AN INTEGRATED SIMULATION STUDY OF GAS PIPELINE

NETWORK IN BANGLADESH

MD. LUTFUR RAHAMAN

MASTER OF ENGINEERING IN PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF PETROLEUM & MINERAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
DHAKA-1000, BANGLADESH

DECEMBER 2015
 AN INTEGRATED SIMULATION STUDY OF GAS PIPELINE
NETWORK IN BANGLADESH

A Project

By

MD. LUTFUR RAHAMAN

Roll NO: 0412132028 (F)

Submitted to the
Department of Petroleum & Mineral Resources Engineering
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ENGINEERIN IN PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF PETROLEUM & MINERAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
DHAKA-1000, BANGLADESH

DECEMBER 2015
 ABSTRACT

Bangladesh is considered a natural gas rich country. Twenty six gas fields have been
discovered in Bangladesh out of which 19 (nineteen) fields are producing gas at present
through 92 producing wells. The natural gas transmission pipeline infrastructure in
Bangladesh that delivers about 2500 MMSCF of natural gas per day, and is made up of
over 2406.82 km of pipe. At present a parallel pipeline (36" × 137 km) is being
commissioned for transmitting additional gas from Bibiyana to Dhanua. Another 177 km
new pipeline is going to be added to the existing network after completing the river crossing
operation in Padma River, to include Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna regions.

To meet the future demand, the existing pipelines are not enough to transmit large volume
of gas. Before taking up construction work of new transmission lines, an extensive study
of a pipeline network simulation model for this country is required. A mathematical
model to simulate pipeline system operation is constructed covering this entire existing
system. The model is first validated by matching with the existing network using known
data. Sensitivity studies are performed to investigate the effect of supply-demand
fluctuations. In this project work commercial software “PIPESIM” is used for gas
pipeline network analysis and simulation.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My deepest appreciation goes to my supervisor Mohammad Mojammel Huque, Assistant

Professor, Department of Petroleum & Mineral Resources Engineering, Bangladesh
University of Engineering and Technology for his supervision, guidance, encouragement,
review, writing, rewriting, verification and cooperation throughout this work.

I express my gratitude to Farhana Akter, Lecturer, Department of Petroleum & Mineral

Resources Engineering, for her valuable advice, guidance, inspiration, cooperation to
complete this work.

I would like to thank to the management of Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL)
for their support and cooperation in getting data and information that helped me a lot in
completing this work. I am also grateful to all who extended their helping hands
especially Ashoke Kumar Biswas, Manager, Zobayer Ahmed, Manager, S.M. Amir
Hossain, Manager, Sumon Mallik, Assistant Engineer, all of GTCL in completing this
work.

Finally, I would like to express my intense gratefulness to almighty Allah, the most
gracious and the most merciful for all his blessing and for enabling me to complete my
work.
 Table of Contents

Particulars Page No

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1

Chapter 2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

2.1 Objectives of the study -------------------------------------------- 3
2.2 Methodology ------------------------------------------------------- 3

Chapter 3 SCENARIO OF GAS SECTOR IN BANGLADESH

3.1 Brief history of gas sector ---------------------------------------- 6
3.2 History of gas pipeline in Bangladesh ------------------------- 9
3.3 Natural gas transmission system of Bangladesh ------------- 10
3.4 Present gas reserve ------------------------------------------------ 11
3.5 Present gas production ------------------------------------------- 12
3.6 Sector wise natural gas consumption in last 30 years -------- 13
3.7 Major gas transmission pipeline and flow capacity ---------- 15

Chapter 4 LITERATURE REVIEW 17

Chapter 5 NETWORK MODELING AND ANALYSIS

5.1 Volumetric flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing
network before commissioning of BD line -------------------- 25
5.2 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing network
after commissioning of BD line --------------------------------- 33
5.3 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing pipeline
network with (24" × 137 km) BD pipeline --------------------- 39
5.4 Prediction Case-1: Minimum pressure in Khulna at present
demand considering BD pipeline 24 inch in diameter -------- 43
5.5 Prediction Case-2: Maximum possible volumetric flow rate
maintaining 350 psig in Khulna with boost up device -------- 47
5.6 Prediction Case-3: Maximum demand and effect of
additional gas from LNG ----------------------------------------- 51
5.7 Summary of case studies ------------------------------------------ 56
5.8 Bottleneck of the transmission network ------------------------ 57
5.9 Costing of Bibiyana-Dhanua (BD) pipeline ------------------- 58

Chapter 6 CONCLUSION
Conclusion --------------------------------------------------------- 62
References --------------------------------------------------------- 63
Appendix ----------------------------------------------------------- 65
ACRONYMS

AGA American Gas Association.

AGMS Ashuganj Gas Manifold Station.
API American Petroleum Institute.
BCF Billion Cubic feet.
APCL Ashuganj Power Company Limited
AFCL Ashuganj Fertilizer Company Limited
BGFCL Bangladesh Gas Field Company Limited.
BGSL Bakhrabad Gas System Limited.
BOC Burmah Oil Company.
BPDB Bangladesh Power Development Board.
CEGIS Center for Environment and Geographical Information Services.
CFH Cubic Foot per Hour
CGS City Gate Station
CNG Compressed Natural Gas.
CS Compressor Station.
CWC Concrete Weight Coating.
DPP Development Project Proposal.
EPZ Export Processing Zone.
GIIP Initial Gas in Place.
GPSA Gas Processors Suppliers Association.
GPM Gallon Per Thousand Cubic Feet.
GTDP Gas Transmission and Development Project.
GTCL Gas Transmission Company Limited.
GUFF Ghorashal Urea Fertilizer Factory
GPS Ghorashal Power Station
HDD Horizontal Directional Drilling.
ID Internal Diameter
IOC International Oil Company.
JGTDSL Jalalabad Gas Transmission and Distribution System Limited.
JFCL Jamuna Fertilizer Company Limited
JDP Joydebpur
KGDCL Karnafuli Gas Distibution Company Limited.
KTL Kailastila.
LGR Liquid Gas Ratio.
LNG Liquid Natural Gas.
MMscfd Million cubic feet per day at standard condition.
NGC National Gas Company.
NWPGCL North-West Power Generation Company Limited.
OD Outer Diameter.
OGDC Oil and Gas Development Corporation.
Petrobangla Bangladesh Oil, Gas & Mineral Corporation.
PGCL Paschimanchal Gas Company Limited.
PPL Pakistan Petroleum Ltd.
PSOC Pakistan Shell Oil Company.
PUFF Polash Urea Fertilizer Factory
QMS Quality Management System.
RDDP Revised Development Project Proforma/Proposal
RPCL Roghurampur Power Company Limited
SGCL Sundarban Gas Company Limited.
SGFCL Sylhet Gas Field Company Limited.
STANVAC Standard Vacuum Oil Company.
STB Standard Stock Tank Barrel.
STP Standard Temperature and Pressure.
TBS Town Border Station.
TGTDCL Titas Gas Transmission and Distribution Company Limited.
WT Wall Thickness.
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Bangladesh is a country of opportunities, and the petroleum industry is one of the major
sectors. Countrywide well established infrastructure, advanced telecommunication
facilities, growing middle-class with substantial economic capacity and fast growing need
for power have attracted International Oil Companies (IOC) to invest in the petroleum
sector of Bangladesh. Bangladesh constitutes the largest deltaic basins of the world with
sediments deposited and has proven its ability to generate significant hydrocarbon
resources. [1]

