Field of Disclosure
The disclosure relates generally to the field of natural gas liquefaction to form liquefied natural gas (LNG). More specifically, the disclosure relates to the production and transfer of LNG from offshore and/or remote sources of natural gas.
Description of Related Art
This section is intended to introduce various aspects of the art, which may be associated with the present disclosure. This discussion is intended to provide a framework to facilitate a better understanding of particular aspects of the present disclosure. Accordingly, it should be understood that this section should be read in this light, and not necessarily as an admission of prior art.
LNG is a rapidly growing means to supply natural gas from locations with an abundant supply of natural gas to distant locations with a strong demand for natural gas. The conventional LNG cycle includes: a) initial treatments of the natural gas resource to remove contaminants such as water, sulfur compounds and carbon dioxide; b) the separation of some heavier hydrocarbon gases, such as propane, butane, pentane, etc. by a variety of possible methods including self-refrigeration, external refrigeration, lean oil, etc.; c) refrigeration of the natural gas substantially by external refrigeration to form liquefied natural gas at or near atmospheric pressure and about −160° C.; d) transport of the LNG product in ships or tankers designed for this purpose to a market location; and e) re-pressurization and regasification of the LNG at a regasification plant to a pressurized natural gas that may distributed to natural gas consumers. Step (c) of the conventional LNG cycle usually requires the use of large refrigeration compressors often powered by large gas turbine drivers that emit substantial carbon and other emissions. Large capital investments in the billions of US dollars and extensive infrastructure are required as part of the liquefaction plant. Step (e) of the conventional LNG cycle generally includes re-pressurizing the LNG to the required pressure using cryogenic pumps and then re-gasifying the LNG to pressurized natural gas by exchanging heat through an intermediate fluid but ultimately with seawater or by combusting a portion of the natural gas to heat and vaporize the LNG. Generally, the available exergy of the cryogenic LNG is not utilized.
A relatively new technology for producing LNG is known as floating LNG (FLNG). FLNG technology involves the construction of the gas treating and liquefaction facility on a floating structure such as barge or a ship. FLNG is a technology solution for monetizing offshore stranded gas where it is not economically viable to construct a gas pipeline to shore. FLNG is also increasingly being considered for onshore and near-shore gas fields located in remote, environmentally sensitive and/or politically challenging regions. The technology has certain advantages over conventional onshore LNG in that it has a lower environmental footprint at the production site. The technology may also deliver projects faster and at a lower cost since the bulk of the LNG facility is constructed in shipyards with lower labor rates and reduced execution risk.
Although FLNG has several advantages over conventional onshore LNG, significant technical challenges remain in the application of the technology. For example, the FLNG structure must provide the same level of gas treating and liquefaction in an area that is often less than a quarter of what would be available for an onshore LNG plant. For this reason, there is a need to develop technology that reduces the footprint of the FLNG plant while maintaining the capacity of the liquefaction facility to reduce overall project cost. One promising means of reducing the footprint is to modify the liquefaction technology used in the FLNG plant. Known liquefaction technologies include a single mixed refrigerant (SMR) process, a dual mixed refrigerant (DMR) process, and expander-based (or expansion) process. The expander-based process has several advantages that make it well suited for FLNG projects. The most significant advantage is that the technology offers liquefaction without the need for external hydrocarbon refrigerants. Removing liquid hydrocarbon refrigerant inventory, such as propane storage, significantly reduces safety concerns that are particularly acute on FLNG projects. An additional advantage of the expander-based process compared to a mixed refrigerant process is that the expander-based process is less sensitive to offshore motions since the main refrigerant mostly remains in the gas phase.
