SHELLS FLOATING LNG PLANT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

USINE GNL FLOTTANTE SHELL POUR LE 21E SICLE

A. Bliault, D. Reijnen
Shell International Exploration and Production B.V., The Netherlands
D. Runbalk , R. Klein Nagelvoort
Shell International Oil Products B.V., The Netherlands

ABSTRACT

Shell has developed a Floating LNG (FLNG) system consisting of a number of sub-sea wells
connected to a weather-vaning barge. The barge serves to support the gas treatment facilities and
liquefaction plant, and to provide storage volume for the produced LNG and valuable condensates. On a
regular basis, the LNG is off-loaded to LNG carriers, which are dedicated to the FLNG system. The FLNG
concept has a capacity up to 4+ million tonnes per year, depending on the application, which may be for
either remote green field gas developments or for oil/associated gas field developments. The system is
designed to remain on-site for at least 20 years.
The liquefaction of the gas is based on a single split-train approach using Shells newly
developed Mixed Refrigerant processes. These processes feature fewer equipment items, more flexible
specifications on the refrigerant composition, and a reduced inventory of total on-board hydrocarbons.
The use of competitive tendering for the plant items and barge manufacture will serve to reduce overall
costs. These Mixed Refrigerant processes are at least as efficient but safer for this application than the
traditional propane pre-cooled Mixed Refrigerant process, and will offer the optimum capital expenditure
for this type and scale of project, combined with the flexibility to handle different gas feeds.
The Shell FLNG concept is based on a combination of extensive in-house expertise in Floating
Production, Storage and Off-loading systems (FPSOs) and LNG manufacturing and transport. At the
same time, the project incorporates the best that contractors are currently able to offer. As part of the
development, most of the relevant contractors, certifying authorities, etc. have been directly or indirectly
consulted. All possible options for the key building blocks of a FLNG system have been assessed on their
merits (e.g. process selection, steel against concrete hull, alongside against tandem off-loading, stick-built
against modular topsides, etc.). Furthermore, many options for the topsides layout have been considered.
Three-dimensional CAD models of the topsides facilities, including piping and cable trays, assisted in the
assessment of the reliability, availability and maintainability of the process equipment and the utilities.
Concept risk assessments assisted in the selection of the hull material, the type of process, the
storage system and the lay-out arrangement for the safest concept. Extensive hazard identification and
consequence modelling studies have been carried out on the safest concept followed by a Quantitative
Risk Assessment, based on extensive Shell research. This experimental research has resulted in novel
more realistic dispersion and explosion models. The integrated approach to HSE throughout the whole of
the project results in safety levels, which are similar to the best North Sea platforms and FPSO's.

