首页> 外文期刊>SPE production and operations >Compressed Natural Gas (CNG): An Alternative to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
【24h】

Compressed Natural Gas (CNG): An Alternative to Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

机译:压缩天然气(CNG):液化天然气(LNG)的替代品

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Natural gas is rapidly becoming an even more important resource of energy, with its share in the world consumption expected to increase dramatically over the next two decades. Currently, natural gas is transported to the markets by pipelines as LNG. Transporting the natural gas by pipelines is convenient and economically attractive onshore. For the offshore transport of natural gas, pipelines become challenging as the water depth and transporting distance increase. LNG, an effective means of transporting gas for long distances across the seas, constitutes 25% of the world gas movement. But LNG projects require large investments, along with substantial natural-gas reserves, and are economically viable for distances of 2,500 miles and beyond. CNG provides an effective way for shorter-distance transport. The technology is aimed at monetizing offshore reserves that cannot be produced because of the unavailability of a pipeline or because the LNG option is very costly. Technically, CNG is easy to deploy, with lower requirements for facilities and infrastructure. "Coselle" and "Votrans" are two would-be commercial, high-pressure gas-storage and -transport technologies for CNG. Technical and economic analyses of these two technologies were done in this study, and a comparison is provided. The results show that for distances up to 2,500 miles, natural gas can be transported as CNG at prices ranging from U.S. $0.93 to $2.23 per MMBtu compared to LNG, which can cost anywhere from $1.5 to $2.5 per MMBTU depending on the actual distance. At distances beyond 2,500 miles, the cost of delivering gas as CNG becomes higher than the cost for LNG because of the disparity in the volumes of gas transported with the two technologies.
机译:天然气正迅速成为一种更为重要的能源,在未来的二十年中,天然气在世界消费中所占的份额预计将急剧增加。当前,天然气通过管道以液化天然气的形式运输到市场。通过管道运输天然气在陆上是方便的并且在经济上具有吸引力。对于天然气的海上运输,随着水深和运输距离的增加,管道变得具有挑战性。液化天然气是远距离运输天然气的有效手段,占世界天然气运输量的25%。但是液化天然气项目需要大量投资以及大量天然气储备,并且在2500英里及以上的距离上具有经济可行性。 CNG为短距离运输提供了一种有效的方法。该技术旨在将由于管道不可用或LNG选件成本高昂而无法生产的海上储备货币化。从技术上讲,CNG易于部署,对设施和基础设施的要求较低。 “ Coselle”和“ Votrans”是CNG的两种可能的商业化,高压储气和运输技术。在这项研究中对这两种技术进行了技术和经济分析,并进行了比较。结果表明,对于长达2500英里的距离,天然气可以以CNG的价格运输,每MMBtu的价格在0.93美元至2.23美元之间,而LNG的价格则取决于实际距离,每MMBTU的价格在1.5美元至2.5美元之间。在超过2500英里的距离处,由于采用这两种技术所运输的天然气量存在差异,因此CNG的天然气运输成本高于LNG的天然气运输成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号