installation

– Reduce horisontal laying radius

ConclusionsFor ultra deep water pipeline transport, the combination of pipediameter and water depth indicates the project challengeBUT:The capability to install and operate such pipelines will also requirecontrol of :

• DESIGN FRAMEWORK• GEOHAZARD ASSESSMENT• DEEP WATER LAYING• MAPPING• FREE SPANS• SEABED INTERVENTION• HOT TAP AND REPAIR TECHNOLOGY• RISK MANAGEMENT & PROJECT ORGANISATION

• New technology is under development to be capable of ultra deepwater installation and diverless hot-tap and repair of existingpipeline systems