Although expander-based process has its advantages, the application of this technology to an FLNG project with LNG production of greater than 2 million tons per year (MTA) has proven to be less appealing than the use of the mixed refrigerant process. The capacity of known expander-based process trains is typically less than 1.5 MTA. In contrast, a mixed refrigerant process train, such as that of the propane-precooled process or the dual mixed refrigerant process, can have a train capacity of greater than 5 MTA. The size of the expander-based process train is limited since its refrigerant mostly remains in the vapor state throughout the entire process and the refrigerant absorbs energy through its sensible heat. For these reasons, the refrigerant volumetric flow rate is large throughout the process, and the size of the heat exchangers and piping are proportionately greater than those used in a mixed refrigerant process. Furthermore, the limitations in compander horsepower size results in parallel rotating machinery as the capacity of the expander-based process train increases. The production rate of an FLNG project using an expander-based process can be made to be greater than 2 MTA if multiple expander-based trains are allowed. For example, for a 6 MTA FLNG project, six or more parallel expander-based process trains may be sufficient to achieve the required production. However, the equipment count, complexity and cost all increase with multiple expander trains. Additionally, the assumed process simplicity of the expander-based process compared to a mixed refrigerant process begins to be questioned if multiple trains are required for the expander-based process while the mixed refrigerant process can obtain the required production rate with one or two trains. For these reasons, there is a need to develop an FLNG liquefaction process with the advantages of an expander-based process while achieving a high LNG production capacity. There is a further need to develop an FLNG technology solution that is better able to handle the challenges that vessel motion has on gas processing and LNG loading and offloading.
Once LNG is produced, it must be moved to market, typically in LNG ships. For onshore LNG facilities, the transfer of LNG to ships is done in sheltered water such as in a harbor or from berths in more mild environmental conditions. Often FLNG requires LNG to be transferred in more open water. In open water, the design solutions for LNG transfer to merchant LNG ships becomes more limited and expensive. In addition, the marine operations of tankers versus the FLNG facilities can become more complicated such as open-water berthing of a tanker either in tandem or side-by-side. Design options become more limited and often more expensive as the designed-for ocean conditions become more severe. For these reasons, there is a further need to develop an FLNG technology solution that is better able to handle the transfer of LNG in more challenging ocean or metocean conditions.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,025,860 to Mandrin discloses an FLNG technology where natural gas is produced and treated using a floating production unit (FPU). The treated natural gas is compressed on the FPU to form a high pressure natural gas. The high pressure natural gas is transported to a liquefaction vessel via a high-pressure pipeline where the gas may be cooled or additionally cooled via indirect heat exchange with the sea water. The high pressure natural gas is cooled and partially condensed to LNG by expansion of the natural gas on the liquefaction vessel. The LNG is stored in tanks within the liquefaction vessel. Uncondensed natural gas is returned to the FPU via a return low pressure gas pipeline. The disclosure of Mandrin has an advantage of a minimal amount of process equipment on the liquefaction vessel since there are no gas turbines, compressors or other refrigerant systems on the liquefaction vessel. Mandrin, however, has significant disadvantages that limit its application. For example, since the liquefaction of the natural gas relies significantly on auto-refrigeration, the liquefaction process on the vessel has a poor thermodynamic efficiency when compared to known liquefaction processes that make use of one or more refrigerant streams. Additionally, the need for a return gas pipeline significantly increases the complexity of fluid transfer between the floating structures. The connection and disconnection of the two or more fluid pipelines between the FPU and the liquefaction vessel would be difficult if not impossible in open waters subject to waves and other severe metocean conditions.
United States Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0226373 to Prible, et al. discloses an FLNG technology where natural gas is produced and treated on an FPU. The treated natural gas is transported to a liquefaction vessel via a pipeline. The treated natural gas is cooled and condensed into LNG on the liquefaction vessel by indirect heat exchange with at least one gas phase refrigerant of an expander-based liquefaction process. The expanders, booster compressors and heat exchangers of the expander-based liquefaction process are mounted topside of the liquefaction vessel while the recycle compressors of the expander-based liquefaction process are mounted on the FPU. The at least one gas phase refrigerant of the expander-based process is transferred between floaters via gas pipelines. While the disclosure of Prible et al. has an advantage of using a liquefaction process that is significantly more efficient than the disclosure of Mandrin, using multiple gas pipeline connections between the floaters limits the application of this technology in challenging metocean conditions.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 to Shivers et al. discloses an FLNG technology where natural gas is produced and treated using an FPU, which is shown generally in
The FLNG technology solution described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 has several advantages over conventional FLNG technology where one floating structure is used for production, gas treating, liquefaction and LNG storage. The disclosed technology has the primary advantage of providing reliable operation in severe metocean conditions because transfer of LNG from the FPU to the transport vessel is not required. Furthermore, in contrast to the previously described FPU with liquefaction vessel technologies, this technology requires only one gas pipeline between the FPU and the liquefaction vessel. The technology has the additional advantage of reducing the required size of the FPU and reducing the manpower needed to be continuously present on the FPU since the bulk of the liquefaction process does not occur on its topside. The technology has the additional advantage allowing for greater production capacity of LNG even with the use of an expander-based liquefaction process since multiple liquefaction vessels may be connected to a single FPU by using multiple moored floating disconnectable turrets.