Various national and international companies used to carry out wild cat exploration in the
potential areas of Bangladesh. The exploration works have so far been discovered 26
[2]
(twenty Six) gas fields including 1(one) offshore gas field and 1 (one) oil field . The
way of transportation of gas either by pipeline or by cylinder/vessel in the form of CNG.
But the most economical, easiest and safe way of continuous transportation of large
volume of gas is transportation by pipeline. In Bangladesh, National Gas Grid is operated
by Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL), a state owned company under
Petrobangla, dividing the transmission system into two operational regions such as
Transmission East (Dhaka, except greater Faridpur district, Sylhet and Chittagong
divisions) and Transmission West (Rajshai, Khulna and Barisal divisions including
greater Faridpur district) [3].The West Zone comprises geographical area on the west side
of the rivers Jamuna and lower Meghna, which means Khulna, Rajshahi, Barisal divisions
and greater Faridpur district of Bangladesh [4].

All gas fields are situated in the Eastern, North-Eastern and South-Eastern side of the
river Jamuna, naturally, most of the principal demand area and major gas consumers in
the Transmission East area along with capital Dhaka have been brought under gas
transmission and distribution network. The transmission lines, operated by the
transmission and distribution companies of Petrobangla, are also situated in the eastern
part of the country.

1
A detail study is required to know what quantity of gas at customer’s required pressure
would be possible to transmit through the entire network as well as to the West Zone by
the present upstream pressure.

The project aims to build virtual network models for existing pipeline network along with
extended pipeline by using commercial software “PIPESIM”. This work is done to
simulate and to analyze some sensitivity studies on the entire network from which various
scenarios would come up such as pressure drop along the pipeline at different
junctions/outlets when gas flow rate varies effectively, maximum gas flow rate at
minimum required outlet/downstream pressure and minimum pressure at maximum
required flow at demand centers under the network, the effect of compressors to the
network after installation at Elenga.

2
 CHAPTER 2

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

2.1Objectives of the study

The specific objectives are:

 To analyze the existing gas pipeline network before commissioning of
Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline in Bangladesh.

 To validate the Model with both Field data and Analytical value in terms of
pressure and flow rate.

 To observe the pressure scenario along the pipeline at different junctions,

District Regulating Station (DRS) and City Gate Station (CGS) when gas flow
rate varies effectively.

 To observe the effect of newly constructed parallel gas transmission pipeline

(36" × 137 km) from Bibiyana, Hobigonj to Dhanua, Gazipur.

 To analyze the effect of additional gas from LNG through transmission pipeline
(30" × 90 km) from Moheshkhali to Chittagong Ring-Main (Fouzdarhat).

 Check bottlenecking in the whole pipeline network if any.

2.2 Methodology

The Project involves network modeling and analysis of gas transmission pipeline. The
aim of the project is to analyze some sensitivity studies i.e. specify the known inlet/outlet
pressure and flow rate and calculate the corresponding gas pressure and flow rate at
various sets of inputs.

In this project work network models for existing gas transmission pipeline network along
with extended or newly commissioned pipelines, are built by using PIPESIM software. A
virtual network model comprises of physical model and fluid model. Among others,
pressure drop and volume of flow depend on pipeline length, diameter, wall thickness,
efficiency factor etc. which are considered to build the physical model.

3
For the simulation, a fluid model is defined according to the sales gas specification data
of GTCL. The fluid model is the main prerequisite that should be defined first while
building a simulation network model. To create a fluid model, amount of water and
liquefiable hydrocarbons are also defined along with gas composition as pressure drop in
pipeline largely depends on these fluid properties. Black Oil Fluid Model is defined in
this simulation network. The fluid used in the model is a mixture of natural gas of several
gas fields taken from Ashuganj Gas Manifold Station (AGMS) in September 2010 and
the defined gas compositions are shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Used Fluid Model [5]

Element % Mole
Nitrogen 0.331
CO2 0.101
Methane 96.518
Ethane 2.091
Propane 0.458
i-Butane 0.159
n-Butane 0.086
i-Pentane 0.049
n-Pentane 0.032
Hexane 0.092
Heptane 0.074
Octane 0.011
Total 100.00

Specific Gravity: 0.5805 at Base Condition: 60°F & 14.696psia

Ideal Density: 0.0443 lb/ft3
Real Density: 0.0444 lb/ft3
Mole Weight: 16.8123 gm/mol
C5+: 0.0951 GPM (gallon per thousand cubic feet)

Effect of temperature gradient is not considered and 60ºF of gas temperature is considered
all through the pipeline. The Watercut and Liquid Gas Ratio (LGR) are considered 0%
and 0 STB/MMscf respectively to represent the fluid in the model as gas.

4
There are numbers of equations for long pipelines such as the Weymouth, Panhandle A,
and Panhandle B equations to simulate compressible gas flow. These equations were
developed from the fundamental energy equation for compressible flow, but each has a
special representation of the friction factor. The selection of appropriate flow
equation/correlation for a particular pipeline is very important and it requires detailed
study on selection criteria such as flow characteristics viz. turbulent/laminar flow, flow
rate, operating pressure, percentage of pressure drop etc. and length/diameter of pipeline.
In these models Beggs and Brill Revised fluid flow correlation has been used for
horizontal flow assuming there is no vertical flow in the network and Panhandle ‘B’
correlation has also been used for single phase flow considering the fluid as 100% gas.
The friction factor is considered 1.

To validate the network model, pressure at different junctions, District Regulating Station
(DRS) and City Gate Station (CGS) compare with both field data from the existing outlets
and the simulated data obtained from existing gas transmission pipeline network analysis
by PIPESIM software. The simulated data is validated with the actual data from the Gas
Transmission Company Limited (GTCL) data sheet on a specific date. Once the network
model is validated, it can be used to perform several sensitivity studies.