RESUME

Shell a mis au point un systme GNL flottant (GNLF) compos de plusieurs puits sous-marins relis
une barge dvitage. Cette barge sert de support aux installations de traitement et lunit de liqufaction
du gaz, et offre un volume de stockage pour le GNL produit et les condensats utilisables. Rgulirement,
le GNL est dcharg dans des mthaniers entirement ddis au systme GNLF. Le concept de GNLF
prsente une capacit pouvant atteindre 4+ millions de tonnes par an en fonction de son application, que
ce soit le dveloppement de gisements loigns ou de champs associs des gisements ptroliers. Le
systme est conu pour rester sur site au moins 20 ans.
La liqufaction du gaz est base sur une approche de train de sparation unique utilisant les procds de
mlanges de rfrigrants rcemment mis au point par Shell. Lapplication de ces procds se traduit par
un quipement moins important, une plus grande flexibilit du cahier des charges quant la composition
du rfrigrant, ainsi quun stockage rduit du volume total dhydrocarbures bord. Le recours aux offres
concurrentielles concernant les composants de lunit et la fabrication de la barge doit permettre de
rduire les cots gnraux. Aussi performants que les traditionnels mlanges rfrigrants prrefroidis au
propane, les nouveaux mlanges rfrigrants sont plus srs pour cette application et correspondent aux
dpenses dinvestissements optimales pour un projet de ce type et cette chelle combin la flexibilit
de gestion de lalimentation en gaz.
Le concept GNLF de Shell est bas sur la combinaison de comptences au niveau des systmes de
production, de stockage et de dchargement flottants (FPSO) et de la fabrication et du transport du GNL.
Dans le processus de dveloppement, la plupart des entrepreneurs, des autorits de certification, etc. ont
t consults directement ou indirectement. Toutes les options envisageables pour les lments cls de
la construction du systme GNLF ont t values en fonction de leurs mrites (par exemple, au niveau
du choix du procd, coque en acier ou bton, dchargement bord bord ou en tandem, hauts rigides ou
modulaires, etc.). En outre, de nombreuses options concernant la disposition des installations en surface
ont t considres. Des modles CAO 3D des installations en surface, y compris pour les tuyaux et les
cbles, ont permis dvaluer la fiabilit, la disponibilit et laspect entretien de lquipement et des
installations du procd.
Lestimation des risques a permis de slectionner le matriau de la coque, le type de procd, le
systme de stockage et la disposition du dispositif afin dobtenir le concept le plus fiable . Une
identification approfondie des risques et la modlisation des consquences ont t menes sur le
concept le plus fiable, suivies dune estimation quantitative des risques base sur la recherche de Shell.
Cette recherche exprimentale sest traduite par de nouveaux modles plus ralistes dexplosion et de
dispersion. Cette approche a permis datteindre des niveaux de scurit comparables aux meilleures
plates-formes de la mer du Nord.

SHELLS FLOATING LNG PLANT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

1. INTRODUCTION
New hydrocarbon reserves tend to be found in ever more remote locations and/or deeper water.
Even in some shallow waters and close to shore, environmental considerations complicate field
developments. As a result the cost of the infrastructure to connect these reserves to onshore facilities is
increasing over time. Combining the well control, process facilities, storage terminal, and offloading jetty
on a single entity at the field location can compensate this burden.
Shell pioneered this principle for oil products in the early 1970's
with the first Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO)
"Castellon" in the Mediterranean, see Figure 1.
The advantages of this concept were quickly recognised by the
industry and to date more than 60 floating production units have been
installed in ever more harsh environments, including the North Sea and
North Atlantic [1]. The main savings lie in the elimination of pipeline,
harbor facilities, land lease and preparation cost, and duplication of
equipment and personnel. Because all hydrocarbon related activities are
concentrated at a single location, a single set of utilities and support
facilities are required. The hull of the FPSO doubles as support structure
for well control and process equipment, as well as storage vessel and
jetty.
Figure 1 World First FPSO:
The same logic that has been applied so successfully in oil
Shell Castellon
developments, also holds for gas developments involving Liquefied
Natural Gas (LNG). Since gas developments require larger diameter high pressure pipelines, the
incentive to eliminate the pipeline to shore is even higher.
Early proposals were made in the 1970's to exploit the advantages of an offshore LNG plant.
However, no projects were realised due to technology and market limitations at that time. The present
Floating LNG development within Shell was triggered by the development of the Shell proprietary Mixed
Refrigerant process. Finally a liquefaction process was available which combined a low hydrocarbon
inventory and equipment count with an excellent efficiency. In combination with the proven application of
subsea wells, ship based large aero-derivative gas turbines, process equipment on oil/LPG FPSO's, and
extensive experience with open water jetty loading of LNG, all the necessary building blocks for a floating
LNG plant are now available.
In 1997 a multi disciplinary team was formed which embodied the unique mix of experiences
+
available within Shell: 20 years experience in the design, construction and safe operation of FPSO's,
LNG plants (Figure 2), LNG carriers, loading of LNG in open waters (Figure 3) and LNG related safety
issues.