The FLNG technology solution described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 also has several challenges and limitations that may limit its application. For example, the liquefaction vessel is likely to be much more costly than a conventional LNG carrier because of the significant increase in onboard power demand and the change in the propulsion system. Each liquefaction vessel must be outfitted with a power plant sufficient to liquefy the natural gas. Approximately 80 to 100 MW of compression power is needed to liquefy 2 MTA of LNG. The technology proposes to limit the amount of installed power on the liquefaction vessel by using a dual fuel diesel electric power plant to provide propulsion power and liquefaction power. This option, however, is only expected to marginally reduce cost since electric propulsion for LNG carriers is not widely used in the industry. Furthermore, the required amount of installed power is still three to four more times greater than what would be required for propulsion of a conventional LNG carrier. It would be advantageous to have a liquefaction vessel where the required liquefaction power approximately matches or is lower than the required propulsion power. It would be much more advantageous to have a liquefaction vessel where the liquefaction process did not result in a need for a different propulsion system than what is predominantly used in conventional LNG carriers.
Another limitation of the FLNG technology solution described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 is that the dual nitrogen expansion process limits the production capacity of each liquefaction vessel to approximately 2 MTA or less. Although overall production can be increased by operating multiple liquefaction vessels 102, 102a, 102b simultaneously (
Still another limitation of the FLNG technology solution described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 is that the technology has the disadvantage of requiring frequent startup, shutdown and turndown of the liquefaction system of the liquefaction vessel. The dual nitrogen expansion process has better startup and shutdown characteristics than a mixed refrigerant liquefaction process. However, the required frequency of startup and shutdown is still significantly greater than previous experience with the dual nitrogen expansion technology at the production capacities of interest. Thermal cycling of process equipment as well as other issues associated with frequent startups and shutdowns are considered new and significant risks to the application of this technology. It would be advantageous to have a liquefaction process that can be easily and rapidly ramped up to full capacity. It would also be advantageous to limit thermal cycling by maintaining the cold temperatures of the liquefaction process equipment with very little power use during periods of no LNG production.
Yet another limitation of the FLNG technology solution described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,646,289 is that the required power plant and liquefaction trains for this technology are expected to significantly increase the capital and operational cost of the liquefaction vessel over the typical cost of a conventional LNG carrier. As stated above, the power plant required for liquefaction will need to be three to four times greater than what is needed for ship propulsion. The liquefaction trains on the liquefaction vessel are similar to what is on a conventional FLNG structure. For this reason, outfitting each liquefaction vessel with its own liquefaction trains represents a significant increase in capital investment of liquefaction equipment compared to conventional FLNG structures. This technology limits the impact of the high cost of the liquefaction vessel, by proposing an LNG value chain where the loaded LNG liquefaction vessel moves to an intermediate transfer terminal where it offloads the LNG on to conventional LNG carriers. This transport scheme shortens the haul distance of the liquefaction vessel and thus reduces the required number of these vessels. However, it would much more preferable to have liquefaction vessels of sufficiently low cost that it would be economical to haul the LNG to market without having to transfer its cargo to less expensive ships.
The present disclosure provides a method for producing liquefied natural gas (LNG). A natural gas stream is transported to a liquefaction vessel. The natural gas stream is liquefied on the liquefaction vessel using at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between the natural gas stream and a liquid nitrogen stream to at least partially vaporize the liquefied nitrogen stream, thereby forming a warmed nitrogen gas stream and an at least partially condensed natural gas stream comprising LNG. The liquefaction vessel includes at least one tank that only stores liquid nitrogen and at least one tank that only stores LNG.