5
 CHAPTER 3

SCENARIO OF GAS SECTOR IN BANGLADESH

3.1 A brief history of natural gas in Bangladesh

The beginning: up to 1947

The search for oil and gas in the area constituting Bangladesh began in the later part of
the 19th century through some isolated geological mapping. The first serious attempt to
find oil and gas was undertaken in Sitakund in 1908 by the Indian Petroleum Prospecting
Company, 18 years after the first oil discovery in Digboi, Assam. During 1923-31
Burmah Oil Company (BOC) drilled two shallow wells in Patharia. The wells were
abandoned though there was a reported show of oil. A total of 6 exploratory wells were
drilled, the deepest being 1047 meters. There was, however, no discovery and the Second
World War disrupted further activities [2]

The interim: 1948 to 1971

The promulgation of Petroleum Act in 1948 generated a lot of interest in oil and gas
exploration by international oil companies. The Standard Vacuum Oil Company
(STANVAC) of USA, Pakistan Petroleum Ltd. (PPL), Burmah Oil Company affiliate and
Pakistan Shell Oil Company (PSOC) carried out exploration till the end of the sixties.
STANVAC drilled 3 wells at Hazipur, Bogra and Kuchma in the north-western part of the
country without success. PPL drilled wells in Haripur, Patharia, Chhatak, Fenchuganj,
Patiya and Lalmai and made the first gas discovery in Haripur in 1955, followed by
Chattak in 1959. PSOC was the most successful company and discovered 5 gas fields
named Titas, Habiganj, Rashidpur, Kailashtila and Bakhrabad. They also drilled the first
offshore well Cox's Bazar-1, which was dry. Oil and Gas Development Corporation
(OGDC) was established in 1961 providing an institutional foundation for exploration of
oil and gas in the country. OGDC carried out geological and geophysical surveys
including gravity, magnetic and seismic types and drilled wells in Jaldi and Semutang,
discovering gas in Semutang in 1970 [2]

6
The way forward: 1972 to 1979

After the independence of Bangladesh, exploration activities by both national and

international companies gathered pace. Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Mineral Corporation
(Petrobangla) continued its exploration efforts while the Bangladesh Petroleum Act was
passed in 1974 to facilitate international participation under Production Sharing Contract
(PSC). The offshore area of Bangladesh was divided into 6 blocks, which were taken up
by Ashland, ARCO, BODC (Japex), Union Oil, Canadian Superior Oil and Ina Naftaplin
under PSCs. These companies carried out gravity, magnetic and seismic surveys (about
32,000 km) and drilled 7 wells. Of them, only Union Oil Company discovered an
offshore gas field Kutubdia in 1977. This phase of PSC ended in relinquishment of the
blocks by the PSC operators in 1978. On 9 August, 1975, Government led by the Father
of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman purchased five gas fields, namely
Titas, Habiganj, Rashidpur, Kailashtila and Bakhrabad from British company, Shell
Petroleum Company Limited, for a nominal amount of 4.5 million pound sterling. This
landmark decision taken by the then Government laid the foundation of energy security of
the country by introducing sole ownership of the state over these major gas fields [2]

Gathering momentum: 1980 onwards

The 1980s saw accelerated exploration activities by Petrobangla. During the time, 12
exploration wells were drilled at Muladi, Begumganj, Singra, Beanibazar, Atgram, Feni,
Fenchuganj, Sitakund, Bogra, Kamta, Marichakandi (Meghna) and Belabo (Narshindi);
and 7 gas fields were discovered at Begumganj, Beanibazar, Feni, Fenchuganj, Kamta,
Marichakandi (Meghna) and Belabo (Narshindi). Among these, Fenchuganj # 2 well
remains the deepest one drilled so far in Bangladesh (4,977m). Meanwhile, a new
milestone was achieved when Petrobangla discovered the first commercial oil pool in
Sylhet # 7 on 23December, 1986. Since 1989, after the formation of BAPEX as the
national exploration company and thereafter exploration and production company, the
company has continued exploration and production activities and drilled 4 exploratory
wells discovering gas at Shahbazpur, Saldanadi, Srikail and Sundalpur. In 1981 Shell Oil
Company (Shell) was awarded the Chittagong Hill Tracts for petroleum exploration under
PSC. Shell conducted geological and seismic survey and drilled the Sitapahar well which
was dry. Subsequently Shell undertook exploration in the extreme North West of the
7
country and drilled the first well in the area - the Salbanhat well which was also dry. In
1988 Scimitar Exploration Limited was awarded another PSC of what is now block # 13
in the Surma basin. They failed to prove the extent of the oil discovery at Sylhet structure
but discovered the Jalalabad gas field. Formulation of National Energy Policy, 1996 and
adoption of a model production sharing contract (PSC) document together with redefining
the whole of Bangladesh territory into 23 exploration blocks ushered in a new phase of
exploration and development of oil and gas in the country. In the first stage under the new
arrangement, 8 blocks were awarded to 4 companies under PSC. Exploration and
development activities in these blocks were rather limited and most of the blocks were
moderately covered by seismic surveys. A total of 11 exploration wells were drilled and 3
gas fields were discovered in these blocks. These fields are Moulavibazar, Sangu
(offshore) and Bibiyana. These 3 fields along with Jalalabad gas field discovered by
Scimitar Exploration Ltd. were developed under PSC and are currently in production. The
first 3D seismic survey of the country took place in Bibiyana during its appraisal.
Bibiyana came under production in March, 2007. Another PSC bidding round during the
late nineties culminated in awarding 4 more blocks. These were SHELL/CAIRN/BAPEX
in blocks # 5 and 10, UNOCAL/BAPEX in block # 7 and TULLOW/
CHEVRON/TAXACO/BAPEX in block # 9. Exploration activity was conducted in these
blocks. Substantial activities were undertaken in block # 9 only, where 5 exploration
wells were drilled on the basis of seismic survey including 3D seismic. The Offshore
Bidding Round 2008 being limited to newly-formed deep water blocks attracted some
bids. However, the ensuing maritime boundary dispute in most of the blocks created a
stalemate. In this backdrop, two blocks were negotiated with Conoco Phillips and a PSC
for two blocks was signed in 2011. Conoco Phillips completed the initial seismic survey
in the blocks. They relinquished these blocks in 2014 without drilling any exploratory
well. After the resolution of the Maritime boundary dispute with Myanmar by virtue of
the judgment awarded on 14 March, 2012 by International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea (ITLOS), the deep water blocks on the eastern part were rearranged. This is a widely
acclaimed achievement of the Government led by Honorable Prime Minister Sheikh
Hasina. The Bangladesh Offshore Bid Round 2012 was announced in December 2012
and substantial initial response was received. Under this Bid round, three shallow water
PSCs have been signed with ONGC Videsh, Oil India & BAPEX for blocks SS-04 and
SS-09. Santos, Kris Energy and BAPEX for block SS-11. Deep water bids, received in
January, 2014, are now being processed. Since the signing of the PSC's, several changes
8
in ownership and restructuring in the contracts have taken place. All of the onshore PSC's
have matured from the exploration phase to the production phase and major areas of the
blocks have been relinquished. As of December, 2014 PSC's are active in production
areas of blocks 12, 13 and 14 (Bibiyana, Jalalabad and Maulavibazar Gas Fields) operated
by Chevron. Even though exploration history of oil and gas in Bangladesh goes back
almost a century, exploration density could not be enhanced as much it is required to
convert domestic oil and gas resources into proven reserves. However, the exploration
success ratio is high as of about 1 in 3 wells. PSC explorations were also contributing to
the enhancement of gas production. As of December, 2014 out of 26 gas fields
discovered, 19 were under production. Meanwhile, peak gas production per day crossed
the level of 2,600 MMCFD wherein average daily gas production remained more than
2,500 MMCFD by December, 2014. Despite increase in production, the rising demand
could not be met and the gap between supply and demand is widening. As such the
government has taken steps to import LNG to minimize the gap. [2]

3.2 History of gas pipeline in Bangladesh

Generally natural gas fields are situated in the remote areas in Bangladesh. But the gas
consumers are situated mainly in the urban areas, suburbs and industrial areas. In order to
bring the gas to consumer’s premises it is essential to construct gas transmission pipe
lines, stations (CGS, TBS, DRS and RMS etc.) and distribution networks. When the
maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of a pipeline is above 10 bars it is
known as transmission and when the MAOP is below or equal to 10 bars it is known as
distribution pipeline.
The first commercial use of gas in Bangladesh began in 1960 with the construction and
commissioning of Chattak Cement Factory (Ex-Assam-Bengal Cement Factory). The gas
was supplied from Chattak (Tengratilla) gas field through 4 inch diameter 19 kilometer
transmission pipeline which is known as the first transmission pipeline in Bangladesh.
The second transmission pipeline (psig) was constructed & commissioned in 1961 from
Sylhet (haripur) gas field to Natural Gas Fertilizer Factory (NGFF), fenchuganj, Sylhet.

