ROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) - · PDF fileROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) TERMINAL...

ROVIGO Liquefied

Natural Gas (LNG)

TERMINAL

MEGAPROJECT: The Effective Design and Delivery of Megaprojects in the European Union

Prepared by: Giorgio Locatelli (University of

Lincoln) and Mauro Mancini (Politecnico di Milano)

Contacts:

Giorgio Locatelli

University of Lincoln

Lincoln School of Engineering

Brayford Pool - Lincoln LN6 7TS

United Kingdom

Phone;+441522837946

[email protected]

MEGAPROJECT: The Effective Design and Delivery of

Megaprojects in the European Union

ROVIGO LNG TERMINAL (Adriatic LNG)

2



ROVIGO LNG TERMINAL (Adriatic LNG)

3

GBS

Structure



ROVIGO LNG TERMINAL

4

LNG carrier near the terminal



ROVIGO LNG TERMINAL

5

1)GBS structure 9) Generators

2) LNG vaporizers ORV 10) Maintenance building

3) Boil-off gas compressors 11) Helicopter platform

4) Boil-off recondenser 12) LNG unloading platform

5) High-pressure pumps 13) Docking facilities

6) Flare 14) Bridges

7) Living quarters 15)Pipeline connection

8) Electric and instrumental system



More than words…

6



More than words…

7



More than words…

8



More than words…

9



More than words…

10



More than words…

11



More than words…

12



More than words…

13



More than words…

14



SECTION 1 - BASIC PROJECT INFORMATION

15

Project Title Liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal of Rovigo.

Location 15 Km far from the coast of Porto Levante, in the province of Rovigo, in the Adriatic sea. (Adriatic LNG,

2011).

Purpose Regasify 8 billion m3 of gas per annum, about at the 10% of the Italian gas consumption.

Scope Realization of the gravity base structure (GBS), all the facilities placed on the top of GBS, the mooring

dolphins, the off-shore and the on-shore (Porto Viro – Cavarzere – Minerbio) pipeline to connect the

terminal to the national gas distribution.

Contractual

Framework

Two EPC contracts with Aker Kvaerner and Snamprogetti (now Saipem). About 1 billion of Euro

Relevant

Physical

Dimensions

The GBS built with 90.000 cubic meters of concrete and 30.000 tons of steel, is long 180 m and high 47

m and the most part is under the sea level.

The liquefied natural gas is stored in two LNG tanks, with capacity of 125.000 cubic meters everyone,

placed into the GBS structure.

A first pipeline of 76 cm diameter and 40 km long covers 15 Km of sea floor and then carries on for 25

Km onshore.

From here the gas is carried by another pipeline (90 cm diameter and 84-km long) to a tie in point with

the national distribution network near Minerbio (BO). (Adriatic LNG, 2011).



SECTION 1 - BASIC PROJECT INFORMATION

16



SECTION 2 - PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS

17

Stakeholder

Category

Case-Study Comments

(e.g. maturity, previous experiences of stakeholders,

skills, influence on project)

Intern

al

Supply-

Side

Client Adriatic LNG Owner and manager of the terminal and the pipeline up

to Cavarzere station. The company employs about 125

people. (Adriatic LNG, 2011).

Financiers Edison, Qatar Petroleum (QP),

ExxonMobil (XOM), Italian

State.

Sponsors Edison. It obtained all the necessary authorizations for the

realization of the terminal.

Client’s

Customers

Edison 80%, BP 12,5%, Others

8,5% (percentage of the gas

productions).

Edison is the holder of the right of allocation and so it has

a contract “take or pay” with RasGas of 25 years of

duration for the utilization of the 80% of the gas

processed in the terminal. (Quadrino, 2009) and (Delibera

n. 91/02).

The remaining 20%, available for the other gas

companies, has been assigned according to the

procedures defined by AEEG Authority. The 8,5% is

processed on demand. (Adriatic LNG, 2011).




18

Stakeholder

Category

Case-Study Comments

Intern

al

Supply-

Side

Client’s Owners ExxonMobil 70,7%,

Qatar Petroleum

22%, Edison 7,3%.

QP and XOM are involved together in other joint venture of LNG

terminal. South Hook LNG terminal in UK, Golden Pass LNG

terminal in USA. (Qatar Petroleum, 2010).

Other internal

supply-side

categories (

please specify)

RasGas ExxonMobil and QP own also the company RasGas (ExxonMobil,

2010) that supply the 80% of the LNG for the terminal.

