IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Modeling and studying basic parameters
Conceptual design of floating storage and of tank sets in combined regasification
N N Osipova, S S Kuznezov and A V
regasification unit (FSRU) for Eastern Part Rulev

- The Study of Adaptive Planning

Indonesia Application for LNG Regasification
Terminal Infrastructure in Indonesia
Oktaviani Turbaningsih, Wahyu Nur
To cite this article: Lilik Khoiriyah et al 2023 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1239 012015 Hidayatun Nisa, Achmad Mustakim et al.

- Calculation of electric energy savings and

simulation of tank operation with variable
extraction of steam and liquid phases of
propane-butane mixtures
View the article online for updates and enhancements. A V Rulev, S S Kuznezov and V O
Sevostiyanov

This content was downloaded from IP address 94.176.54.151 on 26/09/2023 at 14:02

ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

Conceptual design of floating storage and regasification unit

(FSRU) for Eastern Part Indonesia

Lilik Khoiriyah1, Ketut Buda Artana1,2, A A B Dinariyana1,2

1
Department of Marine Engineering, Faculty of Marine Technology, Institut
Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia
2
Center of Excellences Maritime Safety and Marine Installation, Institut Teknologi
Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia

[email protected]

Abstract. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) can be used as an alternative fuel with environmentally
friendly solutions. In general, the domestic distribution of natural gas in LNG is more cost-
effective than transporting gas through underwater pipelines considering Indonesia as
archipelagic country. According to Indonesia's Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources
Regulation Number 13 of 2020, the government supports converting 52 power plants to LNG.
However, the current challenge in the LNG industry is the lack of supporting facilities. Storage
and regasification facilities are among the infrastructure that requires optimization. Floating
Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU) are viable options for energy distribution that offer
opportunities and competitiveness compared to onshore terminals. Small and medium-scale
FSRU can serve as an alternative solution due to their relatively fast, flexible, and affordable
development process. Therefore, this research will develop a small-medium FSRU design with
a capacity of 60 MW – 70 MW in Eastern Indonesia. FSRU design should consist of four
segments including location considerations and environmental conditions, powerplants gas
requirements, LNG storage tank sizing and LNG regasification process. Calculations for various
supporting FSRU components, seakeeping analysis, loading-offloading processes, 3D modelling
and the integration of solar panels were discussed. The results obtained include the principal
dimension, technical aspects of FSRU design, and the technology for LNG regasification
processes used.

1. Introduction
With the massive increase in the industrial development of Indonesia, the country needs more energy
supply including electricity [1]. In general, the domestic distribution of natural gas in LNG is more cost-
effective than transporting gas through underwater pipelines. LNG has several advantages of emitting
less than 10% of particulate matter compared to other sources [2]. Using LNG for power generation can
achieve 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal [3]. In maritime transport,
utilizing gas-fueled engines instead of heavy fuel oil can lead to emission reductions of up to 21% [4].
Additionally, imported natural gas in LNG form can contribute to balancing fluctuations in electricity
generation from renewable sources and meeting peak electricity demands [5].
According to DJMigas data as of January 2017, the natural gas reserves in Indonesia reached 142.72
TSCF, with 100.36 TSCF being proven reserves and 42.36 TSCF being potential reserves [6]. The

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

government of Indonesia is dedicated to increasing the consumption of natural gas through the
construction of 52 power plants. It aims to increase consumption as outlined in the Regulation of the
Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources Number 13 of 2020 concerning the conversion of power
plants to LNG Fuel. This conversion will result in a total installed capacity of 1697 MW and will require
166.98 billion BTU (British thermal units) of natural gas per day. The Asia Pacific Energy Research
Center report on APEC Energy Supply-Demand Outlook 2019 forecasts that Indonesian gas demand
will rise to meet both domestic and export requirements, reaching 60.9 Mtoe by 2040. Gas consumption
in the power sector will remain significant, accounting for 30% in 2020 and growing to 40% of the total
gas demand.
At present, Indonesia possesses significant gas potential. However, the locations of several gas power
plants in Indonesia are scattered. The need for infrastructure capable of supplying LNG to end users is
expected to increase in accordance with the electricity demand. One of the most critical infrastructures
is the storage and regasification terminal. FSRU serves the purpose of storing LNG and converting it
into its gaseous form. These units have gained significant popularity over the past two decades and
currently constitute 6.3% of the global LNG fleet [1].
PT Perta Arun Gas
Capacity: 508.000 m3
PT DPS Energi Sukses Pratama
PT Arun LNG (Lhokseumawe) Capacity: 630 m3
Capacity: 12.85 MMTPA PT Sulawesi Regas Satu
Capacity: 14.100 m3
PT Badak (Bontang)
PT Donggi Senoro LNG (Luwuk)
Capacity: 21.64 MMTPA
Capacity: 2 MMTPA

PT BP (Tangguh)
Capacity: 7.6 MMTPA

PT PGN LNG Indonesia

Capacity: 170.271 m3

PT Nusantara Regas
LNG Plants
Capacity: 126.355 m3
PT Pelindo Energi Logistik
FSRU and Regasification
Capacity: 31.000 m3 facilities

Figure 1. Distribution of LNG Plants and FSRU in Indonesia.

