Or Every Solution has a Problem. Patrick Sean Wells Suncor Energy, Inc.

Transcription

1 Or Every Solution has a Problem Patrick Sean Wells Suncor Energy, Inc.

2 Questions and a Focus on Solutions or Every Solution has a Problem

3 Oil Sands Tailings Early Problem Late 1960 s Great Canadian Oil Sands has a problem Less recycle water available from ponds Suspended Clays and Silts accumulating in fine tailings layer Known elsewhere as slimes or sludge Solutions sought through Research and Collaboration Formation of the Fine Tailings Fundamentals Consortium Alberta Department of Energy, Alberta Research Council Alberta Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority, Environment Canada Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology, National Research Council, OSLO Suncor, Syncrude

4 The First Solution Advances in Oil Sands Tailings Research, 1995 Basis for the scientific understanding of fine tailings behaviour Several potential techniques recommended Resulted in an Operational Solution: First to be adopted widely was Non Segregating Tailings or NST Suncor and Syncrude as Consolidated or Composite Tailings (CT)

5 CT The Problem Scale Performance in a pond differs from the lab or test deposits Significant accumulation of soft, low sand content beaches 25 Mm3 Soft CT Trafficable Beaches

6 Soft CT The Solution Coke Capping and Vertical Strip Drains

7 Coke Cap (2m) over 30m Soft Tailings 100t

8 VSD s Dewatering the Deposit

9 Coke Capping The Problem Capping and Dewatering Takes Time! Public scrutiny of the oil sands tailings operations was increasing In response, regulators developed a new directive requiring: Minimum undrained shear strength of 5 kpa Removal or remediation of material deposited in the previous year that does not meet the 5 kpa requirement; and Ready for reclamation within five years after active deposition has ceased surface layer must have a minimum undrained shear strength of 10 kpa Coke Capping with VSD dewatering cannot meet these criteria (no existing commercial methods available at this time could)

10 Meeting Directive 74 The Solution Need to focus industry on meeting the intent and letter of D74 Collaboration worked before, seems a good model CEO s agree on the formation of the Canada s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA) alliance of oil sands producers focused on accelerating the pace of improvement in environmental performance in Canada's oil sands through collaborative action and innovation This is resulting in the development of significant technology options, and a large increase in funding for the work.

11 Canadia s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance + Current Members Operating Companies 1. BP Canada 2. Shell Canada Energy 3. Canadian Natural Resources Limited 4. Statoil Canada Ltd. 5. Cenovus Energy Inc. 6. Suncor Energy Inc. 7. ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. 8. Syncrude Canada Ltd. 9. Devon Canada Corporation 10.Teck Resources Limited 11. Imperial Oil 12.Total E&P Canada Ltd. 13. Nexen 11

12 + Current Associate Members Private Companies Public Organization 1. AECOM 16. Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (AI TF) 2. Aquatech 17. Alberta Innovates Energy & Environment (AI EES) 3. Baker Hughes 18. Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering 4. BASF 19. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) 5. FP Innovation 20. Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) 6. General Electric 7. Golder Associates Academic Institutions 8. Maxxam Analytics 21. NAIT 9. Nalco/Champion 22. SAIT 10. SGS 23. University of Calgary 11. Tervita 24. University of Alberta 12. Thurber Engineering 13. Titanium Corp. 14. URS Corp. 15. WorleyParsons 12

13 Portfolio Analysis Tailings EPA Project Funnel *Updated April 2014 Discover Develop Demonstrate Deploy [21; $17.0MM]* [13; $34.5MM]* [17; $114.8MM]* [6; $13.3MM]* OSTRF FFT Clay Removal Mechanical dewatering of MFT COSI Engineered Tailings Research 2 Stage Flocculation Carleton U/ NSERC UoA Tailings Geotechnique Shear Resistant Flocculants MFT Bio densification Processes EK 4 in Demo In situ EK D074 Meas. Protocol Promising technologies support CANMET Data Compilation ATA Trials DuPont Particlear Consolidation Technical Standards FFT Overburden Co mixing Polymer Testing NAIT NARCOSS Centrifuge MFT Spiking of TT NST spiked with MFT NST H20 Chemistry Aurora Thickener Prototype Base Mine Lake Demonstration Accelerated Enhanced Fines Beach Research WG Dewatering Pilot Capture TT Spiking of Kearl Thickener RFP MFT Screening & CST Deposit FFT Insitu design Pilot Dewatering Cross Flow Tremie Diffuser Filtration Tailings Optimisation UoA Remote Sensing Bitumen Removal Jacking header AFD Froth Treatment CIMA Tails MFT Paste Coarse Tails Thickening Cyclo stacker Secondary MFT Treatment On Line MFT Characterization MFT Filtration Trials Dynamic Flocculation Trial Time to Full Deployment Thin Lift Drying TT Deposition TT Flocculent Deep Cohesive Deposit Screening Modelling MFTD Research Rheology Tests MFT Centrifugation Tremie Diffuser for CT placement CO2 Addition LGP bearing ditchers Thickeners Application Project Status Relative Project Impact** Deployed Green Font Completed Underlined High 0 3 Years Black Font Active Normal Low TT Strengthening 4 6 Years Project Freeze Thaw Modeling 7 10 Years Blue Font In Planning > 10 Years * [Number of active and planned projects in stage; Known budget through 2018] ** Impact is combined effect of contribution to closing gaps and the importance of those gaps. Results are scaled Projects > ~5 are rated as high impact.