9
Gas Transmission & Distribution widely started in 1968 when Titas Gas Transmission &
Distribution Company Ltd. (TGTDCL) completed its 14 inch diameter 821 kilometer
Transmission pipeline from Titas Gas Field (B’Baria) to Demra with a spun line
(Transmission pipeline) from Narshingdi to Ghorashal Industrial Area.

Gas fields have different wellhead pressure and after processing the raw gas to pipeline
quality the gas is supplied to Transmission pipelines usually at 1000 psig (about 70 bar)
in Bangladesh. But sometimes this pressure may be above 1150 psig and less than 500
psig as per requirement. [3]

3.3 Natural gas transmission system of Bangladesh

Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL) is now responsible for maintenance and
operation of the gas transmission pipeline across the country. At present Gas is Produced
by state owned enterprises i.e. companies of Petrobangla and International Oil Companies
(IOC). Among them Bangladesh Gas Field Company Ltd (BGFCL), Sylhet Gas Field
Company Limited (SGFCL), Bangladesh Petroleum Exploration and Production
Company Limited (BAPEX) are the state owned companies of Petrobangla. The IOC’s
are Chevron Bangladesh, Tullow Bangladesh Limited and Santos.

Currently Six companies of Petrobangla are responsible for distributing gas in their
franchise areas. The marketing companies are:
 Titas Gas Transmission and Distribution Company Limited (TGTDCL)
 Bakhrabad Gas System Limited (BGSL)
 Jalalabad Gas Transmission and Distribution System Limited (JGTDSL)
 Karnafuli Gas Distribution Company Limited (KGDCL)
 Paschimanchal Gas Company Limited (PGCL)
 Sundarban Gas Company Limited (SGCL)

Before the formation of Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL) in 1993 there were
three gas transmission companies in Bangladesh who were also distribution companies
i.e. sell gas to end customers. These were Titas Gas Transmission and Distribution

10
Company Limited (TGTDCL), Bakhrabad Gas System Limited (BGSL) and Jalalabad
Gas Transmission and Distribution System Limited (JGTDSL). But after formation of
GTCL they are not permitted to expand their transmission facilities.

3.4 Present gas reserve

26 gas fields and an oil field have been discovered in Bangladesh up to March2015 out of
which 19 (nineteen) fields are producing gas at present through 92 producing wells[6]
Though average daily gas production is 2490-2550 MMscfd, Bangladesh is currently a
gas deficit country due to an average shortfall of 550-600 MMscfd. The overall gas sector
scenario is shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Gas sector at a glance [6, 7]

*Total Gas Fields 26

Producing Gas Fields 19

Producing Gas Wells 92

Daily Gas Production Capacity 2312MMscfd

Daily Gas Production 2490MMscfd

(Daily gas production and supply statics, GTCL,
as on 03February 2015)

GIIP (Proven + Probable) 37.7Tcf

Total Recoverable Gas Reserve 27.12Tcf

(Proven + Probable)

Gas Production up to December 2014 12.57Tcf

Remaining Reserve (Proven + Probable) 14.55Tcf

Current Gas Demand 3100MMscfd

Daily Gas Shortfall 550-600MMscfd

* Including newly (in 2014) discovered gas field named “Rupganj Gas Field”, Dhaka.

11
.3.5 Present gas production

Currently average gas production is around 2490-2550MMscfd. Table 3.2 shows gas
production of a particular day (02-03 February 2015) only.

Table 3.2 Daily Gas Production Statistics [6]

Company Gas Fields No. of Production Gas Production
Producing capacity production as a % of
well. (MMscfd) (MMscfd) Total
production
1. National Gas Companies (NGCs)
1.1 BGFCL Titas 21 518 513 21.82
Bakgrabad 6 43 40 1.61
Habigonj 7 225 225 9.52
Narsigdi 2 30 28 1.19
Meghna 1 11 8 0.4
Sub-total 37 827 814 34.62
1.2 SGFL Sylhet 2 11 9 0.38
Kailashtila#1 2 15 14 0.76
Kailashtila#2 3 65 57 2.59
Rashidpur 4 64 60 1.99
Beanibazar 1 14 10 0.42
Sub-Total 12 169 150 6.16
1.3 Bapex Salda 1 20 9 0.59
Fenchugonj 3 40 38 1.61
Shahbazpur 2 30 7 0.29
Semutung 2 12 5 0.42
Sundalpur 1 10 5 0.21
Srikail 2 44 4 1.78
Sub-Total 11 156 102 4.93
Total (NGCs) 62 1152 1066 45.72
2. IOCs
2.1 Chevron Jalalabad 4 230 221 10. 67
Maulavibazar 6 60 51 3.19
Bibiyana 18 770 1041 35.68
Sub-Total 28 1060 1313 49.55
2.2 Santos Sangu - - - -
2.3 NIKO Feni - - - -
2.4 Tullow Bangora 4 100 112 4.72
Total (IOCs) 32 1160 1425 54.27
Grand Total 92 2312 2490 100
(NGCs+IOCs)

From Table 2.2, it is seen that about 45% gas is produced by NGCs and 55% gas is
produced by IOCs. Chevron alone is producing near about 50% of total national
production.

12
3.6 Sector wise natural gas consumption in last 30 years
In keeping with the increased production, gas sales also showed an upward trend. By the
end of 2013-14 financial year, total sales was 828.1 BCF of which power sector again
consumed the largest part worth 480.93BCF followed by fertilizer sector 53.8 BCF,
industry sector 141.8 BCF, domestic sector 101.5 BCF and others non-bulk 49.7 BCF.