The development of FSRU is particularly needed in Eastern Indonesia, given its challenging
geography as shown as figure above. Compared to western Indonesia, the distribution of LNG in eastern
Indonesia is limited due to challenging geographical conditions. The existing pipeline infrastructure is
also significantly underdeveloped. To address these challenges, the concept of utilizing small-scale LNG
and regasification terminals has emerged as a promising alternative for transporting natural gas for
power generation, replacing the use of diesel oil. FSRU can provide greater operational flexibility and
an efficient solution in cases where land transportation is not feasible.
Decision-making in the analysis of selecting a medium-scale LNG regasification terminal using real
options analysis has been conducted. The concept of FSRU is chosen as the most suitable configuration
compared to FRU, FSU, and onshore regasification terminals in Indonesia [7]. According to research
conducted by Bulte, FSRU terminals are mentioned to be cheaper than onshore terminals in terms of
price and cost, but more expensive than natural gas pipelines. Regarding construction time, new FSRU
vessels are typically completed within 27 to 36 months, and the conversion of conventional vessels for
LNG transportation to FSRU vessels can be even faster, taking place between 18 to 24 months [8]. In

2
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

Kelle's study, if the construction of an onshore LNG terminal is not feasible FSRU becomes a viable
alternative [9]. Meanwhile, according to Jovanović et al., underwater pipelines are characterized by
long-term investments with a relatively slower payback period. Additionally, the implementation of
FSRU receiving terminals is one of the fastest-growing segments in the LNG industry due to numerous
advantages over land-based terminals [10]. Ramos et al. (2014) compared the environmental risks of
onshore LNG terminals and FSRU. This comparison supports FSRU because the distance to the
population is greater, resulting in lower environmental and social risks [11]. Artana has conducted a
study on utilizing multiple criteria decision-making to choose the location of FSRU in Bali. FSRU is
considered an alternative choice to replace onshore LNG receiving terminals [12]. Research on the
conceptual design of a simple mini FSRU has been conducted by Putra et al [13]. However, in the design,
several technical considerations and detailed system components have not been included.
The current issue faced is that the available FSRU designs mostly cater to large-scale LNG
distribution, while the demand in Indonesia is relatively small ranging from 0.42 BBTUD (Billion
British Thermal Units per day) at the lowest to 14.64 BBTUD at the highest. This design, however, does
not seem feasible for the eastern part with geography issues. One alternative is the implementation and
development of a small-scale FSRU concept, which offers many advantages, including rapid LNG
distribution, reduce capital cost, and lower environmental risks. This concept is believed to fulfill the
gas requirements of consumers which not connected to gas pipelines or require smaller gas volumes,
such as small-capacity power plants and small regasification terminals.
This paper presents a conceptual design of a small to medium-scale floating storage and
regasification unit (FSRU) with a capacity of 60 MW to 70 MW and investigates its technical feasibility
by considering critical design requirements. As a case study, Eastern Parts Indonesia is carried out by
analyzing environmental conditions, estimating the required LNG consumption, determining the hull
structure, and anticipating the design cases, and several technical considerations by relevant regulations.

2. Methodology

2.1. Small to Medium Scale FSRU

Currently, most FSRU designs have large capacities ranging from 100.000 cubic meters to over 200.000
cubic meters. This design of large FSRU, however, does not seem feasible for small demands which are
scattered in the eastern part of Indonesia with challenging geography. One alternative is small to
medium-scale FSRU, which is similar to large FSRU.

Small-Medium FSRU Design

Considerations

Location Selection Power plants Storage Tank Sizing Regasification

Capacity Deck Arrangements
Environmental Regasification type,
Condition LNGC capacity, Time (cargo and capacity, and process
(Round Trip) accomodation) spaces

Figure 2. FSRU Design Considerations.

To build and operate FSRU several design requirements should be satisfied. It is important to
emphasize that three design criteria including safety, economics, and principal functions are related to
each other. For example, structural integrity of hull against environmental loads. Loads due to wave and
tides are the dimensioning factors, although LNG transfer operations have been conducted successfully,
they are still limited to calm area condition. Selecting location of FSRU should considering
environmental condition for safety factors. Cost of fabrication and installation will be significantly
affected by these considerations.

3
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

This study suggests that the small to medium FSRU considered for small powerplants capacities
should consist of four segments: location considerations and environmental conditions, powerplants gas
requirements, storage tank LNG sizing and deck arrangements, and regasification LNG process. Figure
2 shows a schematic diagram of the small to medium FSRU design considerations.

2.2. Conceptual Design Proposed

This section presents a conceptual design that addresses some of the issues regarding the design
considerations.
DESIGN OPTIMIZATION AND PROCESS

OWNER REQUIREMENTS
AND/OR PARENT HULL
Storage tank capacity, Deadweight, Design Realization
Regasification type, Principal Hull form, internal compartments, deck arrangements,
Dimension machinery layout

External Shape
Hydrodynamics, L-B-T Ratio

Has the hull ratio NO

& characteristic
formed?
KNOWLEDGE BASE
Technical Databases
Regulations
YES

PRINCIPAL DIMENSION SELECTED

Internal Arrangements Global Properties*

Capacity, Weight, tank Arrangements, Cost
Machinery Spaces, Room Definitions, *Next stage

Deck Arrangements

SELECTION OF THE BEST COMPROMISES

DETAILED DESIGN

Figure 3. FSRU Design Process.