The present disclosure also provides a system for liquefying a natural gas stream. A liquefaction vessel transports liquefied natural gas from a first location to a second location and transports liquefied nitrogen (LIN) to the first location. The liquefaction vessel includes at least one tank that only stores LIN and at least one tank that only stores LNG. The liquefaction vessel also includes an LNG liquefaction system including at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between a LIN stream from LIN stored on the natural gas liquefaction vessel and the natural gas stream, which is transported to the natural gas liquefaction vessel, to at least partially vaporize the LIN stream, thereby forming a warmed nitrogen gas stream and an at least partially condensed natural gas stream comprising LNG. The LNG is stored on the natural gas liquefaction vessel to be transported to the second location.
The foregoing has broadly outlined the features of the present disclosure so that the detailed description that follows may be better understood. Additional features will also be described herein.
These and other features, aspects and advantages of the disclosure will become apparent from the following description, appending claims and the accompanying drawings, which are briefly described below.
It should be noted that the figures are merely examples and no limitations on the scope of the present disclosure are intended thereby. Further, the figures are generally not drawn to scale, but are drafted for purposes of convenience and clarity in illustrating various aspects of the disclosure.
To promote an understanding of the principles of the disclosure, reference will now be made to the features illustrated in the drawings and specific language will be used to describe the same. It will nevertheless be understood that no limitation of the scope of the disclosure is thereby intended. Any alterations and further modifications, and any further applications of the principles of the disclosure as described herein are contemplated as would normally occur to one skilled in the art to which the disclosure relates. For the sake clarity, some features not relevant to the present disclosure may not be shown in the drawings.
At the outset, for ease of reference, certain terms used in this application and their meanings as used in this context are set forth. To the extent a term used herein is not defined below, it should be given the broadest definition persons in the pertinent art have given that term as reflected in at least one printed publication or issued patent. Further, the present techniques are not limited by the usage of the terms shown below, as all equivalents, synonyms, new developments, and terms or techniques that serve the same or a similar purpose are considered to be within the scope of the present claims.
As one of ordinary skill would appreciate, different persons may refer to the same feature or component by different names. This document does not intend to distinguish between components or features that differ in name only. The figures are not necessarily to scale. Certain features and components herein may be shown exaggerated in scale or in schematic form and some details of conventional elements may not be shown in the interest of clarity and conciseness. When referring to the figures described herein, the same reference numerals may be referenced in multiple figures for the sake of simplicity. In the following description and in the claims, the terms “including” and “comprising” are used in an open-ended fashion, and thus, should be interpreted to mean “including, but not limited to.”
The articles “the,” “a” and “an” are not necessarily limited to mean only one, but rather are inclusive and open ended so as to include, optionally, multiple such elements.
As used herein, the terms “approximately,” “about,” “substantially,” and similar terms are intended to have a broad meaning in harmony with the common and accepted usage by those of ordinary skill in the art to which the subject matter of this disclosure pertains. It should be understood by those of skill in the art who review this disclosure that these terms are intended to allow a description of certain features described and claimed without restricting the scope of these features to the precise numeral ranges provided. Accordingly, these terms should be interpreted as indicating that insubstantial or inconsequential modifications or alterations of the subject matter described and are considered to be within the scope of the disclosure.
The term “heat exchanger” refers to a device designed to efficiently transfer or “exchange” heat from one matter to another. Exemplary heat exchanger types include a co-current or counter-current heat exchanger, an indirect heat exchanger (e.g. spiral wound heat exchanger, plate-fin heat exchanger such as a brazed aluminum plate fin type, shell-and-tube heat exchanger, etc.), direct contact heat exchanger, or some combination of these, and so on.
The term “dual purpose carrier” refers to a ship capable of (a) transporting LIN to an export terminal for natural gas and/or LNG and (b) transporting LNG to an LNG import terminal.
As previously described, the conventional LNG cycle includes: (a) initial treatments of the natural gas resource to remove contaminants such as water, sulfur compounds and carbon dioxide; (b) the separation of some heavier hydrocarbon gases, such as propane, butane, pentane, etc. by a variety of possible methods including self-refrigeration, external refrigeration, lean oil, etc.; (c) refrigeration of the natural gas substantially by external refrigeration to form liquefied natural gas at or near atmospheric pressure and about −160° C.; (d) transport of the LNG product in ships or tankers designed for this purpose to a market location; and (e) re-pressurization and regasification of the LNG at a regasification plant to a pressurized natural gas that may distributed to natural gas consumers. The present disclosure modifies steps (c) and (e) of the conventional LNG cycle by liquefying natural gas on a liquefied natural gas (LNG) transport vessel using liquid nitrogen (LIN) as the coolant, and using the exergy of the cryogenic LNG to facilitate the liquefaction of nitrogen gas to form LIN that may then be transported to the resource location and used as a source of refrigeration for the production of LNG. The disclosed LIN-to-LNG concept may further include the transport of LNG in a ship or tanker from the resource location (export terminal) to the market location (import terminal) and the reverse transport of LIN from the market location to the resource location.