(Quadrino, 2009).

Demand

Side

Principal

Contractor

Aker Kvaerner for

the LNG terminal

and Saipem for the

pipeline.

Aker Kvaerner is a global oil services company that provides

engineering services, technologies, product solutions for the oil

and gas industry. It employs about 18500 people. (Aker

Solutions, 2011).

Saipem is an Italian contractor in the field of infrastructure

construction and maintenance for the oil industry, with

operations on five continents. It employs about 30000 people.

(Saipem, 2012).




19

Stakeholder

Category Case-Study

Comments

(e.g. maturity, previous experiences of stakeholders, skills, influence on

project)

Intern

al

Demand

Side

First Tier

Contractors

Acciona

It built the GBS structure (Serina, 2012). It also undertook all of the ancillary

installations for the base camp, including 4500 square meters of offices and

other facilities (Acciona, 2008).

Whessoe

It provided, with an EPC contract, the engineering and design for LNG tanks

and subcontracted the construction. It was responsible for the testing and

commissioning of the tanks after their installation into GBS. (Whessoe,

2010).

Dragados It constructed the top side facilities, and was responsible to their

installation and hook up on the GBS structure. (Serina, 2012).

Ing. E.

Mantovani

It built the Mooring Dolphins at the Arsenale shipyard in Venice (Italia Oggi,

2008) and was involved in the pipeline construction (Penolazzi, 2006).

Max Streicher

and Saipem pipeline construction.




20

Stakeholder

Category Case-Study

Comments

(e.g. maturity, previous experiences of

stakeholders, skills, influence on project)

Intern

al

Demand

Side

Second Tier

Consultants

Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) It manufactured and supplied the LNG tanks in six

sections. (Hyundai Heavy Industries, 2006).

Siemens It built the module of electric and instrumental

system. (Serina, 2012).

Emtunga It supplied the Living quarters module. (Serina,

2012).

Professional

Services

Providers

Fagioli

It was responsible for the unload, the transport,

the lifting and the positioning of the all modules

and top side facilities on the GBS structure.

(Fagioli, 2011).




21

Stakeholder Category Case-Study Comments

External

Public Regulatory Agencies AEEG (Autorità per l’Energia

Elettrica e il gas)

AEEG has the functions of regulation

and control in the sectors of the

electricity and gas (determination of

tariffs and the technical and economic

conditions of access and

interconnection to the networks).

(AEEG, 2012).

Local Government Regione Veneto, Regione

Emilia Romagna, Provincia di

Rovigo, Municipalities.

Both regions approved and was

favourable to the projects.

National Government Ministero Sviluppo

Economico, Ministero

dell’Ambiente.

The Ministero dell’Ambiente issued the

VIA decrees . The Ministero Sviluppo

Economico issued the permissions to

construction.

Private Environmentalists Committees environmentalist Tried to stop the construction of the

terminal.



Stakeholder Relationship Maps

22

Adriatic LNGTermi nal + Pipeline

(Terminal-Cavarzere)

ExxonMobilQatar

Petroleum Edison

Qatar State

RasLaffan LNG

Transalpinadi Energia

EDFGruppo Tassara

Privates and banks

RasGas

Aker KvaernerTerminal

SaipemPipeline

AccionaGBS

Dragados Top side facilities

WhessoeLNG tanks

Hyundai Heavy IndusriesLNG tanks

Ing. E. MantovaniMooring Dolphins

and Pipeline

Max StreicherPipeline

BP

Others

Supplies 80%

ConstructionConstruction

Owns 7,3%

Owns 61,3%

Owns 19,4%

Owns 10%

Owns 30%

Contract

Construction

Supplier

Design and construction

ConstructionConstruction and installation

Owns 50%

Owns 70%

Owns 70,7% Owns

22%Sell80%

Sell 12,5%

Sell 8,5%

Edison StoccaggioPipeline (Cavarzere-

Minerbio)

owns

ContractOthers

Supplies 20%

Floating

Owns9,3%

Contract

owns owns

owns

Siemens Module of

electric system

Supplier

EmtungaModule of living

quarters

Supplier

Foreign investors:

• Own the plant

• Supply the gas

• Sell the gas



MEGAPROJECT External Stakeholder Attitude

Analysis

23

External

Stakeholder

External Stakeholder’s Attitude to this

Project

External Stakeholder’s Influence on

project

Impact of Project on External

Stakeholder

Region of Veneto It was favourable to the realization of the

terminal and the pipeline in its territory.