FSRU design process is shown in figure 3. Existing FSRU database is used to compare and reference
the design. Several regulations related to FSRU design are International Maritime Organization (IMO)
documents, including SOLAS 1974 and IGC Code, Class Rules, and other regulations related to LNG
design. The parametric design phase holds significant importance throughout the design process as it
establishes the key ship characteristics by defining the design parameters. Statistical design methods
typically rely on regression formulas to determine these design parameters. Additionally, numerical
programs are employed to gather data on the hydrodynamic characteristics. Utilizing existing FSRU
designs to determine the initial size. The initial design stage focuses on determining the hull form.
Calculations for various supporting FSRU components, general arrangements, 3D modeling, loading-
offloading processes and the integration of solar panels also discussed.

4
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. FSRU Location Considerations and Power Plant Gas Requirements

Selecting an appropriate site for an FSRU project is crucial, and it involves conducting metocean and
oceanographic studies to ensure the terminal can operate safely in the selected location. By analyzing
historical data on weather and marine conditions, including factors like wind speed, wind direction,
wave height, tides, and more, the project can gain insights into extreme conditions and the frequency of
different weather and marine conditions at the proposed site. This analysis reduces uncertainties in the
terminal specifications and improves safety, operational efficiency, and reliability.
The conceptual design of Eastern Part Indonesia was carried out as a case study. The data in Table 1
were derived from European Centre For Medium-Range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) by 2013-2022
every hour. The location of the FSRU should be chosen with care to dispense LNG efficiently and not
interrupt other ships traffic. The freeboard and deck height of the FSRU should be designed by taking
the wave height into account. The structural integrity of the hull structure is strongly affected by wave
height, wind speed, tide level, etc. All environmental conditions are important factors in selecting the
site and type of hull structure. They also affect the LNG transfer operation and motion. Therefore, the
FSRU design will be placed near Jayapura power plants with sea depth 20 meters. This location
consideration also takes into account the environmental data around the mooring location.

Table 1. Environmental Data Collection (2013 – 2022)

Years Hs (m) Tp (s) Tz
1 0.96 4.64 3.62
5 1.21 5.14 4.02
10 1.34 5.40 4.22
15 1.40 5.52 4.31
20 1.44 5.60 4.38
30 1.49 5.71 4.46
50 1.55 5.82 4.55
100 1.62 5.97 4.66
150 1.66 6.04 4.72

Environment data is gathered on an hourly basis, subsequently analysed with the results of significant
wave height (Hs), zero crossing wave period (Tz), and peak wave period (Tp) outcomes represented in
Table 1. The data have been collected and averaged on every five years basis. The maximum significant
wave height (Hsmax) observed over the past 10 years are 1.66 m.
Initially, most terminals were designed for seasonal demand, but FSRU have proven to be reliable
and capable of providing continuous regasification for base load requirements. Table 2 shows power
plants capacity in Eastern powerplant Indonesia.

Table 2. Plant Capacity

Power Plants Bbtud Mmscfd m3/day
PLTMG Manokwari 5.83 5.59 257.45
PLTMG Biak 2.27 2.17 100.24
PLTMG Serui 0.95 0.91 41.95
PLTMG Nabire 2.34 2.24 103.33
PLTMG Jayapura 12.3 11.8 543.16
1046.15

Based on the distance matrix from the LNG source to each power plant, it can be determined the
round trip of the LNG carrier (LNGC). Assuming LNG will be transferred using small LNG carrier
(SLNGC) from The Tangguh LNG plants, with a service speed approximately 12 knots. Regasification

5
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

and storage system will take place at the FSRU, and then it will be transferred to the onshore receiving
facility (ORF) and other gas-fired power plants where gas metering or further gas heating take places.
LNG loading unloading timeline is divided in three stages: before, during and after loading
unloading. The time limit for the loading unloading ratio is set to approximately 12 hours before entering
port or before ship to ship (STS) operations, while the loading unloading time is approximately 12 hours,
depending on the LNG pump capacity. The round-trip time for the SLNGC vessel from the Tangguh
refinery to the FSRU in Jayapura is 15.4 days, which includes sailing time, loading-unloading time, and
idle or slack time. The capacity of the SLNGC tank is determined by multiplying the gas demand
(m3/day) by the total round trip time plus the safety stock. This ensures a continuous supply of gas. The
total storage tank capacity of the LNG vessel around 14.518 m3. assuming a safety stock of 3 days for
the power plants. Therefore. the planned volume of LNG to be accommodated by the FSRU is 15.000
m3. The FSRU design is planned to use 2 tanks with capacity of 2x7500 m3. Barge is chosen as the hull
form to facilitate operability and initial fabrication construction. Barge or flat-bottomed vessel is chosen
as it is suitable for shallow waters conditions.