Figure 2 Brunei LNG, since 1972

Figure 3 Brunei LNG, 3000+ Cargo's

The initial focus of the Floating LNG development was on large non associated gas fields with
production rates of 2- 4 million tonnes of LNG per year. More recently, the lessons learned during the
development of a base-load plant have been used to develop an integrated process plant, which deals
with oil and associated gas and can be deployed to produce associated gas constrained remote oil fields.

2. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
Prior to starting the in-house concept development, an extensive program was carried out to
compile all previous developments related to offshore LNG facilities in and outside Shell. Possible high
level options for the different building blocks that combined form the floating LNG concept, were assessed
and ranked. Prime considerations were safety, cost, plot space and operability.
2.1. Barge
A rectangular shape barge has been selected rather than a square concept. For the same
amount of deck and storage capacity, a rectangular shape allows larger separation distances between
the safe areas (accommodation) and hazardous areas (fractionation and high-pressure risers). Mooring
the barge using a turret at the bow and installing stern thrusters also provides the advantage that the
barge can be positioned to further minimise motions during a storm by aligning with the wave direction.
Typical gas reservoirs only require a small number of wells (4-10) to feed a liquefaction train.
Also, unlike many oil developments, a gas development does not have the complications involved with
water injection, gas re-injection or gas lift. As a result the subsea layout can be simple and the number of
risers and swivels is small. Due to the moderate environmental conditions at the offshore field locations
considered to date, a more costly internal turret is not required to accommodate the number of
swivels/risers or for strength purposes. The more cost effective and easier to integrate external bow turret
option is selected.
An investigation into possible construction locations revealed that since the barge has a ship shape it can
be constructed in one piece in existing dry docks avoiding the complications associated with the mating of
multiple floating structures.
Prismatic LNG tanks proved to lead to concepts with higher inherent safety levels than spherical
tanks for a similar size barge. The same process equipment can simply be spread over a larger area,
reducing the risk of escalation of events.
2.2. Liquefaction
Critical parameters for a base-load liquefaction process on an offshore entity are safety,
liquefaction efficiency, operability and layout requirements. A liquefaction process based on nitrogen
cycles scores high from a safety point of view, but suffers from a limited track record for high capacity
liquefaction trains, and has a low liquefaction efficiency that affects the overall economic performance of
the plant. Conventional propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant cycles are not suitable for offshore
application due to their large hydrocarbon inventories. These inventories affect safety levels on a real
estate confined barge. The Shell Mixed Refrigerant processes, developed in the mid nineties offer a
better alternative for this application. These processes incorporate all the lessons learnt from 30 years of
LNG plant operation and design. Two different versions are available: a Single and Dual Mixed
Refrigerant process. The Single Mixed Refrigerant process is optimised for smaller throughputs (0.5-2
million tonnes per year) and minimum equipment count, which reduces plot layout space. Adding a
second refrigeration loop leads to the Shell Dual Mixed Refrigerant process, which has an improved
liquefaction efficiency over the Single Mixed Refrigerant process and is suited for capacities to 4 million
tonnes per year and above. The application of Mixed Refrigerants reduces the hydrocarbon inventory and
simplifies the overall design and operability of the plant.

2.3. Drivers
The safety of the overall concept is further enhanced by application of electric motor driven
refrigeration compressors. Shell has extensive experience with large electrical motors and the stability of
electrical systems. Removing the gas turbines from the process area and grouping them in the utility area
increases the distance between the closest process area and the accommodation. Although some
additional cost is involved with electric drives, this type of drive brings other advantages apart from safety.
The capacity of a liquefaction train is not determined by the available size gas turbine (and helper motor)
but is an independent design variable that can as such be optimised. In conventional plants, the timing
and length of a scheduled shutdown, is set by the maintenance requirements of the gas turbine drivers.
Removing the drivers from the process and using central power generation instead, eliminates these
requirements. Because of the sparing and application of offshore proven aero-derivative gas turbines, the
gas turbines can be safely and easily maintained one by one while the plant is running at full capacity. As
a result the plant has more on-stream days and thus a higher availability, which pays for the additional
costs of the electric link. Also the daily capacity of the plant is uncoupled from variations in ambient
temperature.
2.4. Cooling Water
Offshore a stable supply of clean cooling water can be obtained at low cost using standard
offshore practices. The cooling water is taken at depth where the water is significantly colder and free of
small marine life. The lower temperature of the cooling medium increases the liquefaction efficiency and
reduces the number of heat exchangers required.