(Regione Veneto, 2006).

In the VIA decree of 1999 for the

terminal and in 2003 for the pipeline it

obtained that it takes great care of the

environment and its restoration during

the construction of the terminal and

pipeline. (Decreto di VIA, 2003) and

(Penolazzi, 2005).

Region of Emilia-

Romagna

It was favourable to the realization of the

pipeline in its territory. (Regione Emilia-

Romagna, 2003).

In the VIA decree of 2003 for the pipeline

it obtained that it takes great care of the

environment and its restoration during

the construction of the pipeline.

(Decreto di VIA, 2003).

Province of Rovigo The Province opposed to the terminal and

the pipeline trying in any way, in the

courtroom, to stop the project. (Chinaglia,

2006).

It first appealed to the TAR of Lazio and

then turned to the State Council against

the acts of authorization. It lost in both

the judgements in June 2005 and July

2006.

(TAR del Lazio, 2005) and (Consiglio di

Stato, 2006).

In February 2008 there was

the signing of the agreement

between AdriaticLng, Consvipo

and the Province of Rovigo

that put an end to the battles.

This agreement established a

environmental compensation

for the territory. (Consvipo,

2008).



MEGAPROJECT External Stakeholder Attitude

Analysis

24

External

Stakeholder

External Stakeholder’s Attitude to this

Project

External Stakeholder’s Influence on

project

Impact of Project on External

Stakeholder

Enviro

nm

entalists

Since 1998 until the entry into operation

of the terminal there was the opposition

of the environmentalists and committees

of citizens against the terminal. (Stoppa,

2009).

the negative effects on the environment

risks of accident

any benefit on the employment plan and

stops the process of tourism

development.

The committee Basso-polesano

recoursed to the TAR of Lazio and then to

the State Council against the acts of

authorization. It lost in both the

judgements in June 2005 and July 2006.

(TAR Veneto, 2006).

In 2006, some environmental groups

including the Committee Basso-polesano

appealed to the TAR of Veneto against

the acts of authorization and the TAR of

Veneto dismissed this appeal on October

2006. (TAR Veneto, 2006).

Mu

nicip

alities

In 2006 there was the agreement

between Edison and the municipalities

for the environment compensations. The

overall amount was 1,2 million euro. The

municipalities committed to facilitate the

execution of work, releasing permits not

included into urban conformity required by

Edison, and to renounce to legal action. All

the municipalities expressed their

agreement with resolution of their

councils. (Comune di Berra, 2006).

In 2006 the municipalities crossed for

the section of pipeline Cavarzere -

Minerbio obtained by Edison the

environmental compensation for the

constraints burdening in their

territories. The municipalities of the

on-shore pipeline section of Porto Viro

- Cavarzere (the municipality of Porto

Viro and Loreo) was compensated,

together with Consvipo, by Adriatic

LNG after the agreement of

20.02.2008. (Consvipo, 2008).



Client Project Team Size &

Structure

Contractor Project Team

Size and Structure

Sub-Contractor Project

Team Involvement

Project Tools and Techniques Please √ if present, x if absent , leave blank if unknown

Life-Cycle Costing Approaches □

Stakeholder Involvement □

Building Information Modelling (BIM) □

Project Management Software □

Relationship Management Tools □

Project Knowledge Management Tools □

Lessons Learnt Transfers □

Team Building Tools □

Competency framework □

Other Tools and Techniques or More Information

SECTION 3 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT

MEGAPROJECT Project Management



Risk Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

HR Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Procurement Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Integration Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Scope Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Time Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Cost Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Quality management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

Communications Management Processes Present (describe below) □Not Present □ No Information □

SECTION 3 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT

MEGAPROJECT Project Management



MEGAPROJECT Project Performance Aspects of Performance Concerned with Doing the Project Right

27

Original Targets and changes to targets Actual Achievements Against Targets

Performance relating to time The project of the LNG terminal of Rovigo, started in 1998, during the years has been subjected to postponements of the coming into operational of the terminal.

- In November 2000, when the managers of the then-company Edison Gas (after Edison LNG and now Adriatic LNG) introduced the project to the territory involved, They stated that the objective was to complete the terminal within the end of 2004. (Il Gazzettino - Cronache di Rovigo, 2000).