Table 3.3 Natural gas consumption [7]

Gas Bulk Sales BCF Non Bulk Sales BCF Total

Year Production Comm- Tea / Bricks Sales
BCF Power Fertilizer Industry Domestic BCF
ercial Estate Field

1981-82 64.85 18 26.6 9.1 4.2 1.7 0 0 59.6

1982-83 72.16 22 25.8 9.8 5.2 1.9 0 0 64.7
1983-84 83.29 22.9 29.4 10.4 5.8 2.1 0 0 70.6
1984-85 94.59 38.3 27.2 12.6 6.3 2.2 0 0 86.6
1985-86 106.66 39.8 33.7 16.4 6.8 2.7 0 0 99.4
1986-87 125.32 51.8 34.9 18.7 6.8 3.4 0 0 115.6
1987-88 147.5 62.1 51 16.7 7.6 3.6 0 0 141
1988-89 155.93 65.5 53.4 15 9.3 3.2 0 0 146.4
1989-90 167.83 75.6 55.9 14.3 10.2 3.1 0 0 159.1
1990-91 172.84 82.6 54.2 13.2 10.5 2.9 0.7 0 164.1
1991-92 188.48 88.1 61.6 13.4 11.6 2.9 0.7 0.2 178.5
1992-93 210.98 93.3 69.2 15.2 13.5 2.4 0.7 0.2 194.5
1993-94 223.76 97.3 74.5 20.26 15.4 2.87 0.7 1.1 212.13
1994-95 247.38 107.4 80.5 24.24 18.86 2.88 0.6 1.1 235.58
1995-96 265.51 110.9 90.98 27.31 20.71 3 0.72 0.99 254.61
1996-97 260.99 110.82 77.83 28.62 22.84 4.49 0.71 0.48 245.79
1997-98 282.02 123.55 80.07 32.32 24.89 4.61 0.74 0.39 266.57
1998-99 307.48 140.82 82.71 35.79 27.02 4.71 0.71 0.35 292.11
1999-00 332.35 147.62 83.31 41.52 29.56 3.85 0.64 0.35 306.85
2000-01 372.16 175.27 88.43 47.99 31.85 4.06 0.65 0.44 348.69
2001-02 391.53 190.03 78.78 53.56 36.74 4.25 0.726 0.53 364.616
2002-03 421.15 190.54 95.89 63.75 44.8 4.56 0.744 0.527 400.811
2003-04 452.77 231.43 92.8 46.48 49.22 4.84 2.75 0.12 427.64
2004-05 486.64 249.42 93.97 52.28 52.6 4.84 4.49 0 457.6
2005-06 532.86 273.25 89.08 63.26 56.74 5.2 17.6 0 505.13
2006-07 562.7 283.28 93.46 77.41 63.13 5.64 12.73 0 535.65
2007-08 600.86 314.5 78.66 92.19 69.02 6.59 23.51 0 584.47
2008-09 653.57 351.84 74.83 104.6 73.38 7.48 31.8 0 643.93
2009-10 700 395.73 64.71 118.8 80.2 8.11 38.91 0 706.46
2010-11 708.9 395 62.8 121.5 87.4 8.5 39.3 0 714.5
2011-12 743.57 427.86 58.39 128.45 89.29 8.55 39.3 0 751.84
2012-13 800.57 463 59.95 135.74 89.74 8.81 38.56 0 795.8
2013-14 820.09 480.93 53.75 141.82 101.50 8.89 40.91 0.00 828.1

13
 Figure 3.1: Sector-wise annual gas consumption

Figure 3.2: Total Consumption: 820 BCF in FY 2013-14

14
3.7 Major gas transmission pipeline and flow capacity
Before formation of Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL), distribution
companies were transmitting gas through their transmission pipelines. GTCL is now
solely responsible for augmentation, operation and maintenance of national gas grid. The
name of the major transmission pipelines are mentioned in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: Major Gas Transmission Pipeline & Flow Capacity [2]

Sl. No. Name of pipeline Length OD MAOP Max. Flow

(Km) (inch) (psig) Capacity
(MMscfd)
Existing Gas Transmission Pipeline Operated by GTCL
1. Bakhrabad-Chittagong 175 24 960 350
2. Bakhrabad-Demra 68 20 1000 150
3. Ashuganj-Elenga 125 24 1000 270
4. North-South(KTL-Ashuganj) 175 24 1135 330
5. Ashuganj-Bakhrabad 59 30 1135 400
6. Elenga-Baghabari 73 20/24/30 1000 200
7. Beanibazar-Kailashtila 18 20 1090
8. Rashidpur-Ashuganj 82 30 1135 425
9. Nolka-Bogra 6+54 30/20 1000 166
10. Ashuganj-Monohordi 37 30 1000 400
11. Dhanua-Aminbazar 60 20 1000 200
12. Monohordi-Dhanua 51 30 1135 300-750
13. Bonpara-Rajshahi 53 12 1000 45
14. Titas-AB Pipeline 8 24 1000 -
15. Bibiyana-Dhanua 137 36 1000 -

Existing Gas Transmission Pipeline Operated by TGTDCL

16. Titas-Narshindi-Demra 82 14 1000 175
17. Habiganj-Ashuganj 58 12 1000 85
18. Titas-Narshingdi-Joydevpur 84 14/16 1000 260
19. Narshingdi-Siddirganj 43 20 1000 300
20. Dhanua-Mymensingh 57 12 1000 55
21. Elenga-Tarakandi 43 12 1000 80
Existing Gas Transmission Pipeline operated by other companies
22. Horipur-NGFF (JGTDSL) 43 - 1000 62
23. Srimongal-Moulavibazar (JGTDSL) 26 6 1000 11
24. ShahajiBazar-Shamsher 65 6 1000 11
Nagar(JGTDSL)
25. Kailastila-Kuchai(JGTDSL) 13 8 1000 62
26. Meghna-Baghrabad(BGSL) 28 8 1000 20
27. Salda-Bakhrabad(BGSL) 35 10 1000 35
28. Jalalbad Field-Kailashtila(Chevron) 15 14 1135

29. Sangu-Fazdarhat(Satons) 45 20 1000

30. Chadpur Lateral(BGSL) 42 8 960 35
31. Maulavibazar-Muchai(Chevron) 22 14 1135
32. Bibiyana-Muchai(Chevron) 42 30 1135
33. Semutang-Chittagong(KGDCL) 56 10 960 70
Note: These are the major transmission pipelines only. Besides these, there are other transmission
pipelines of smaller diameter and shorter length which are not mentioned here.

15
Figure 3.3: Block diagram of gas transmission system in Bangladesh

16
 CHAPTER 4
LITERATURE REVIEW

The act of simulating something first requires that a model be developed; this model
represents the key characteristics or behaviors/functions of the selected physical or
abstract system or process. The model represents the system itself, whereas the simulation
represents the operation of the system over time. The basis for hydraulic analysis of a gas
network is a simulation model. Individual, consultant and many organization simulated
present and future supply situation considering existing and planned transmission and
production situation by commercial software. In this study pipeline simulation network of
total transmission system of Bangladesh is designed by commercial software PIPESIM,
which is a steady-state, multiphase flow simulator used for the design and analysis of gas
production systems [8].

Model

A model is only as good as the data that is used to build it. Analysis based on incorrect
values will yield incorrect results. The analysis results should be evaluated and validated
with the proper weight. In most gas distribution models, customer usage and load
distribution will be the most critical parameter in the analysis.

Benefits of Modeling
 The ability to anticipate operating conditions within the system.
 The ability to identify problem areas and trouble-shoot problems before they
become serious.
 The ability to efficiently size new and replacement segments of gas system.
 The ability to estimate the impact on the system of adding new customers.
 And the ability to analyze “What if” scenarios without physical manipulation of
the gas system of actual operating settings.