The disclosure more specifically describes a method for liquefying natural gas on a liquefaction vessel having multiple storage tanks associated therewith, where at least one tank exclusively stores liquid nitrogen used in the liquefaction process, and at least one tank stores LNG exclusively. Treated natural gas suitable for liquefaction may be transported to the liquefaction vessel via a moored floating disconnectable turret which can be connected and reconnected to the liquefaction vessel. The treated natural gas may be liquefied on the liquefaction vessel using at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between a liquid nitrogen stream and the natural gas stream to at least partially vaporize the liquefied nitrogen stream and at least partially condense the natural gas stream. The LNG stream may be stored in the liquefaction vessel either in the at least one tank reserved for LNG storage or in other tanks onboard the liquefaction vessel configured to store either LNG or LIN.
In an aspect of the disclosure, natural gas may be produced and treated using a floating production unit (FPU). The treated natural gas may be transported from the FPU to a liquefaction vessel via one or more moored floating disconnectable turrets which can be connected and reconnected to one or more liquefaction vessels. The liquefaction vessel may include at least one tank that only stores LIN. The treated natural gas may be liquefied on the liquefaction vessel using at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between a liquid nitrogen stream and the natural gas stream to at least partially vaporize the liquefied nitrogen stream and at least partially condense the natural gas stream. The liquefied natural gas stream may be stored in at least one tank that only stores LNG within the liquefaction vessel. The FPU may contain gas processing equipment to remove impurities, if present, such as water, heavy hydrocarbons, and sour gases to make the produced natural gas suitable for liquefaction and or marketing. The FPU may also contain means to pre-cool the treated natural gas prior to being transported to the liquefaction vessel, such as deep sea-water retrieval and cooling and/or mechanical refrigeration. Since the LNG is produced on the transporting tanker, over-water transfer of LNG at the production site is eliminated.
In another aspect, natural gas processing facilities located at an onshore production site may be used to remove any impurities present in natural gas, such as water, heavy hydrocarbons, and sour gases, to make the produced natural gas suitable for liquefaction and or marketing. The treated natural gas may be transported offshore using a pipeline and one or more moored floating disconnectable turrets which can be connected and reconnected to one or more liquefaction vessels. The treated natural gas may be transferred to one or more liquefaction vessels that includes at least one tank that only stores LIN and at least one tank that only stores LNG. The treated natural gas may be liquefied on the liquefaction vessel using at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between a LIN stream and the treated natural gas stream to at least partially vaporize the LIN stream and at least partially condense the natural gas stream. The LNG stream produced thereby may be stored either in the at least one tank that only stores LNG, or in another tank onboard the liquefaction vessel that is configured to store either LNG or LIN. Since the LNG is produced on the liquefaction vessel, which also serves as a transportation vessel, over-water transfer of LNG at the production site is eliminated.
In yet another aspect of the disclosure, onshore natural gas processing facilities may remove impurities, if present, such as water, heavy hydrocarbons, and sour gases, to make the produced natural gas suitable for liquefaction and/or marketing. The treated natural gas may be transported near-shore via a pipeline and gas loading arms connected to one or more berthed liquefaction vessels. Conventional LNG carriers, LIN carriers and/or dual-purpose carriers may be berthed alongside, proximal, or nearby the liquefaction vessels to receive LNG from the liquefaction vessel and/or transport liquid nitrogen to the liquefaction vessel. The liquefaction vessels may be connected to cryogenic loading arms to allow for cryogenic fluid transfer between liquefaction vessels and/or the LNG/LIN/dual-purpose carriers. The liquefaction vessel may include at least one tank that only stores liquid nitrogen and at least one tank that only stores LNG. The treated natural gas may be liquefied on the liquefaction vessel using at least one heat exchanger that exchanges heat between a LIN stream and the natural gas stream to at least partially vaporize the liquefied nitrogen stream and at least partially condense the natural gas stream. The LNG gas stream produced thereby may be stored in the at least one tank that only stores LNG and/or in at least one tank onboard the liquefaction vessel configured to store either LIN or LNG. In a further aspect, one permanently docked liquefaction vessel may liquefy the treated natural gas from onshore. The produced LNG may be transported from the liquefaction vessel to one or more dual-purpose carriers. LIN may be transported from the one or more dual-purpose carriers to the liquefaction vessel.