Table 3. Principal Dimension FSRU

Principal Dimension
Length Overall (LOA) 124.40 m
Breadth (B) 27.00 m
Depth (H) 9.00 m
Draft (T) 7.00 m
Tank Capacity 15.000 m3 (2 x 7500 m3)
Regasification Capacity 17 mmscfd (2 sets)

Based on the power plant capacity, LNGC hull ratio, and the appropriate selection of hull form. the
principal dimensions of the FSRU can be determined as shown in Table 3 above. Alternative LNG
supply chain with the assumption LNG source - LNG plant (liquefaction) - LNG shuttle - FSRU - Gas
pipeline - Power plant 1/ Power plant 2 - End user. LNG is transported from the LNG source to the
FSRU using LNG shuttle. Here, the LNG which has been converted into gas is transferred to the power
plants using a gas pipeline. The gas sent to the power plants is used as fuel to generate electricity. The
gas pipeline enables the delivery of natural gas not only to one power plant but also to several power
plants. This supply chain scheme is particularly useful when truck transportation is not feasible due to
land transportation limitations and delivery access constraints. To implement this alternative scheme.
environmental conditions such as geography conditions need to be considered, as well as the planned
location of the gas pipelines.
The analysis of sea-keeping is a critical aspect of FSRU design and has a significant impact on the
availability of the FSRU. Even if the unloading of LNG from an LNG carrier is temporarily not possible
due to weather conditions, the FSRU operation can still be maintained. As long as the availability of
unloading is typically above 95%, the operation of the FSRU will remain unaffected. Minimizing the
motions and accelerations of the FSRU is important for the comfort and efficiency of the crew.
Seakeeping analysis has been conducted for the designed FSRU, focusing on pitch, roll, and combined
pitch and roll motions. Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) which is a transfer function used to
determine the effects of sea conditions on the motion of a marine structure is shown in figure 4(a) – (f).
It helps determine whether a marine structure requires design modifications to improve stability. The
use of RAO in this design phase enables the identification of necessary design modifications to meet
safety criteria and enhance the performance of the vessel. RAO indicates the motion trend of a ship in
relation to waves.

6
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

Figure 4 (a). RAO Surge Full Load. Figure 4 (b). RAO Sway Full Load.

Figure 4 (c). RAO Heave Full Load. Figure 4 (d). RAO Roll Full Load.

Figure 4 (e). RAO Pitch Full Load. Figure 4 (f). RAO Yaw Full Load.

The largest surge RAO occurs at angles 0° and 180° with a value of 0.954 deg/m at a frequency of
0.2513 rad/s. The largest sway RAO occurs at an angle of 90°. Also, with a value of 0.954 deg/m at a
frequency of 0.2513 rad/s. The heave RAO at all angles is approximately 1 deg/m. including the height.
Due to the very low draft, resulting in a significant response of heave motion of the FSRU along the Z-
axis. The largest roll RAO occurs at an angle of 90° with a value of 0.836 deg/m. The largest pitch RAO
occurs at angles 45° and 135° with a value of 0.378 deg/m. The largest yaw RAO occurs at an angle of
135° with a value of 0.44 deg/m. Based on the RAO analysis, the motion of the FSRU occurs in all six
degrees of freedom (6 DOF), including the dominant direction for each motion as indicated by the

7
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

maximum frequency values. Based on the seakeeping RAO analysis, it can be determined that the FSRU
encounters the highest environmental load at a 90° direction. Therefore, in order to minimize the load
on the FSRU and achieve effective mooring tension, the FSRU should be oriented in the 90° direction.
The maximum pitch moment is influenced by waves approaching from the bow or aft direction. In
the case of moored FSRU with fixed positioning, where waves approach perpendicular to the
longitudinal centerline, no pitching is expected. However, for moored carriers capable of weathervaning,
pitching can occur for wavelengths longer than twice the ship's length. Since the waves are shorter
compared to the ship's length, little to no pitching is anticipated.