17
Network

A network is any system of interconnected or interrelated components. In a network, each

component to some extent, affects every other component in the network. A gas system
can be considered as a network. In a gas system, the components of the network are the
pipes, valves, fittings, connectors, and regulators that make up the physical configuration
of the system – and the customers attached to the system. An example of how individual
components of a gas network might affect the other components in the network, consider
the following:

(a) The outlet pressure of a regulator supplying the system is reduced.

(b) To a certain extent, the pressure in the entire system is reduced.

(c) An additional regulator is added to the system, the flow from the other regulators
will be changed.

(d) And the flow through the pipes will be redistributed to accommodate the change in
flow from the regulators.

(e) A valve in the system is closed. Flow in the system must be redistributed to
accommodate the changes caused by the valve closure. The flow and pressure in
all the pipes will be changed, to a certain extent. Flow will decrease in the mains
to which the valve was attached and increase in mains that might provide flow
around the valve. When flows change in the system, so do the pressures in the
system.

(f) A large load is connected to the system. The flow in the portions of the system
supplying that load will be increased. The increase in flow will affect the
pressures in the system and the flow required of the supplying regulators.

18
Simulation Model

A simulation model consists of nodes and pipes. Source, sink and storages are all
represented by nodes which are interconnected by pipes.

Nodes
A node can be:
 Consumer,
 A simple node without consumption
 Producer
 Connection between one or more pipes.
Nodes are characterized by:
 Name
 Geometrical level
 Pressure
 Temperature
 Flow.
A node is placed in the model using one of the following criteria:
 Important change of dimensions;
 Branch;
 A wished position for known pressure of flow;
 Termination of a pipe without continuation;
 A large consumer.

Pipes
Pipes are connections between nodes. A pipe is characterized by-
 An upstream node;
 A downstream node;
 Length;
 Internal diameter;
 Roughness;
 Pressure;
 Pressure drops; and
 The mass flow through the pipe.

19
Pipes carry gas between nodes. The sum of the pipe flows going into a specific node must
equal the sum of the flows leaving the node through the connected pipes plus the flow
leaving the system through the node. The sum of the flow coming into the system through
a node must equal the sum of the flow leaving the node through the connected pipes. In
steady-state modeling, neither nodes nor pipes can store flow.

Sources

A source may be producer/supplier, intake point or others that carry in fluid into the
network. It is characterized by volume, pressure, temperature etc.

Sink

A sink may be customer, off-take or other load centers that carry out fluid from the
network. It is characterized by volume, pressure, temperature etc.

Flow

Flow in a pipe moves from the higher pressure end of the pipe to the lower pressure end.
That is flow always moves in the direction of the lower pressure node. Like a ball rolling
downhill, gas flows from high to low as shown in Figure 3.1
.

Figure 4.1: Schematic of flow in pipe.

Flow is created by a difference in pressure and consequently flow causes frictional

pressure losses. As the flow increases the friction losses also increase, and tend to restrict
or limit the flow. The greater the pressure difference, the greater the flow rate and the
greater the frictional pressure losses.

20
Flow Equations.

The Weymouth, Panhandle A, and Panhandle B equations were developed to simulate

compressible gas flow in long pipelines. The Weymouth is the oldest and most common
of the three. It was developed in 1912. The Panhandle A was developed in the 1940s and
Panhandle B in 1956[9]. The equations were developed from the fundamental energy
equation for compressible flow, but each has a special representation of the friction factor
to allow the equations to be solved analytically. The Weymouth equation is the most
common of the three - probably because it has been around the longest. The equations
were developed for turbulent flow in long pipelines. For low flows, low pressures, or
short pipes, they may not be applicable.

If the pressure drop in a pipeline is less than 40% of upstream pressure (P1) then Darcy-
Weisbach incompressible flow calculation may be more accurate than the Weymouth or
Panhandles for a short pipe or low flow. The Darcy-Weisbach incompressible method is
valid for any flow rate, diameter, and pipe length, but does not account for gas
compressibility. Crane (1988) states that if the pressure drop is less than 10% of P1 and it
is used an incompressible model, then the gas density should be based on either the
upstream or the downstream conditions. If the pressure drop is between 10% and 40%,
then the density used in an incompressible flow method should be based on the average of
the upstream and downstream conditions. If the pressure drop exceeds 40% of P1, then
use a compressible model, like the Weymouth, Panhandle A, or Panhandle B [10].

The equations for compressible flow are shown below. The Weymouth, Panhandle A, and
[9-10]
Panhandle B equations are the equation beginning with Qs=... with the constants c,
n, u, x, and y defined below. All of the equations shown below use the English units
indicated in the Variables section. Of course, calculation uses a variety of units with all of
the unit conversions handled internally by the program.

21
 u u
 Ts   P12  P22 
Qs  cED    x
n

 Ps   S LTZ 
2.7  s S P  P2
s 
Ts Pressure Drop (%) = 1 100 
P1  Patm
W   sQs  1Q1   2Q2
2.7 PS 2.7 P2 S
1  1
, 2 
TZ TZ

Variables:

The units refer to the units that must be used in the equations shown above. However, a
variety of units may be used in calculation and shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Particulars of variables.
Variable Description Unit Value
A Pipeline cross sectional area Square inch
C Constant - Weymouth: c=18.0625,
Panhandle A: c=18.16125,
Panhandle B: c=30.7083,
D Pipe inside diameter Inch -
E Efficiency factor - Typically 0.85 to 1.0
L Pipeline length mile -
N Constant Weymouth: n=2.6667,
Panhandle A: n=2.6182,
Panhandle B: n=2.53
P Absolute pressure in pipeline psia
Q Volumetric flow rate cfh
S Specific gravity of gas in -
pipeline, relative to air
T Absolute temperature (Rankin) ºR
U Constant Weymouth: u=1.0,
Panhandle A: u=1.07,
Panhandle B: u=1.02
V Velocity of gas = Q/A
W Mass flow rate Ib/hr
Z Gas compressibility Typical value 1.0 at standard
condition.
Ρ Density Ib/ft3
x, y Constant X=0.96 and y=0.51 for
Panhandle B

Subscripts:
1 = Upstream conditions; 2 = Downstream conditions; atm = Atmospheric conditions;
and s = Standard conditions (520 ºR, 14.73 psia).

22
AGA- Turbulent

 Applicable to transmission systems with fully turbulent flow conditions.

 Accounts for relative pipe roughness using rough pipe law.
 Moderately conservative compared to other transmission style equations.

Panhandle – A

 Applicable to transmission systems.

 Yields moderate results.
 Developed in the 1940’s.
 The Gas Engineers Handbook reports that the equation is applicable for large
diameter transmission piping where the Reynolds number varies between 5 and 20
million. And suggests an average efficiency for steel pipelines of 0.92 for this
equation.

 The Gas Process Suppliers Association (GPSA) data book reports that this
equation is intended to reflect flow of gas through smooth pipes. When used with
an efficiency of 0.90 the equation reasonably approximates the partially turbulent
general flow equation.