The use of LIN in the LNG liquefaction process as disclosed herein provides additional benefits. For example, LIN may be used to liquefy LNG boil off gas from the LNG tanks and/or the multipurpose tanks during LNG production, transport and/or offloading. LIN and/or liquid nitrogen boil off gas may be used to keep the liquefaction equipment cold during turndown or shutdown of the liquefaction process. LIN may be used to liquefy vaporized nitrogen to produce an “idling-like” operation of the liquefaction process. Small helper motors may be attached to the compressor/expander combinations found in the expander services to keep the compressor/expander services spinning during turndown or shutdown of the liquefaction process. Nitrogen vapor may be used to derime the heat exchangers during the periods between LNG production on the liquefaction vessel. The nitrogen vapor may be vented to the atmosphere.
The steps depicted in
The aspects described herein have several advantages over known technologies. For example, the power requirement for the liquefaction process disclosed herein is less than 20%, or more preferably less than 10%, or more preferably less than 5% the power requirement of a conventional liquefaction process used on a liquefaction vessel. For this reason, the power requirement for the liquefaction process disclosed herein may be much lower than the required propulsion power of the liquefaction vessel. The liquefaction vessel according to disclosed aspects may have the same propulsion system as a conventional LNG carrier since natural gas liquefaction is predominantly accomplished by the vaporizing of the stored liquid nitrogen and not by the onboard power production of the liquefaction vessel.
Another advantage is that the liquefaction process disclosed herein is capable of producing greater than 2 MTA of LNG, or more preferably producing greater than 4 MTA of LNG, or more preferably producing greater than 6 MTA of LNG on a single liquefaction vessel. In contrast to known technologies, the LNG production capacity of the disclosed liquefaction vessel is primarily determined by the storage capacity of the liquefaction vessel. A liquefaction vessel with an LNG storage capacity of 140,000 m3 can support a stream day annual production of LNG of approximately 6 MTA at a liquefaction vessel arrival frequency of 4 days. The tank or tanks that only store liquid nitrogen may have a total volume of less than 84,000 m3, or more preferably a volume of approximately 20,000 m3, to provide a liquefaction vessel with a total storage capacity of 160,000 m3.
Additionally, the liquefaction process according to disclosed aspects has the additional advantage of allowing for fast startup and reduced thermal cycling since a fraction of the stored liquid nitrogen can be used to keep the equipment of the liquefaction module cold during periods of no LNG production. Additionally, the overall cost of the disclosed liquefaction module is expected to be significantly less than the cost of a conventional liquefaction module. The LIN-to-LNG liquefaction module may be less than 50% of the capital expense (CAPEX) of an equivalent capacity conventional liquefaction module, or more preferably less than 20% the CAPEX of an equivalent capacity conventional liquefaction module. The reduced cost of the liquefaction module may make it economical to have the liquefaction vessels transport the LNG to market rather than having to transfer its cargo to less expensive ships in order to reduce the number of liquefaction vessels.