3.2. Considerations in Determining FSRU Components

3.2.1. Deck Arrangements. For the LNG storage tank, cylindrical LNG tank (IMO type C) will be used
to contain LNG. There are two cylindrical LNG tank connected to the LNG pump at the same time. One
of them is in stand-by mode. This choice is based on the consideration that LNG tank type C can
withstand pressures of ≤ 10 bar, allowing for longer Boil Off Gas (BOG) storage time without being
affected by sloshing and prevents the occurrence of local stress. The double bottom of FSRU (H) is
calculated with the formula 1 following guidance from DNV part 3.1.6. where B is breadth of the FSRU.
𝐵
𝐻 = 20 (1)
The inert gas requirement is determined by DNV Part 5.3.11. which states that the inert gas system
must supply at least 125% of the maximum flow rate out of the storage tank (reduced volume from the
storage tank). Inert gas generator chosen based on the natural gas send out capacity and gas expansion
ratio. Gas expansion ratio assumed to be 581.47 m3 NG/ m3 LNG.
From the calculation, double bottom FSRU is designed 1.35 m minimal height and the inert gas
capacity is 126.5 m3/h. According to DNV GL Chapter 2. Section 9. 3.5. the water spray system which
functions to prevent fires should be supplied to several areas: including exposed storage tank domes,
visible parts of storage tanks, storage vessels on the open deck, liquid and gas discharge and loading
manifolds, boundaries of the FSRU structure, and the gas pre-treatment area. The determination of the
emergency fire pump capacity on the FSRU complies with SOLAS Chapter II-2. 2.2.4.2. 2004. which
states that the number of installed pumps exceeds the minimum required, the capacity of the pump
should be at least 25 m3/h and capable of supplying 2 fire nozzles simultaneously.
𝑄
𝑣= 𝑑2
(2)
𝜋𝑥
4
The diameter of the emergency fire pump pipe is adjusted to the main firefighting pipeline diameter.
which is 8 inches. The flow rate of seawater in the firefighting pipeline can be calculated by the
following formula 2. Where v is seawater flow rates, Q is pump flow rate, and d is internal pipe diameter.
Based on the calculation, the water velocity in the fire-fighting pipeline when using the emergency fire
pump is 780.5 m/h or 0.217 m/s.

3.2.2 Heating Medium Regasification Capacity. For the regasification unit, this research uses
Intermediate Fluid Vaporizer (IFV). Several advantages of using IFV are it can be used both open loop
or closed loop, design LNG pressure 10 to 150 barg, free from freezing problems of seawater by not
contacting the LNG with sea water, reducing weight and size, and free from propane leakage. The
minimum LNG regasification capacity is 17 mmscfd or 2 x n (vaporizer). PFD of regasification LNG
process using IFV is shown in figure 5. Black lines are normal operation system, red lines are
intermediate discharge and re-discharge system (only for overhaul maintenance) and blue line is cooling
system for LNG tube sheet if quick start is required. While in normal operation, specifically in holding
mode without loading, the boil-off gas (BOG) produced from the LNG stored in the tanks is typically
around 0.10-0.15% by weight per day, equivalent to approximately 3-5 t/h (tons per hour), varying based
on the FSRU age. Modern FSRU with improved insulation exhibit lower BOG rates, approaching 0.1%.

8
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

Figure 5. Process Flow Diagram (PFD) of IFV [15].

3.2.3 Pipe Diameter. The determination of the main gas pipe diameter in the FSRU consists of three
types: LNG liquid header pipe in the loading system, natural gas header pipe for BOG, and gas pipe for
power plants. Natural gas header pipe diameter depends on the performance of the LNG pump. Diameter
of the LNG liquid header (Di) is calculated with formula 3. Where Q is LNG flowrate and v is the
velocity of LNG with maximum velocity for stainless steel is 3 m/s. Referring to the pump
specifications. which have a capacity of 1000 m3/h. the diameter of the LNG liquid header pipe is 450
mm. According to the minimum thickness standard stated in DNV Part 4.6.9. it should be at least 4 mm.
4𝑥𝑄
𝐷𝑖 = √𝑣 𝑥 𝜋 (3)
For the natural gas header pipe diameter is based on the maximum allowed gas flow velocity. which
is 20 m/s. Therefore. the minimum diameter of the NG header pipe is 114 mm. For the gas pipe diameter
to the power plants consists of the high-pressure line and the low-pressure line. as different types of
engines are used in the power plants. The high-pressure line is responsible for meeting the gas demand
for gas turbine power plants with a gas capacity of 14.8 t/h or equivalent to 20.000 m3 gas/hour at peak
load conditions. Meanwhile. the low-pressure line is responsible for meeting the gas demand for the
Jayapura Peaker and Jayapura Load Follower power plants, both using Wartsila dual fuel diesel engines,
with a total gas capacity of 15.3 t/h or equivalent to 20.630 m3 gas/hour at peak load conditions. Based
on the calculations. the diameter of the natural gas low-pressure line pipe is 0.58 m, and the diameter of
the natural gas high-pressure line pipe is 0.57 m.

3.2.4 Tank Capacity. There are three tanks to be considered: ballast tanks, bilge tanks, and freshwater
tanks. The ballast system in the FSRU has purpose to maintain stability and to keep the FSRU in an
even keel condition caused by the regasified LNG which reduces the weight of the tanks. Bilge and
ballast pumps will be combined as general service to reduce investment costs. The capacity of the ballast
pump depends on the required de-ballasting time. The ballast pump capacity is assumed to be 0.035
m3/s. Minimum diameter main pipe is 4.79 inches.
Table 4 show ballast tank capacity of FSRU design. The use of freshwater in the FSRU is divided
into two categories: consumable and non-consumable needs. Consumable needs include drinking and
cooking water with minimum of 2.5 litres/person per day is required for cleaning and sanitation needs.
It requires 60-200 kg of clean water per crew member per day. The amount of crew is 15 persons.
Therefore, the calculation for freshwater is 2070 kg/day or 2.070 m3/day, and the freshwater requirement