 The AGA GEOP text reports that this equation is applicable to distribution
systems where the Reynolds numbers range between 1,300,000 and 75,000,000
with 2% deviation from the smooth pipe and 16 inch and larger diameter pipe
operating between 20 Psig and higher.

 Reynolds number dependent.

Panhandle – B
 Applicable to transmission systems.
 Revised version of Panhandle – A, published in 1956.
 Less conservative transmission equation.
 The Gas Engineers Handbook notes that the equation is applicable for large
diameter transmission piping where the Reynolds number varies between 5 and 20
million. And suggests an average efficiency for steel pipelines of 0.9 for this
equation.
 Efficiency factors of 0.88 to 0.94 are often used with this equation.
 Reynolds number dependent.

23
Weymouth

 Applicable to transmission systems, though often for both distribution and

transmission.
 Yields conservative results.
 Equation published in 1912.
 The Gas Engineers Handbook reports that this equation provides a reasonable
approximation of the general rough pipe equation for diameter equal to ten inch,
and effective pipe wall roughness equal 0.002 inches. And suggests an average
efficiency for steel pipelines of 1.10 for this equation.
 The GPSA data book reports that for short pipelines and gathering systems this
equation agrees closely with metered volumes. However, the degree of error
increases with pressure.
 The AGA GEOP text suggests that the equation is not applicable to calculations in
distribution systems.
 Not a Reynolds number dependent equation.

Assumptions

 For the simplicity of calculation, the following assumptions are often made:
 No external work is done on the system i.e. w = 0;
 The gas flow is at constant temperature;
PV PV
 The gas behaves as an ideal gas, in other words, 1 1
 2 2
T1 T2

 The compressibility factor Z is taken into account;

 Differences in elevation on long pipelines are disregarded;

24
 CHAPTER 5

NETWORK MODELING AND ANALYSIS

For transmission system analysis, it is necessary to configure the pipeline model with
correct pipeline data. The transmission model is updated using all pipeline data within the
software PIPESIM for steady state analysis of the main transmission grid along with
interconnected transmission pipelines in the network.
The gas transmission network (existing and extended) are modeled, run and sensitivities
are studied and finally analyzed. The following sensitivity studies are made and analyzed
in this work:

 Volumetric flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing pipeline network before
commissioning of Bibiyana- Dhanua (BD) pipeline.
 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing pipeline network after
commissioning of (36" × 137 km) Bibiyana- Dhanua (BD) pipeline.
 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing pipeline network with
(24" × 137 km) of Bibiyana- Dhanua (BD) pipeline.
 Prediction Case-1: Minimum pressure in Khulna at present demand considering
Bibiyana- Dhanua (BD) pipeline 24 inch in diameter.
 Prediction Case-2: Maximum possible volumetric flow rate maintaining 350 psig
in Khulna with boost up device.
 Prediction Case-3: Maximum demand and effect of additional gas from LNG.

5.1 Volumetric flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing network before
commissioning of Bibiyana-Dhanua (BD) pipeline.

The physical model of the existing network before commissioning of BD pipeline

[11]
comprises of 2406.82 km gas transmission pipelines of various sizes. In this study
[12]
about 2320MMscfd gas is supplied through the entire network. The supplied volume
is very low compare to the network supply capacity. From Bibiyana gas field 855
MMscfd gas is supplied through the network. The gas flow of different gas fields as
source of the network is shown in Table 5.1 and the pressure at different sinks, obtained
from the network simulation at present demand situation, are tabulated in Table 5.2.

25
Major junctions such as Muchai Manifold, Ashuganj MS, Bakhrabad HUB and Elenga
TBS are shown in Figure 5.1. Bibiyana Gas Field is delivering gas to North South
Pipeline Corridor through North South and Rashidpur –Ashuganj Pipeline at Muchai
Manifold Station. The expensive gas pipeline compressor stations were set up at Muchai
and Ashuganj to evacuate additional gas from Northern Gas fields including Bibiyana and
Jalalabad. Gas produced from Bangora, Srikail, Salda, Meghna, Titas and Bakhrabad Gas
Fields are gathered in Bakhrabad HUB and supplied through Bakhrabad-Chittagong and
Bakhrabd-Demra pipeline. Gas is supplied to West Zone through Elenga TBS. The
physical model of the existing network along with extended constructed pipeline which is
built in PIPESIM software is shown in figure 5.2.

Figure 5.1: Major junction points of gas transmission network in Bangladesh

(Source:GTCL)

26
Figure 5.2: PIPESIM network modeling
27
 Table-5.1: Input parameters (actual value) as of 17 October 2014 [12]

Name Gas Flow

Type
(Gas Fields) (MMscfd)
Bakrabad Source 40
Bangora Source 110
Beanibazar Source 10
Bibiyana Source 855
Fenchuganj Source 38
Hobigonj Source 225
Jalalabad Source 210
Kailastilla Source 60
Maulvibazar Source 60
Meghna Source 10
Narsingdi Source 28
Rashidpur Source 60
Salda Source 12
Semutang Source 10
Srikail Source 40
Titas Location 1 Source 245
Titas Location 3 Source 145
Titas Location 5 Source 100
Titas Location 7 Source 55
Total 2313

All the gas fields are sources of this transmission network. Gas flow mentioned in Table
5.2 is the consumption rate at different District Regulating Station (DRS), City Gate
Station (CGS), Town Border Station (TBS), power station, fertilizer factory etc. as of 17
October2014

28
 Table- 5.2: Simulated pressure at different demand centers.

Gas Flow Pressure

Name Type
(MMscfd) (psig)

AES Haripur Sink 55 128.03

AES Meghnaghat Sink 75 339.67
AFCCL Sink 50 675.69
Aminbazar CGS Sink 110 107.55
APCL Sink 160 641.37
Ashulia CGS Sink 120 157.64
Baghabari Sink 60 325.33
Barabkunda Sink 45 345.59
Bogra Sink 20 345.47
Brahmanbaria Sink 30 864.12
Chandpur Sink 27 428.55
Comilla Sink 10 846.58
CTG CGS Sink 275 286.99
Fenchuganj PS Sink 52 880.2
Feni TBS Sink 6 690.9
Gozaria Sink 13 410.8
GPS Sink 140 443.41
GTCL Demra Sink 100 187.97
Haripur Sink 70 209.59
Iswardi EPZ Sink 5 669.05
JDP Sink 100 168.44
JFCL Sink 50 552.48
KTL off take Sink 50 933.98
Moymensing Sink 75 301
PUFF Sink 15 444.15
Rajshahi Sink 5 669.27
Shahjibazar PS Sink 45 300
Siddhirgonj Sink 160 125
Sirajgonj Sink 50 654.79
Sonargaon Sink 10 287.57
Tarabo Sink 35 205.18
TGTDCL Demra Sink 250 280
UFFL Sink 45 444
Total 2313

29
Analytical Data

To validate the simulation model, pressure at different off-take/outlet points are

calculated analytically using following modified Panhandle ‘B’ equation-most useful and
fairly accurate for transmission pipeline.
0.51
 P 2  P22 
Qmmscfd  0.00128084  1  d 2.53
 Lmiles 
Where,
Q= Flow in MMscfd
P1= Upstream Pressure, psig
P2= Downstream Pressure, psig
d= Inside pipe diameter, inch
L= Length of pipeline in Miles

Simulated, analytical and real field data of some off-take/outlet points are tabulated in
Table 5.3.
Table 5.3: Simulated, actual and calculated pressure at major demand centers.