3. SAFETY BY DESIGN
Once the building block options were chosen, a generic design was made to assess the overall
performance of the resulting concept in more detail. Again inherent safety was the key consideration.
Experts involved with Shell's leading research in the propagation of explosions and LNG spills were
directly engaged, to ensure the design conformed to our latest experience. By carefully arranging the
different process blocks based on their risk level, and avoiding congested areas, safety was built in for
little additional cost.
The flare was placed on the bow close to the high pressure gas risers. Maximum separation
between the flammable hydrocarbons and personnel is achieved by placing the accommodation on the
stern. Since power generation and utilities separate the accommodation from the process area, the
separation between the process facilities and the accommodation is increased.
A concrete deck was found to provide adequate protection for the storage while at the same time
resilient to cryogenic spills. Initial fears that a rapid phase transformation of LNG spilled on the sea during
offloading activities would cause damage to a ship hull were demonstrated to be unfounded.
All the different issues were collated during the development of a 3 dimensional CAD model of the facility.
The model was also used to test layout assumptions and to provide experienced operators the possibility
to review the implications of standard operational and maintenance activities. Safety experts assessed
the risks associated with these operations. All this information was used during the subsequent
Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA). This detailed assessment concluded that although the equipment
count is significantly higher than on a traditional offshore facility: the safety levels of a floating LNG facility
are on par with those of new developments in the North Sea. On the other hand, it also emphasised the
importance of the special design features of the Shell Concept on which the safety experts had insisted
from the very start.

4. PROCESS DESIGN
4.1. Introduction
Two process designs are being applied to the floating LNG facility. For LNG production rates up
to 2 million tonnes per year the Shell Single Mixed Refrigerant process is used, while for larger
throughputs the Shell proprietary Dual Mixed Refrigerant is employed. Depending on feed composition
this process can deliver a capacity from 4 million tonnes per year upwards.
In case of moderate CO2 (5 mol%) and nitrogen levels (1 mol%) this equates to a feed gas flow of
just over 8.5 million std m3 per day (300 million scf/d) for the smaller process and in excess of 17 million
std m3 per day (600 million scf/d) for the larger one.

Figure 4 Shell Floating LNG Concept

4.2. Feed Gas Receiving Facilities and Stabilisation
Gas/condensate is produced from typically 4-10 subsea wells. They can be located in water as
deep as 1000 - 1500 meters. Flexible risers depending on the water depth possibly in combination with a
buoyant tower transport the gas to the surface where it enters the FPSO via the turret. Gas, condensate
and water are separated using conventional methods. Water is treated and routed to sea, while the
condensate is stabilised in a column and stored in integral hull tanks. Condensate off-loading takes place
to a standard trade tanker, moored in tandem behind the barge using a floating hose. If necessary, e.g. at
end of field life, the gas is compressed in the optional feed gas compressor module.