9
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

for engine cooling is 0.12 m3 per engine. But in the FSRU it is provided twice the amount to cover at
least one full requirement.
Table 4. Tank Capacity
Ballast Tank Volume (m3) Mmscfd m3/day
Aft Peak Tank Port 174.949 Ballast Tank Starboard 2 405.290
Aft Peak Tank Center 176.830 Ballast Tank Portside 3 407.761
Aft Peak Tank Starboard 174.949 Ballast Tank Center 3 430.099
Ballast Tank Portside 1 310.396 Ballast Tank Starboard 3 407.761
Ballast Tank Center 1 329.076 Ballast Tank Portside 4 405.856
Ballast Tank Starboard 1 310.396 Ballast Tank Center 4 405.856
Ballast tank Portside 2 405.290 Ballast Tank Starboard 4 405.856
Ballast Tank Center 2 427.443 Ballast Tank Portside and Starboard 5 397.55

3.3. Conceptual Design FSRU in Eastern Indonesia

The FSRU is designed with two cranes for loading and unloading process. Flexible hoses are used to
transfer LNG from the LNGC storage tank to the FSRU. The FSRU manifold is planned to have a total
of 5 manifolds: including two manifolds for the liquid phase, two manifolds for the vapor phase, and
one transfer pipe to the power plant on each portside and starboard of the FSRU. The manifold planning
refers to OCIMF standards. Figure 6 (a) – (d) shows detailed visualization of FSRU design.

Figure 6 (a). Isometric View of FSRU Design. Figure 6 (b). Isometric View of FSRU
Design.

Figure 6 (c). Side View of FSRU Design. Figure 6 (d). Front View of FSRU
Design.

The engine room is located at the front, on the lower deck of the accommodation area. Cargo control
room, meeting room, and office are situated on the accommodation deck. Each FSRU tank is equipped
with two low-pressure pumps which are submersible hydraulic pumps located below the LNG tank.
Each tank is also equipped with inlets and outlets for the regasification facility, vent mast, metering unit,
pressure control, and temperature control. The pressure control functions as an automatic system to

10
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

control the operation conditions of the centrifugal pump to achieve the required pressure, while the
temperature control ensures that the NG outlet temperature does not drop below 18°C during the
gasification process. Additionally, emergency shutdown (ESD) valves and gas metering units are
installed at the pump outlet and NG delivery outlet to automatically cut off the liquid and gas phases. In
case of leakage or fire, an alarm will be triggered. and the water spray system will be activated on top
of the equipment. The regasification facilities are located between the tanks to facilitate LNG handling.
The BOG from each tank will be directed to the BOG management system, which is positioned near the
regasification facilities above the LNG tanks. The BOG will then be routed to the generators and some
of the natural gas will be supplied to the power plant.

3.4. The Use of Solar Panel in FSRU

The generator used has an output power of 920 kW. When summed up, the highest total load occurs
during the night-time and loading conditions due to the fire-fighting pump operation during LNG
loading on the FSRU. Optimization of the available area on the FSRU for the placement of solar panels
is conducted. From the optimization results. the areas utilized for solar panel placement are on the
accommodation deck and additional platform with areas of 359.93 m2 and 145.41 m2, respectively.
The number of solar panels required to continuously supply the lighting load on the FSRU is 144
panels. The power calculation prioritizes the electrical load requirement for the lighting system on the
FSRU which is 45.2 kW. Considering the average sunlight duration in Indonesia is 12 hours with a
maximum assumed sunlight duration of 5 hours per day, the total power generated is 543 kWh per day.

3.5. Technical Loading and Unloading Process of FSRU

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) will be loaded onto the LNG Carrier (LNGC) with a cargo tank capacity
of 15.000 m3. The LNGC will transfer LNG to FSRU using the Ship-To-Ship (STS) transfer method.
During the unloading operation from the LNG Carrier to the FSRU, excessive Boil-Off Gas (BOG) will
be controlled by sending it to the power plant using the compressors on the ship. Some of the BOG will
be returned to the cargo tank of the LNG Carrier through free flow to maintain a positive tank pressure
(0.10 ~ 0.15 BarG) as the amount of LNG in the cargo tank decreases.

Figure 7. PFD for Loading Unloading LNG in FSRU.

Figure 7 shows PFD for loading unloading LNG from LNGC to FSRU storage tank. The
regasification process involves converting LNG from a liquid phase to a gas phase. Initially, natural gas

11
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

is cooled to a temperature of -160 °C and a pressure of 1 atm to form liquid LNG (Liquid Natural Gas).
Changing the phase from gas to liquid facilitates transportation and storage processes. LNG undergoes
regasification in the Regasification Unit of the FSRU to convert it back to gas. Once the BOG in the
FSRU tank reaches a certain pressure (approximately 0.15 - 0.25 Mpa), the LNG is pressurized (0.8 -
1.0 Mpa) by centrifugal pumps in each tank and then transferred to the LNG gasifier process. In this
process, it is heated and gasified by water-ethylene glycol. resulting in natural gas at a specific pressure
(0.8-1.0 Mpa) and a temperature of -50℃ before entering the gas heater. Inside the LNG gas heater. It
undergoes further heating by water-ethylene glycol to reach the required temperature (around 18℃) and
pressure (0.8-1.0 Mpa) before being transferred to the power plant.