14 Collaboration and Expectations Types of Collaboration Investigation and Execution What are they (as defined here)? Investigation Focus on identifying problems and developing technical directions for solutions (FTFC) Execution Focus on information sharing and development of these solutions at scale What are they not? The Same!

15 Collaboration and Expectations Investigative (FTFC and CONRAD) Roles Government as participant and driver Led by academia primary investigation and memory Operators contribute individuals, resources, sites for tests Decisions driven by group review Ability to compare and contrast solutions for technical and operational effectiveness Strengths Problems, test methods, and results are methodically identified and documented Academics are the global memory, and their standards ensure information is not lost Primary driver for decisions is technical success and data Considerations Academics do not typically drive full scale solutions Operations rarely commit large scale expenditures on fundamental findings

16 Collaboration and Expectations Execution (COSIA) Roles Led by operating groups and their technical and business teams Government as observer and regulator Academics and non operator technical experts act as advisors Operators decide on what, when and how to proceed with projects Decisions driven by several considerations other than purely technical Strengths Lots of resources very large dollar spend possible Corporate information sharing made possible Single point of contact for vendors and

17 Collaboration and Expectations Execution (COSIA) Considerations No process driver to compare and contrast proposals or results Limited requirements to publish findings Internal records may or may not be available or sufficiently complete to inform the next teams Decisions potentially made in closed, isolated groups No perceived need to validate technical performance beyond individual operations Potential limits on release of negative findings Reduces the chances of directly comparing technology performance

18 Are We on the Path to Solutions? I think so..but Facts are: There is no demonstrated, full scale technology that meets fines capture and reclamation objectives Techniques are being trialled at each operation, with varying degrees of collaboration There remains a need for frank technology comparisons

19 Aligning Collaboration Expectations Is Collaboration the right solution in all cases? "Too often a business leader asks, How can we get people to collaborate more? That s the wrong question. It should be, Will collaboration on this project create or destroy value? In fact, to collaborate well is to know when not to do it. Morten Hansen, Harvard Business Review Which type of collaboration provides better solutions?

20 Aligning Collaboration Expectations Effective development is dependent on the right teams Keep an eye out for potential team members who like to build on what others have said, question the feasibility of an idea, or come up with their own concepts. These people will improve your team, not hinder it. Nicolas Gremion

21 Developing Effective Solutions Steps in Development and Implementation of Technology Solutions Understand the true objectives Collaborate on Solutions for Evaluation Build a small, focused execution team Ensure scale is included in the process Document and Report

22 The Offer First a few opinions on oil sands tailings: Technology is no longer the problem it s scale! Industry does not need more new chemicals, new water treatment systems, new gadgets We need to put together a system that works at scale Too much effort is diverted looking for the next best thing before we have full scale systems running properly and as intended Focus on finding ONE that works through to the end objective, THEN look for better ways Business cases are always better for the technologies of which we know the least!!!

23 The Offer Find a Better System Our Fundamental studies demonstrate: Clay to Water Ratio is the key determining factor in performance As determined by Methylene Blue tests Inline flocculation achieves 1:1 CWR Mechanical methods are challenged to meet this The challenge is how to do this at scale

24 Mechanical MFT Dewatering Goal: To identify and test technologies to mechanically dewater to geotech material Filtration Cross Flow Filtration Hydrocyclone Thickening Centrifuge Screening with Dewatering Tank

25 MFT Thickening Thickeners cannot achieve the same dewatering performance as inline flocculation for dense fines slurries (such as MFT).

26 My Request to You Help us find a robust, full scale solution that achieves the goal of a final reclaimed landscape

27 My Request to You Help us find a robust, full scale solution that achieves the goal of a final reclaimed landscape Simple field operations Insensitive to material variations Results in deposits with multiple placement options Minimal post deposition processes required High degree of confidence in operational performance targets

28 Final Word Where are we going?

29 Final Word Where are we going?

30