It should be understood that the numerous changes, modifications, and alternatives to the preceding disclosure can be made without departing from the scope of the disclosure. The preceding description, therefore, is not meant to limit the scope of the disclosure. Rather, the scope of the disclosure is to be determined only by the appended claims and their equivalents. It is also contemplated that structures and features in the present examples can be altered, rearranged, substituted, deleted, duplicated, combined, or added to each other.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/266,983, filed Dec. 14, 2015 entitled METHOD OF NATURAL GAS LIQUEFACTION ON LNG CARRIERS STORING LIQUID NITROGEN, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein. This application is related to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/266,976 titled “Method and System for Separating Nitrogen from Liquefied Natural Gas Using Liquefied Nitrogen;” U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/266,979 titled “Expander-Based LNG Production Processes Enhanced With Liquid Nitrogen;” and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/622,985 titled “Pre-Cooling of Natural Gas by High Pressure Compression and Expansion,” all having common inventors and assignee and filed on an even date herewith, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3180709 | Yendall et al. | Apr 1965 | A |
3347055 | Blanchard et al. | Oct 1967 | A |
3370435 | Arregger | Feb 1968 | A |
3400547 | Williams | Sep 1968 | A |
3724226 | Pachaly | Apr 1973 | A |
3878689 | Grenci | Apr 1975 | A |
4415345 | Swallow | Nov 1983 | A |
5025860 | Mandrin | Jun 1991 | A |
5137558 | Agrawal | Aug 1992 | A |
5139547 | Agrawal et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5141543 | Agrawal et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5390499 | Rhoades | Feb 1995 | A |
5638698 | Knight et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5950453 | Bowen et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6003603 | Breivik et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6295838 | Shah et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6298688 | Brostow et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6412302 | Foglietta | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6662589 | Roberts et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6917383 | Hamasaki et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7143606 | Trainer | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7278281 | Yang et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7386996 | Fredheim et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7520143 | Spilsbury | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7712331 | Dee et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
8079321 | Balasubramanian | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8375875 | Kim et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8435403 | Sapper et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8464289 | Pan | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8601833 | Dee et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8616012 | Duerr et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8646289 | Shivers, III | Feb 2014 | B1 |
9016088 | Butts | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9422037 | VanWijngaarden et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9435229 | Alekseev | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9459042 | Chantant | Oct 2016 | B2 |
20030226373 | Prible et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20060000615 | Choi | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20090217701 | Minta et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100192626 | Chantant | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100251763 | Audun | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20110036121 | Roberts et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110126451 | Pan et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110259044 | Baudat et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120285196 | Fiinn et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130199238 | Mock et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20140130542 | Brown et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20150285553 | Oelfke et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20170010041 | Pierre, Jr. et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170016667 | Huntington et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
102628635 | Oct 2014 | CN |
1960515 | May 1971 | DE |
2354726 | May 1975 | DE |
102013007208 | Oct 2014 | DE |
1972875 | Sep 2008 | EP |
2756368 | May 1998 | FR |
1376678 | Dec 1974 | GB |
1596330 | Aug 1981 | GB |
2172388 | Sep 1986 | GB |
2333148 | Jul 1999 | GB |
2470062 | Nov 2010 | GB |
2486036 | Nov 2012 | GB |
S59216785 | Dec 1984 | JP |
H05-203342 | Jan 1991 | JP |
2003-146400 | May 2002 | JP |
WO2006120127 | Nov 2006 | WO |
WO2007011155 | Jan 2007 | WO |
WO2015110443 | Jul 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 15/347,968, filed Nov. 10, 2016, Pierre, Fritz Jr. et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/347,983, filed Nov. 10, 2016, Pierre, Fritz Jr. et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/348,533, filed Nov. 10, 2016, Pierre, Fritz Jr. |
U.S. Appl. No. 62/458,127, filed Feb. 13, 2017, Pierre, Fritz Jr. |
U.S. Appl. No. 62/458,131, filed Feb. 13, 2017, Pierre, Fritz Jr. |
U.S. Appl. No. 62/463,274, filed Feb. 24, 2017, Kaminsky, Robert D. et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 62/478,961, Balasubramanian, Sathish. |
Publication No. 43031 (2000) Research Disclosure, Mason Publications, Hampshire, GB, Feb. 1, 2000, p. 239, XP000969014, ISSN: 0374-4353, paragraphs [0004], [0005] & [0006]. |
Publication No. 37752 (1995) Research Disclosure, Mason Publications, Hampshire, GB, Sep. 1, 1995, p. 632, XP000536225, ISSN: 0374-4353, 1 page. |
Bach, Wilfried (1990) “Offshore Natural Gas Liquefaction with Nitrogen Cooling—Process Design and Comparison of Coil-Wound and Plate-Fin Heat Exchangers,” Science and Technology Reports, No. 64, Jan. 1, 1990, pp. 31-37. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/182,050, filed Jun. 14, 2016, Pierre Jr., Fritz et al. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170167787 A1 | Jun 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62266983 | Dec 2015 | US |