1 (800) 909-4403 info@cngdelivery.com
CNG Delivery By Boat is Coming Soon with 200mscf CNG Carrier

CNG Delivery By Boat is Coming Soon with 200mscf CNG Carrier

Global Energy Ventures Ltd (ASX: GEV), a developer of global integrated compressed natural gas (CNG) projects, has completed the design for its 200 million standard cubic foot CNG Optimum (CNG Optimum 200) ship allowing future CNG delivery by boat. All pipe required for ABS testing of the CNG Optimum 200 ship technology in Edmonton, Canada, will depart Osaka port (Japan) on the 9 April 2018; and Milestones GEV set in 2017 for calendar year 2018 remain on schedule. The Company describes its patented CNG Optimum Technology as revolutionary for the CNG industry, in that the volume of gas that can be stored on a ship is much larger and as a result the comparative shipping cost is drastically reduced relative to traditional marine CNG technologies. This cost advantage provides an excellent opportunity to deliver CNG projects in the near-term.   CNG Optimum 200 ship design finalized Following completion of the ship design, GEV is finalizing its CNG shipping package to submit to three pre-selected ship yards in April 2018, with a view to selecting a preferred ship yard in the second quarter of 2018. This will allow GEV to firm up pricing, financing and construction schedules, and later in the year, award construction contracts.   ABS Approvals GEV has previously advised it will need to obtain American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) approvals during 2018 to commence construction of the CNG Optimum 200 ships to carry on with CNG Delivery By Boat. To obtain these approvals, pipe proposed for use in the ships’ construction must be fully tested. GEV is pleased to confirm that following the manufacturing of the required pipe...
CNG vs LNG as a Transportation Fuel?

CNG vs LNG as a Transportation Fuel?

Many people have been talking about CNG vs LNG role as a transportation fuel and which one is better. Both CNG and LNG is a way that natural gas can be used as a transportation fuel. There is not a CNG or LNG specific engine. In both cases, the fuel is delivered to the automobile engine as a gas. The difference between the two fuels lies not in the engine but in how the fuel is stored. Both CNG and LNG have their own advantages and disadvantages. We see two distinct benefits for CNG. First, CNG is cheaper than LNG and, second, the infrastructure for CNG fueling stations is more established in the United States. We also see two distinct benefits of LNG. First, the fuel is roughly twice as dense as CNG in terms of energy content. It takes 1.7 gallons of LNG and 3.8 gallons for CNG to equal the same amount of energy found in a single gallon of diesel fuel. Second, LNG does not need to be transported through pipelines so it can be made available in more remote locations. Given these unique set of advantages and disadvantages, each is better suited for different applications. CNG is better suited for light-duty and low-mileage applications. Waste Management, UPS, FedEx, and some school bus services have converted a small portion of their fleets to CNG for this reason.  LNG is better suited for high-mileage or high-horsepower applications such as to power heavy-duty trucking or drilling rigs. The increased range of LNG vehicles reduces the amount of time spent at fueling stations versus that spent on the road...
Regulations Could Douse North Dakota Gas Flares

Regulations Could Douse North Dakota Gas Flares

Vehicles burning gasoline refined from crude oil is already one of the world’s biggest sources of carbon dioxide emissions, and one of the United States’ largest sources of crude oil is the Bakken shale in North Dakota. NASA satellite images showing bright lights in the Bakken fields illustrate a side effect of crude oil production there that is also problematic for the climate. All the light coming from those fields are thousands of flames burning off, or flaring, natural gas. A NASA nighttime satellite image of North Dakota. The cluster of lights in the northwest quadrant of the state is made up of flames from flaring oil wells in the Bakken shale region of the state. Credit: NASA The natural gas, mostly methane produced with the crude oil extracted from the Bakken, has to be flared because there are few pipelines or infrastructure there that can bring that natural gas to market. Energy companies flare as much as a third of the excess gas they produce. Flaring in North Dakota produced 4.5 million metric tons of CO2 in 2012 alone, roughly the equivalent of adding 1 million new cars to U.S. highways, according to the non-profit sustainability group Ceres. New regulations are aiming to change that, possibly reducing the flaring to 10 percent of all natural gas produced by 2020, according to a U.S. Energy Information Administration report released Monday. In 2013, more than 35 percent of the excess natural gas produced with Bakken crude oil was flared into the atmosphere. North Dakota’s new emissions reduction targets have already reduced flared natural gas to 26 percent, and the goal is to...
Regulatory complexity governs rail, truck oil field transportation

Regulatory complexity governs rail, truck oil field transportation

01/06/2014 Coupling the complex US regulatory patchwork covering truck and rail transportation with the recent boom of nonpipeline transport of oil products, oil companies must understand and comply with far-reaching and potentially intermingled regulations. More than ever before, given both the increased use of truck and rail to transport these products and increasing federal and state regulations concerning truck and rail traffic, oil companies, railroads, and trucking companies must vigilantly remain abreast of all regulatory developments. Although the oil and gas waste exemption from the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) denies the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authority to regulate the transportation of hydraulic fracturing fluid, wastewater, and crude oil, federal entities have the authority to regulate the transportation of oil products. For instance, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration have regulatory authority over the transportation of hydraulic fracturing fluid, wastewater, and oil products by truck and rail, respectively. And though the 1995 Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) preempts state regulation of railroad transportation, various states, including Arkansas, Colorado, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas, impose basic permitting, operating, and recordkeeping requirements on truckers transporting these products. With the volume of oil produced in the US rising faster than can be moved by existing pipelines and with remote areas such as North Dakota leading production growth, oil and gas companies increasingly are using railroads and semi-trucks both to transport crude oil and drilling waste by-products away from the well and bring chemicals, fluids, and other materials needed to drill and develop the resource towards it. Rail transport of oil products has increased...