MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073638424 · doi:10.2523/iptc-10694-ms

Offshore Salt-Cavern-Based LNG Receiving Terminal

2005· article· en· W2073638424 on OpenAlexaff
Michael McCall, James F. Davis, Craig Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubmarine pipelineTerminal (telecommunication)Marine engineeringGeologyPetroleum engineeringOceanographyEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The global LNG business is in the early stages of a significant expansion. Predictions are that the volumes in the LNG industry will more than double in the next ten years. Production capacities of liquefaction trains are increasing and the LNG fleet is growing in numbers and in ships' cargo capacities. The growing scale of facilities and the technical improvements being incorporated in them are materially reducing the unit costs associated with the LNG trade. However, the traditional tank based LNG receiving terminal, because of the cost of the cryogenic storage tanks, does not benefit greatly from increased scale. North America which is expected to go from one of the smallest importers of LNG to the largest importer of LNG. The US needs to significantly expand its ability to import natural gas in the form of LNG, and in so doing to develop more economical, more secure, and larger scale alternatives to the traditional tank based import terminal. This article describes a research project of the US Department of Energy (DOE) in cooperation with 30 energy industry participants. The research was led by Conversion Gas Imports and was completed in August, 2005. The final report describes an import terminal design using salt caverns rather than LNG tanks. This design is advantaged by the significantly lower costs of salt cavern gas storage compared to LNG tank storage, and the larger scale of storage and deliverability that can be achieved using caverns. Large volume underground gas storage at a receiving terminal provides great security and flexibility for the producer, shipper, terminal operator and gas marketer. Salt caverns can immediately deliver gas at high rates to pipelines – a capability important in natural gas distribution for response to seasonal and daily demand fluctuations. Salt caverns can also "decouple" the activities of receiving of LNG and the send-out of gas reducing the possibility of "tank topping" and reducing the "just-in-time" LNG delivery requirements. Salt caverns are utilized to store a wide-variety of products including hydrogen, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gases, olefins, crude oil and refined products. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve uses man made salt caverns to securely store over 700 million barrels of crude oil. Salt caverns provide about five (5%) percent of the natural gas storage capacity and 15% of the deliverability from storage in the United States, but none of these caverns are associated with the LNG receiving terminals currently in operation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Petroleum Technology ConferenceSame topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207