- In November 2003, when there was the sign of agreement between Qatar Petroleum, ExxonMobil and Edison for the development of the LNG terminal project, the startup of the terminal was scheduled for 2007. (Business Wire, 2003).

- In 2005, just before the starting of the GBS construction in Spain (second quarter of 2005), the coming into operation of the terminal was expected into 2008. (IEFE-Bocconi, 2005).

- At the beginning of 2006 the GBS was scheduled to be complete i n the fi rst quarter of 2007. While the ter minal was scheduled to leave for Ital y, after the installati on and hookup of the all module, in the first quarter of 2008. (ExxonMobil, 2006). The coming into operati on of the ter minal, after the commissioning, was scheduled in October 2008 ready for the beginning of the ther mal year as

forecasted in the 2005. (Assomineraria, 2006).

- One year later, exactly in the second quarter of 2007, at the inauguration of LNG Train 5 of RasGas, the coming into operation was scheduled into 2009. So this forecast has revealed correct. (Assomineraria, 2007).

To sum up:

Years Coming into operation

Nov 2000 End 2004

Nov 2003 End 2007

Apr 2005 End 2008

Apr 2007 End 2009 (respected)

Regarding the pipeline Cavarzere-Minerbio, owned by Edison Stoccaggio, the forecast of the end construction (December 2007), made in June 2006 thus some month before the start of the construction sites, was respected. (Comune di Berra, 2006). - The main authorization was issued within 2004 to Edison LNG (now Adriatic LNG).

- In November 2003 QP and ExxonMobil agree to participate in the development of the Terminal with Edison. (RasGas, 2011).

- In summer 2004 Aker Kvaerner was awarded by a EPC contract for the realization of the terminal. (ENR.com, 2008). In July 2004 was awarded Snamprogetti (now Saipem) for the realization of the two sections of pipeline. (Edison Stoccaggio, 2012).

Pipeline:

- Cavarzere – M inerbio: the pipeline construc tion started on October 2006. In October 2007 there was the constructi on compl etion. In November and December 2007 there was the completion of testing and pre-commissioning and the Gas-in whil e the land recover y finished on Mar ch 2008. On Jul y 2008 the pipeline was connected to the national gas distribution networ k. (Edison

Stoccaggio, 2012).

- Terminal – Cavarzere: the work started in September 2005. (Penolazzi, 2006). Because of the seizure of the man-made island for one years the work didn’t respect the delivery times. The finished of the work should have been about May or June 2008 given that after September 2008 the terminal arrived and was to connected to this pipeline.

The Terminal:

- In May 2005 was setup Adriatic LNG By QP, ExxonMobil and Edison (RasGas, 2005) and started the construction of the terminal at the dry dock of Algeciras in Spain. (Adriatic LNG, 2011).

- The construction tanks was completed at the beginning of November 2006 in South Korea. Then the two tanks was unload on the ship and transported in Spain. (Hyundai Heavy Industries, 2006). The tanks arrived at the dry dock of Algeciras at 12.12.2006. In April 2007 the tanks was installed into GBS. (Fagioli, 2011).

- In July 2007 the construction of the GBS structure with inside the LNG tanks was completed. (Serina, 2012).

- The construction of the all top side facilities started on June 2006 and was completed on September 2007 at the dry dock of Cadiz (Spain). (ACS, 2006).

- The installation and hook up of the all facilities and started on July 2007 and finished in March 2008. (Fagioli, 2011).

- In September 2008 the terminal arrived in the Adriatic Sea and it was ballasted, connected to the pipeline and there was the installation of the mooring dolphins. (Adriatic LNG, 2011). The mooring dolphins was constructed between the beginning of 2007 and September 2008. (Italia Oggi, 2008).

- In August 2009 started the commissioning with the mooring of the first LNG carrier. (Esso, 2010).

- In October 2009 there was the inauguration of the terminal. (Esso, 2010).

Performance relating to cost Regarding to the costs associated to the terminal during the years they are increase.

In November 2000 the managers of the then-company Edison Gas (after Edison LNG and now Adriatic LNG) stated that the investment was about 450 million of euro for the terminal. (Il Gazzettino - Cronache di Rovigo, 2000).

In the resolution of the CIPE of 2001 the investments was estimated in 455,98 million of euro. The next year with the second resolution of CIPE the cost increased to 585,519 million of euro. In the last resolution of CIPE in 2003 the cost of the terminal raised to 615,72 million of euro. (CIPE, 2001,2002,2003).