3.6. Safety and Economical Analysis of FSRU

3.6.1 Safety Analysis of FSRU. When conducting a risk assessment for an FSRU, it is essential to
consider several factors, including the FSRU itself, incoming LNG carriers, other coastal infrastructure,
the terminal location, oceanographic conditions, and the traffic in the surrounding waters. The risk
assessment is influenced by four categories of factors: first, location and specific local conditions. This
includes factors such as the importance of LNG imports for the region, potential threats, possible
accidents, and critical coastal infrastructure, as well as the FSRU ship and incoming LNG carrier.
Second, risk management objectives: this involves identifying the consequences to be avoided, such as
injuries or property damage, and the significance of ensuring LNG supply. Third, Protective
mechanisms: this category encompasses safety measures, warning and alarm systems, and reaction
measures in case of accidents. Last, regular evaluation is hazardous projects like liquefied natural gas
imports need to be regularly re-evaluated to assess the adequacy of applied safeguards due to changing
conditions. This includes changes in facilities, coastal infrastructure, emerging threats, and shifts in risk
management objectives, among others.
In the risk assessment process, specific information related to the FSRU facility should be identified,
including the location, local conditions, environmental and oceanographic conditions, and cargo
operations. Factors to consider include the proximity to neighbouring areas and facilities, prevailing
weather conditions, and the specifics of cargo operations, such as the size and design of the FSRU ship,
regasification capacity, and required LNG supply. When identifying potential hazards and threats, both
unexpected accidents and intentionally caused incidents should be considered. Potential accident
scenarios involve leakage from tanks or pipelines, tank or pipeline ruptures, collisions with incoming
LNG tankers, hull damage leading to oil spills, incidents with the ballast system, onboard accidents,
fires, explosions, and disruptions due to severe weather conditions. It is important to note that when the
FSRU ship operates as an LNG terminal, there is no risk of ballast water pollution in the marine
environment, as LNG carrier arrive with full cargo and do not discharge ballast water into local waters.
The flammability of cargoes is a significant risk in the liquefied gas industry. Preventing the
formation of flammable mixtures is crucial, and this is achieved through strategies like containing the
gas, removing ignition sources, and ensuring an inert atmosphere. In the case of FSRU, where storage
tanks and various equipment are located, extensive fire detection equipment is installed. Fire detectors
are categorized as heat, smoke, or flame detectors, selected based on the materials that could potentially
burn in specific areas. Examples of typical locations for fire detectors include electrical control rooms,
BOG compressor houses, and all cargo pumps.
Several systems install in FSRU including the Emergency Shutdown (ESD). ESD system plays a
crucial role in halting all cargo processes in the event of an emergency. The primary purpose of the
system is to activate automatically in emergency situations to prevent adverse consequences. Factors
triggering system activation include exceeding pressure limits in cargo tanks, pipelines, or pumps, fire
detection on the FSRU or LNG ship, interruption of synchronization, and power outages. Before cargo
reloading begins, a thorough check of the entire system ensures readiness and successful
synchronization. Second, pressure Control and Exhaust Valve System. It establishes minimum and
maximum allowable pressure values. In case of pressure increase above the upper limit, gas is released
through vent valves to reduce pressure, while a decrease below the lower limit allows additional gas to

12
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

enter, causing pressure to rise. This prevents potential damage to tanks and pipelines due to excessively
high or low pressures. Each tank is connected to a vent mast, and evaporated gas is collected in a main
vent tank before being discharged through the main vent mast. Nitrogen is constantly used to treat the
vents, creating an inert atmosphere that prevents flammability. A valve at the bottom of each vent mast
regulates the release of nitrogen into the vent line to mitigate the risk of ignition when gas leaves the
vent mast. Last, PERC System. The Powered Emergency Release Coupling (PERC) system swiftly and
effectively halts cargo transhipment processes in emergency situations. It releases all transhipment pipes
using specially designed safety hooks located at the junction of the terminal pipeline and the cargo LNG
pipeline of the ship. The system can also release mooring ropes to quickly move the ship to a safe distance
using its own propulsion or with the assistance of tugs. This applies to both the LNG transhipment vessel
and the FSRU.

3.6.2 Economical Analysis of FSRU.

The capital cost of an FSRU terminal is typically 50-60% lower compared to an onshore terminal of
similar capacity. This cost advantage is attributed to the FSRU's compact size and efficient shipyard
costs, in contrast to the larger land area and significant civil engineering required for onshore terminals.
The reduced capital expenditure and improved cash flow significantly enhance the project economics.
As a point of consideration, a study has been conducted to compare the economic analysis of FSRU and
onshore LNG terminals. The findings, presented in Table 5, indicate a lower total CAPEX for FSRU.
Currently, the cost of constructing a new FSRU with a capacity of 173,000 m3 falls within the price
range of $240-$280 million. The lower CAPEX can be attributed to the significant impact of the smaller
size of the FSRU.