4.3. Gas Treatment

Acid gases are subsequently removed from the feed gas. The design is highly flexible and can
accommodate CO2 levels up to some 16 mol%. Upon exiting the acid gas removal unit, the bulk of the
water in the CO 2 free gas is removed by moderate cooling, followed by adsorption using molecular sieve
units. The dehydration stage is followed by a mercury guard bed using a fixed absorbent bed, as is the
case for land based plants.
4.4. Liquefaction: Shell Single Mixed Refrigerant Process
In the case of the Shell Single Mixed Refrigerant process (Figure 5) two electrically driven parallel
mixed refrigerant compressors form the heart of the liquefaction train. Mixed refrigerant is compressed,
cooled and condensed. Part of the flow is used to pre-cool the natural gas and mixed refrigerant, with the
remaining refrigerant used to cool the LNG to cryogenic temperatures. Depending on the nitrogen content
the LNG is either flashed in a separator or processed in a nitrogen rejection stage. End-flash vapour and
boil off gas from the LNG storage tanks are compressed to the fuel gas system for use by the gas
turbines.
LNG will be off-loaded to a LNG carrier moored to the side of the barge using upgraded LNG loading
arms. All rotating equipment except the main compressors is spared to ensure high reliability. Operating
experience in Shell LNG plants has shown that problems related to the compressors are rare. In nearly all
cases compressor down time is caused by the mechanical drivers and their auxiliaries, and usually due to
instrumentation related events. Employing electric motors for all driven equipment has eliminated the gas
turbines as direct drivers. The electrical power is supplied by a number of parallel gas turbine driven
generators arranged such that a trip of one of the aero-derivative gas turbines does not impact on the
operation of the process plant, nor will a trip of any large electrical load give rise to a loss of the electrical
system. In the event that something does happen to one of the compressors, the plant is designed such
that it will continue production with the remaining compressor string at a reduced rate.

Utilities
Power Generation
From
Turret

Separation

MR
Loop A
Acid Gas
Removal

DeHydration

Liquefaction

LNG
Storage

MR
Loop B

Stabilization

Fractionation

Figure 5 Shell Single Mixed Refrigerant Process for FLNG

Condensate
Storage

4.5. Liquefaction: Shell Dual Mixed Refrigerant Process

The Dual Mixed Refrigerant plant exhibits the same features on a larger scale. The basic set up is
illustrated in Figure 6. It consists of two process strings that share certain components leading to a cost
effective design, which satisfies the safety requirements and provides a high overall plant availability.
Splitting process functions such as refrigerant compression and acid gas removal limits the size of
equipment, such as compressors and columns, to a level that can be handled on a barge. Besides cost
and size, the other major advantage is on-stream time. As in the case of the smaller plant, loss of a
compressor circuit will not result in a forced shutdown of the whole liquefaction unit, since the remaining
parallel compressor system will remain on-line albeit with a lower LNG production. In addition the main
cryogenic equipment will not be subjected to unnecessary thermal cycles, as happens following a trip of a
refrigerant loop in a conventional plant. The electrical generation and supply system is designed in the
same way as the smaller plant.

Utilities
Power Generation
From
Turret

Pre-cool
A

Acid Gas
Removal
DeHydration

Separation
Acid Gas
Removal

Main
Loop A

LNG
Storage

Liquefaction

Pre-cool
B

Stabilization

Main
Loop B

Fractionation

Condensate
Storage

Figure 6 Shell Dual Mixed Refrigerant Process for FLNG

The dual string design allows one string to be shutdown, isolated and maintained while the other
string remains in service keeping the main cryogenic exchangers in operation and producing LNG. This
avoids the time and potential difficulties associated with warming up and cooling down such cryogenic
equipment, as well as reducing the time needed for a total facilities shutdown in order to carry out
inspection and maintenance.
Both refrigeration circuits are designed such that they can contain the mixed refrigerant following
a total shutdown, without having to flare part of the refrigerant inventory.