In 2004 the EPC contract awarded was of 900 millions of Dollars (ENR.com, 2008) and some months before was awarded the FEED and the detailed design for about 70 million of Dollars (Aker Kvarner, 2004).

The Terminal:

- In Januar y 2004 was awarded to Aker Kvaer ner the contract to perfor m Front-End Engineering Des ign (FEED). The FEED contract was worth around 21 mil lion of Dollars (Aker Kvaerner, 2004). In June 2004 Aker Kvaerner has been awarded by the then- company Edison LNG to conduct the detail ed design and planning ac ti vities. Thi s contract was worth about 50 milli on of doll ars

(Aker Kvarner, 2004). At the end Aker Kvaerner was awarded by a 900 million of dollars EPC contract associated with development of the LNG terminal. The contract consists of engineering, procurement and construction management of the concrete gravity based structure, LNG storage tanks and topside regasification facilities (ENR.com, 2008).

- Aker Kvaerner subcontracted the construction of the GBS to Acciona for 300 million of euro. (Acciona, 2008).

- Aker Kraerner subcontracted the design and construction of the LNG tanks to Whessoe for 200 million of euro. (Whessoe, 2010).

The pipeline:

- Snamprogetti (now Saipem) subcontracted the construction of the Terminal-Cavarzere pipeline for 61 million of euro. (Penolazzi, 2006).

Performance related to achieving specification

Years Coming into operation

Nov 2000 End 2004

Nov 2003 End 2007

Apr 2005 End 2008

Apr 2007 End 2009 (respected)

Performance relating to time

Performance relating to cost

• In November 2000 the managers of the then-company Edison Gas (after Edison LNG and now Adriatic

LNG) stated that the investment was about 450 million of euro for the terminal. (Il Gazzettino - Cronache

di Rovigo, 2000).

• In the resolution of the CIPE of 2001 the investments was estimated in 455,98 million of euro. The next

year with the second resolution of CIPE the cost increased to 585,519 million of euro.

• In the last resolution of CIPE in 2003 the cost of the terminal raised to 615,72 million of euro. (CIPE,

2001,2002,2003).

• In 2004 the EPC contract awarded was of 900 millions of Dollars (ENR.com, 2008) and some months

before was awarded the FEED and the detailed design for about 70 million of Dollars (Aker Kvarner, 2004).

Size increased from 4 billions to 8 billions!



MEGAPROJECT Project Performance Aspects of Performance Concerned with Doing the Project Right

28

Stakeholder or

Stakeholder Grouping

Original Aims of Project Involvement and Changes

to these Aims

Achievement of these Aims

Province of Rovigo

and Environmentalist

Stop the project. (Chinaglia, 2006). Lost their battle at the civil court

(Consiglio di Stato, 2006) the project has

been completed.

Region Veneto and

Emilia-Romagna

They asked that the project was less invasive for

the environment and asked for the

environmental monitoring plan during and after

the construction. (Decreto di VIA, 2003).

Their requests was accepted. (Decreto

di VIA, 2003).

Aker Kvaerner Realise the first offshore LNG terminal in the

world to get the know-how for the next project

in this sector.

It realized the terminal.

Edison Enter in the new Italian market of the LNG and

to have a good price the gas for its customers.

80% of the gas processed sold to Edison

for 25 years. (Quadrino, 2009).

QP and ExxonMobil Realize LNG terminal in the world to sold the

LNG processed in their liquefaction trains and so

enter in the regasification business. Ensures a

presence in the whole LNG value chain from gas

production through liquefaction, shipping and

LNG regasification. (RasGas, 2011).

The terminal came into operation.

The LNG arrive from their liquefaction

trains. (Qatar Petroleum, 2010).



MEGAPROJECT Project Environment

Legal and Regulatory Environment

29

Legal and

Regulatory

Project

Environment

(regionally,

nationally and

Europe wide)

The environmental compensations to the municipality and local authorities crossed by the two sections of pipeline was possible because of

the law of August 23, 2004 article 1 paragraph 5 (Legge, 2004). In the first part of pipeline Porto Viro - Cavarzere owned by Adriatic LNG

with agreement signed in 2008 were compensated municipalities, the Park of Delta and Consvipo (Consvipo, 2008). In the second part of

pipeline from Cavarzere to Minerbio owned by Edison Stoccaggio with the agreement of 2006 were compensated the remaining

municipalities involved (Comune di Berra, 2006).