Table 5. CAPEX Comparison for Onshore LNG Terminal and FSRU []

Components Onshore FSRU (new build)
Jetty including piping 80 80
Unloading lines 100 N/A
Tank 1x180.000 m3 180 In FSRU
FSRU Vessel N/A 250
Process Plant 100 In FSRU
Utilities 60 In FSRU
Onshore interface/infrastructure N/A 30
CAPEX 520 360
Contingency 30% onshore, 10% FSRU 156 36
Owner’s costs 74 54
Total CAPEX 750 450

Additionally, FSRU terminals offer a shorter delivery schedule for the first gas, which further
improves cash flow and project economics. The ability to commence gas delivery more quickly also
enhances the competitiveness of the project. Most FSRU are leased, as the vessel is owned by a shipping
company and can be reassigned once the project is completed. This leasing arrangement offers
advantages over onshore terminals, where the construction cost is considered a sunk cost. Leasing
improves cash flow and project economics, particularly for shorter-term projects. However, for longer-
term projects like those spanning 20 years, outright purchase may be more cost-effective. Some recent
FSRU contracts provide this option.

4. Conclusion
The conceptual design of an FSRU intended to provide power plants in Eastern Indonesia with a capacity
from 60 MW to 70 MW has been conducted. The design encompasses various aspects. including

13
ICRC-2023 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1239 (2023) 012015 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1239/1/012015

determining the FSRU's location. considering principal dimensions and hull form. establishing the
general arrangement of the FSRU. outlining the loading and unloading procedures for LNG and the
regasification unit. addressing technical considerations related to deck arrangements. and exploring the
innovative utilization of solar panels. These design elements are thoroughly examined and discussed in
detail within this paper.

5. Acknowledgment
All authors would like to sincerely acknowledge to Reliability. Availability. Management and Safety
Laboratory (RAMS) Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember for support. literature project. and data for
this research.

References
[1] IGU 2022. World LNG Report. International Gas Union
[2] Turner and Marc J 2015 Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants rev 03 1a
[3] IEA. The Role of Gas in Today’s Energy Transitions. World Energy Outlook Report. 2019
[4] S. Kupferschmid, J. Hengstler, and S. Whitehouse 2019 Life Cycle GHG Emission 1
[5] V. Semaskaite, M. Bogdevicius, T. Paulauskiene, J. Uebe, and L. Filina-Dawidowicz 2022 J.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 10
[6] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022,( 71st edition) 1–60
[7] O. Turbaningsih, W. N. H. Nisa, A. Mustakim, I. H. Nur, and P. Wuryaningrum 2022 IOP Conf.
Ser. Earth and Environ. Sci. 972
[8] A. Bulte 2013 IGT Int. Liq. Nat. Gas Conf. Proc. 2 1158–1168
[9] F. Projects 2015 Challenges and Risk Allocation
[10] F. Jovanović, I. Rudan, S. Žuškin, and M. Sumner 2019 J. Mar. Res. 33 110–116
[11] M. Ramos and A. Miralles 2012 Nat. Gas - Extr. to End Use 143–158
[12] K. B. Artana 2009 Proc. Int. Conf. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. - OMAE 2 393–400
[13] I. W. G. K. D. D. Putra, K. B. Artana, I. M. Ariana, and L. G. M. P. Sudiasih 2019 IOP Conf.
Ser. Mat. Sci. and Eng. 588
[14] OCIMF 2018 Mooring Equipment Guidelines Part 1
[15] SOLAS 1974 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 222–226
[16] W. and McGuire 2000 Liquefied Gas Handling Principles 308
[17] DNVGL 2003 Rules Classif. Ships Part 3 Chapter 1 1–110
[18] DNVGL 2021 Rules for Classif. Ships Part 5 Ship types Chapter 7 Liquified Gas Tankers
[19] DNVGL 2012 Piping System Part 4 Chapter 6
[19] Z. Bao 2013 Applied Mechanics and Materials 291–294 843–846
[20] A. Energy and W. Group 2020 APEC Energy Working Group
[21] E. Summary 2021 Indonesia ’ s Small -Scale LNG Power Plant Conversion – A Triple Hit for
PGN ? The Goal Is Clear but Not the Numbers 1–37
[22] B. Songhurst 2017 The Outlook for Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRUs) Brian
Songhurst Senior Visiting Research Fellow
[23] S. Quirijns 2015 LNG Regasification Terminals
[24] A. Sugiyono and Adiarso 2021 IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1053
[25] B. Wibawa, I. Fauzi, D. A. Novianti, N. Shabrina, A. D. Saputra, and S. A. Latief 2021 IOP
Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 832
[26] E. Pratiwi, D. W. Handani, G. B. D. S. Antara, A. A. B. Dinariyana, and H. N. Abdillah 2021
IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1052
[27] K. Buda Artana et al 2016 Conf. on Innov. and Ind. App. 138–144
[28] R. T. Ho 2008 Offshore Technol. Conf. Proc. 3 1681–1691
[29] H. Kelle, Y. J. Wong, and J. Schlatt 2011 Offshore Technol. Conf. Proc. 2 950–962
[30] O. Turbaningsih and U. Mutaharah 2022 IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 1081

14