5. DESIGN FOR CONSTRUCTION

Building on experience in onshore plants, the initial Floating LNG design was based on stick build
construction on a concrete substructure. Unfortunately this led to lengthy project schedules. Current
designs feature medium size, where possible a single layer, modular units that can be fabricated in
parallel with the barge and installed by lifting or skidding.
In order to facilitate commissioning most modules contain a complete process function, e.g. acid
gas removal, feed gas compression or separation. The exception to this rule is the liquefaction area. A
single liquefaction module became too heavy for readily available installation equipment, liquefaction is
therefore split in several smaller modules.
Both a steel and a concrete barge are considered for housing the integral prismatic LNG tanks and
supporting the topsides. As a cost effective alternative, the use of membrane tanks in an FPSO is being
investigated in co-operation with a vendor. The steel barge features a special deck that protects the hull
from cryogenic spills and protects the LNG tanks. Both the steel and the concrete hull are designed to
remain on-site for at least 20 years. The barges have been carefully sized to allow efficient construction in
existing dry docks. As an alternative, the concrete hull can also be constructed in a graving dock following
similar practice for concrete gravity based platforms.
The turret is installed while the hull is in the dry dock. Depending on the chosen LNG storage
system, the tanks are installed in sequence during construction of the barge hull or after the barge has
been completed. In the case of the membrane tanks, this installation may be carried out at the topsides
integration site rather than the barge construction site. Different methods have been identified to install
the topside modules ranging from skidding or mobile crane to medium size crane barges. The support
structure of the module will be designed to cater for both the skidding and the lift option to ensure
independence from specific vendors.
Prior to installation on the barge, the plant modules will be mechanically completed, and tested
for functional integrity within the sub-system. Once the modules are installed on the barge, total plant
systems will be connected, and prepared for the pre-commissioning stage.

6. COMMISSIONING, INSTALLATION AND STARTUP

The FLNG barge will continue to be moored at the integration site quayside while each of the
main plant and utility systems are tested. Pressure and functionality tests will be followed by cold trials for
cryogenic systems. Cold trials will be completed together with functional testing of the LNG loading
system, in this case importing LNG from a carrier moored alongside for the purpose. The storage tanks
and LNG transfer piping will all be tested at this time. Life support and loss prevention systems will be
commissioned and started up prior to tow-out from the integration yard.
While the FLNG barge unit is being constructed, the production wells will be drilled, either subsea
in deep water, or from wellhead jacket(s) in shallow water. The wells will be connected to manifolds
including a riser base manifold under the FLNG barge location. FLNG barge mooring lines and anchors
will be pre-installed ready for easy hook-up to the barge turret.
After departing the integration site, the FLNG barge will be stationed inshore for ballast, stability,
marine safety, and thruster trials. Once these have been completed the FLNG barge will be towed to the
offshore field, hooked up to its anchor system, and the riser system installed between turret and seabed
manifold. Plant chemicals and other essential fluids needed to start up the plant offshore will be loaded on
board at this time. After integrity testing has been completed for all flowline systems from the barge to
each well, gas will be introduced to the system, and plant start-up initiated. LNG production will be built
up gradually to contract volumes, once LNG carrier loading operations have been tested and verified.