Another law impacting on the project was the Article 27, comma 2 of 12.12.2002 n. 273 and the subsequent deliberation n. 91/02 and n.

90/03 of AEEG (Autorità per l’Energia Elettrica e il Gas) that acknowledged this law. The resolution 91/02 of the AEEG established the

condition to the priority access for the new LNG terminal in Italy. This is an important decision that allows to the companies of the sector

to have rules to make investment decisions. The main rules of this resolution establish that is allocated the priority access to the companies

that fund the construction of the new terminals in Italy. To this companies is reserved the 80% of the terminal capacity for 20 years from

the start-up of the plant. The tariffs is traded with the owner of the plant. The tariffs must be communicated to the authority (AEEG) that

publishes them. (Delibera n. 91/02).

On 23.05.2000 was enacted the legislative decree n.164/2000 about the liberalization of the internal market of natural gas in Italy, crucial

for the future construction of terminals by private companies. (Legge, 2000).

The liberalization of the gas market began at European level by Directive 98/30, then updated and replaced by 2003/55 that pursued the

objective of creating a single European market free and competitive. In Italy, the opening to the free competition began with the legislative

decree 164/2000. The Italian gas market since its inception has been characterized by vertically integrated monopoly of ENI, with the

exception of the distribution, where, although the leader was Italgas, a subsidiary of ENI, the market shares have always been very

fragmented. When the decree (164/2000) opened the market to competition, he did so by focusing on Upstream chain, going to affect

directly the existing monopoly. The monopoly of ENI was then hit by placing a double cap. From 01.01.2002, in fact, no company could

claim a share of gas supply in Italy (production + imports) over 75% of total consumption (excluding own consumption). This roof was

reduced by 2% every year to get to the limit of 61% in 2009 and 2010. Furthermore, no company can sell to end users more than 50%.

(AmbienteDiritto, 2004) and (Legge, 2000).

Specific Legal

and Regulatory

events

impacting on

the project

The declaration of public utility and urgency for the pipeline Porto Viro - Cavarzere - Minerbio , with legislative decree no.190 of 2002, of

the works allows the realization and operation of strategic infrastructure for energy supply and all the activities envisaged in the approved

project. It is issued with the agreement State-Regions about the location. Local authorities provide to the necessary safeguards for the

areas involved and the related range of respect. The project will then have to obtain the decree of environmental compatibility. So the

main thing is that the local authority have not the power to stop the realization of the project. (Legge, 2002).

• Italian and Regional Laws

• Ask for the authorization

• Modify the project as much as

possible to satisfy as many

stakeholders in possible

• Obtain the authorization



Political Environment

30

Political Project

Environment

• In Italy about 92.5% of gas consumption comes from foreign countries.

• The construction of new LNG terminals is strategic choice and allows Italy to diversify

its sources

• Italy thus would decrease its heavy dependence on Russia.

Specific Political Events

impacting on the

project

In January 2006 and 2009 there was the crisis between Russia and Ukraine, which also

affected Europe and Italy since the gas arriving from Russia passes for 80% through the

Ukrainian territory to which Russia pays transit fees.

Economic Project

Environment

The Comitato interministeriale per la programmazione economica, CIPE, establishes the

address to the national economic policy and the general guidelines for the elaboration of

the national economic program.

The CIPE in 2001 (resolution no. 41 of 2001) with its resolution authorized the stipulation

of the program contract between the Ministero del Tesoro, and the then-company Edison

Gas regarding the investment for the construction of an off-shore terminal.

The incentives were calculated based on the costs of industrial investment and industrial

research activities.



MEGAPROJECT Project Key Events and

Activities Timeline 2006 -2009

31

Events and activities relating to

project stakeholders

Events and activities relating

to project management

Events and activities relating

to project performance


project environment

Dec 1999 VIA decree for the Terminal with

regasification capacity of 4 billion

m3 per year after the favorable

opinion of the Region of Veneto

(Decreto di VIA, 1999).

May 2000 The legislative decree

n.164/2000 about the

liberalization of the internal

market of natural gas in Italy,

crucial for the future

construction of terminals by

private companies. (Legge,

2000).

Mar 2002 The declaration of public utility

for the pipeline Porto Viro -

Cavarzere – Minerbio.

(Penolazzi, 2005).