7. DELIVERING LNG FROM A FLOATER

LNG will normally be produced at the design throughput, with slight adjustments up or down to
accommodate LNG carrier scheduling. The production wells will be specified so that abnormalities or
maintenance at any individual well can be accommodated by adjusting production rates at other wells.
Gas well production experience in Shell ensures high reliability and availability of the wells.
LNG storage volume required for a specific FLNG barge will depend on the LNG carriers to be
used, and the voyage round trip distance to the LNG buyer terminal facilities. A buffer volume is also
needed to cover LNG carrier operational delays, including a margin for gaining access to the FLNG
loading berth. Modern LNG carriers typically store 135,000 m3 cargo volume. Dependent on the offshore
field, FLNG barge storage volume between 160,000 and 200,000 m3 will allow deliveries of LNG to be
made to buyers with equivalent reliability to onshore LNG projects.
The LNG plant on the FLNG barge is designed with motions in mind, including accelerations and
tilt during stormy weather. This relates particularly to columns, separator vessels, and the main cryogenic
heat exchanger. The offshore fields considered at present are actually relatively benign, and the FLNG
barge is very large (approximately 320m by 70m wide), so the influence of motion is small. Roll motions
of less than one degree may be expected for 99% of the time for the concrete barge. Even under the one
hundred year return period storm motions are less than 2 degrees. The effect of these motions on ability
to deliver LNG to the client is minimal.
Berthing of LNG carriers at the FLNG barge will be alongside for moderate environment sites
such as West Africa, Northwest of Australia, and most locations in South East Asia. The LNG carriers
under long term contract will be fitted with bow and stern thrusters to allow unassisted berthing at the
barge. The FLNG unit will be oriented relative to sea and wind conditions to provide a convenient
approach for the ballasted LNG carrier. Studies have been carried out to determine the relative motions
between the barge and carrier, loading arm performance requirements, mooring configuration and
loading, and the envelope of environmental conditions when a carrier can berth, and stay at the berth for
loading. This work suggests that the side by side loading offers a reliable means of exporting the LNG to
a client, with minimum change in operational equipment and marine practice.
A berthing simulator is used by Shell to study the thruster requirements for ship manoeuvring.
Once thrusters are installed for the offshore LNG loading, the same equipment can be used by the
operator to minimise tug assistance requirements at the LNG receiving terminal.
Spot cargoes are likely to be delivered to other LNG carriers during the life of the FLNG project.
In this case offshore support craft would be mobilised to the field to assist with the loading operation, in
the case that the carrier does not have thruster systems.

8. TOWARDS A PROJECT
Realisation of an FLNG project will incorporate the best practices from oil FPSO project
experience, and from onshore LNG project experience. The FLNG barge unit will be equivalent to the
largest offshore development projects to date, and so a careful engineering preparation stage is required.
During the concept development, much generic work has been carried out. An internal system of
technology verification before release for use in projects is employed by Shell. This minimises technical
risk for the project implementation stage, and allows the number of design options considered during
detailed engineering to be reduced. A detailed Basis of Design followed by a comprehensive Project
Specification, as common for Shells onshore LNG projects, will be prepared for each FLNG project.
Major contracts will be let for the barge, detailed plant engineering, topsides module fabrication and
FLNG unit integration. The time scale from Basis of Design until start of construction is planned to be
between 18 and 24 months for the first FLNG unit, followed by 36 to 42 months for the construction

through commissioning stages. This construction schedule is similar to that for an onshore LNG plant
connected to an offshore gas platform and pipeline. The second and subsequent FLNG projects are
expected to show improvements compared to this, based on Shell experience with development of a
series of Tension Leg Platforms for deepwater oilfields in the Gulf of Mexico.
LNG projects are characterised by strong interdependence between medium to long term sales of
LNG volumes, and the availability of an economically strong LNG production concept. The FLNG based
development opens up opportunities for LNG development of many offshore gas reservoirs that have not
been economically viable up to now. Field studies have demonstrated that the potential of floating LNG
extends beyond these stranded reservoirs. For some onshore LNG projects presently under
consideration switching to the floating LNG plant will enable cost savings of 25-30% mainly due to the
elimination of the pipeline/platform combination and site development costs. As a bonus the facility can
be re-deployed to other fields following the initial project. These savings enhance the competitiveness of
the project and the possibility to redeploy avoids the need to find additional reserves in proximity of the
initial field before a second LNG supply contract can be negotiated.

9. CONCLUSION
Shell has developed a concept for offshore production of LNG which is economically competitive
with onshore LNG production, while opening up the possibility for production at reservoirs too remote to
be economically viable using traditional methods.
The technology developed has been validated in a stepwise manner, so as to minimise technical
risk when applied to the first project of this type. The concept is immediately deployable at fields in
moderate environments e.g. West Africa, Northwest of Australia, and most locations in South East Asia.

REFERENCES
1 - Oilfield publications Limited, Ledbury, Great Britain (1999). Mobile Production System of the World,
Third Edition.