Dec 2002 The law n. 273, article 27,

comma 2 (Articolo 27 comma 2)

and the subsequent deliberation

n. 91/02 and n. 90/03 of AEEG

(Delibera n. 91/02).

Mar 2003 Region Veneto (Decreto di VIA,

2003) and Region Emilia-Romagna

(Regione Emilia-Romagna, 2003)

expressed favourable opinion for the

pipeline.





32

Events and activities relating to project

stakeholders


project management

Events and activities

relating to project

performance


project environment

Oct 2003 VIA decree for the Pipeline. (Decreto di

VIA, 2003).

Nov 2003 The CIPE issued a third and last

resolution. The decree

established a contribution to

Edison LNG for the work

amounted to 66,57 million of

euro. (CIPE, 2001,2002,2003).

Nov 2003 QP and ExxonMobil agree to

participate in the development of the

Terminal with Edison. (RasGas, 2011).

Summer

2004

Aker Kvaerner was awarded by

a EPC contract for the

realization of the terminal.

(ENR.com, 2008).

Jul 2004 In July 2004 was awarded

Snamprogetti (now Saipem)

for the realization of the two

section of pipeline. (Edison

Stoccaggio, 2012).

Oct 2004 VIA decree for the increase of the

terminal regasification capacity from 4 to

8 billion m3 per year. (Penolazzi, 2005).

May 2005 Set up of Adriatic LNG By Edison, QP

and ExxonMobil. (RasGas, 2005).





33


stakeholders

Events and

project

management

Events and activities

relating to project

performance


environment

May 2005 Construction start of the

terminal at the dry dock

of Algeciras in Spain.

(Adriatic LNG, 2011).

Jun 2005 The Province of Rovigo (TAR del Lazio, 2005)

and the Environmentalists (TAR Veneto, 2006)

lost the cases at the Tar of Lazio.

Sep 2005 Construction start of the

pipeline Terminal –

Cavarzere. (Penolazzi,

2006).

Jan 2006 Crisis between Russia and Ukraine,

which also affected Europe and Italy

since the gas arriving from Russia

passes for 80% through the

Ukrainian territory. The European

gas companies reported a drop in

pressure in the pipelines of its

national network. (Croce, 2011).

Jul 2006 The Province of Rovigo (Consiglio di Stato, 2006)

and the environmentalists (TAR Veneto, 2006)

lost the cases at the State Council.

Aug 2006 The municipalities of the section of pipeline

Cavarzere -Minerbio obtained by Edison the

environmental compensation. (Comune di Berra,

2006).





34


project stakeholders

Events and

project

manageme

nt


performance


project environment

Oct 2006 Construction start of the Pipeline Cavarzere –

Minerbio. (Edison Stoccaggio, 2012).

Feb 2008 The municipalities of the pipeline

section Porto Viro - Cavarzere was

compensated, together with

Consvipo, by Adriatic LNG.

(Consvipo, 2008).

Mar 2008 Construction end of the terminal at the dry

dock of Algeciras in Spain. (Fagioli, 2011).

Mar 2008 Construction end of the pipeline Cavarzere –

Minerbio. (Edison Stoccaggio, 2012).

May 2008 Probable construction end of the pipeline

Terminal – Cavarzere.

Sep 2008 The terminal arrived in the Adriatic Sea. Then it

was ballasted, connected to the pipeline and

there was the installation of the mooring

dolphins. (Adriatic LNG, 2011).

Jan 2009 New Crisis between Russia and

Ukraine. There was a new stop

flow of gas to Europe. (Il

Giornale.it, 2009).

Aug 2009 Started the commissioning with the mooring

of the first LNG carrier. (Esso, 2010).

Oct 2009 Inauguration of the terminal. (Esso, 2010).



MEGAPROJECT Project Key Events

35

• Feasibility study: 1998

• Project final approval: 2003

• Start of GBS construction: 2005

• Module installation engineering: from beginning 2005

• LNG Tanks arrival on site: December 2006

• LNG Tanks installation: January – May 2007

• Modules installation: July2007 – May 2008

• Basin flooding: 20th May 2008

• GBS sailaway: 30th August 2008

• Sailing duration: 15days

• GBS in final position on Adriatic sea bed:18th September 2008

ROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) - · PDF fileROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) TERMINAL...

Documents

Transcript of ROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) - · PDF fileROVIGO Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) TERMINAL...