Pressure (psig)
Off take points
Actual [12] Simulated Error (%) Calculated Error (%)
Ashulia CGS 161 158 1.8 160.15 0.5
Aminbazar CGS 106 108 1.8 107.78 1.7
PUFF 449 444 1.1 444.98 0.9
GUFF 449 444 1.1 444.85 0.9
GPS 451 443 1.8 444.77 1.4
Demra CGS 190 188 1.1 188.72 0.7
Meghnaghat PP 335 340 1.5 341.05 1.8
AFCCL 670 676 0.9 672.17 0.3
Ashuganj 645 641 0.6 643.02 0.3
Fouzdarhat CGS 282 287 1.8 284.57 0.9
Fenchuganj PS 873 880 0.8 878.89 0.7
Haripur PP 206 210 1.7 210.82 1.7
Siddirgonj 122 125 1.5 123.42 1.2
APCL 645 641 0.6 640.13 0.8
JFCL 557 552 0.9 555.37 0.3
TGTDCL Demra 284 280 1.4 282.34 0.7
RPCL 295 301 2.0 298.73 1.3
Feni TBS 700 691 1.3 690.05 1.4
Baghabari 322 325 0.9 320.78 0.4
Bogra 340 345 1.5 342.45 0.7

30
 Figure 5.3: Pressure of different demand centers.

The simulated and analytical pressure data are obtained against a corresponding flow rate
data, whereas the real value is recorded over the full day range. The simulated, calculated
and actual pressure is plotted in the graph shown in Figure 5.3 to compare with each other
at particular off-take/outlet.

Table 5.4: Actual and simulated gas flow, pressure data at major junctions

Name Type Gas Flow Pressure

(MMscfd) (psig)
Actual [12] Simulated Error Actual [12] Simulated Error
(%) (%)
Muchai Manifold Junction 1181 1180 0.08 1132 1125 0.62
AshugonjMS Junction 1434 1432 0.14 716 712 0.56
Bakhrabad HUB Junction 775 774 0.13 766 760 0.78
Elenga TBS Junction 110 107 2.73 365 362 0.82

31
Analysis of the study

The simulated result for different major demand centers is compared with both the real
field data and the calculated value. Simulated value is quite equal to real value, though
little variation (in the range of 0.3% -2% error) is observed in case of calculated value.
The simulated value of gas flow and pressure for different major junctions of the
transmission network is also matched with the actual data with minor variation. This
variation may occur due to the variation of the value of the some factors i.e. average
temperature, specific gravity, compressibility factor etc. Besides, there may have been
some error with field data as, sometimes, calibration and human error being associated
with it. The overall value is seemed to be very close. So, simulation network model
considered as valid and can be used for further analysis.

32
5.2 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing network after commissioning of
Bibiyana-Dhanua (BD) pipeline.

This case study is made for the network of additional parallel pipeline from Bibiyana to
Dhanua. Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL), a company of Petrobangla,
implemented the Bibiyana-Dhanua Gas Pipeline project aimed at supplying additional gas
to greater Dhaka and western regions and for reducing lone dependency on Ashuganj hub.
A 137-km gas transmission line with a 36-inch diameter has been set up over Habiganj,
Kishoreganj, Mymensingh and Gazipur districts, including a 67-km Haor area in
Habiganj and Kishoreganj districts as shown in Figure 5.4. The Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline
was commissioned on November 2014. Initially, it was planned to supply around 300
million cubic feet of gas through this pipeline which will gradually rise to maximum 650
million cubic feet every day [13].

Figure 5.4: Construction route of Bibiyana-Dhanua (36" × 137 km) pipeline.

It is to be mentioned that in this study after commissioning of this line about 200 MMscfd
gas is supplied through this pipeline. From Bibiyana gas field 1040MMscfd of gas is
supplied through the network whereas countrywide total 2490 MMscfd gas is supplied
through the entire network [6].The gas flow of different gas fields as source of the network
is shown in Table 5.5. Gas consumption of different demand centers as of 2nd February
2015 and pressure at different sinks obtained from the network simulation after
commissioning of this line are tabulated in Table 5.6.

33
 Table-5.5: Input parameters (actual value) as of 2nd February 2015 [6]

Name Gas Flow

Type
(Gas Fields) (MMscfd)

Bakrabad Source 40
Bangora Source 110
Beanibazar Source 10
Bibiyana Source 1040
Fenchuganj Source 38
Hobigonj Source 225
Jalalabad Source 220
Kailashtilla Source 74
Maulvibazar Source 50
Meghna Source 10
Narsingdi Source 28
Rashidpur Source 60
Salda Source 10
Semutang Source 10
Srikail Source 40
Titas Location 1 Source 240
Titas Location 3 Source 130
Titas Location 5 Source 100
Titas Location 7 Source 55
Total 2490

34
 Table- 5.6: Simulated pressure at different demand centers.

Gas Flow Pressure

Name Type
(MMscfd) (psig)
AES Haripur Sink 55 134.01
AES Meghnaghat Sink 75 349.86
AFCCL Sink 50 740.35
Aminbazar CGS Sink 120 241.82
APCL Sink 145 733.41
Ashulia CGS Sink 160 278.35
Baghabari Sink 60 745.06
Barabkunda Sink 10 537.18
Bogra Sink 20 752.18
Brahmanbaria Sink 30 903.88
Chandpur Sink 27 457.93
Comilla Sink 10 855.18
CTG CGS Sink 300 308.25
EPZ DRS Sink 20 631.45
Fenchuganj PS Sink 52 924.05
Feni TBS Sink 6 806.87
Gozaria Sink 15 419.3
GPS Sink 140 533.67
GTCL Demra Sink 120 205.03
Haripur Sink 70 225
Iswardi EPZ Sink 5 751.81
JDP Sink 100 440
JFCL Sink 50 652.49
KTL off take Sink 70 934
Moymensing Sink 85 417
PUFF Sink 15 534.27
Rajshahi Sink 5 603
Shahjibazar PS Sink 50 306
Siddhirgonj Sink 200 425
Sirajgonj Sink 50 739.39
Sonargaon Sink 10 299.21
Tangail DRS Sink 15 702.22
Tarabo Sink 35 227.99
TGTDCL Demra Sink 270 780
UFFL Sink 45 534.15
Total 2490

35
Analytical Data

To validate the simulation model, pressure at different off-take/outlet points are

calculated analytically using modified Panhandle ‘B’ equation that describe earlier.
Simulated, analytical and real field data of some major off-take/outlet points are tabulated
in Table 5.7

Table 5.7: Simulated, actual and calculated pressure at major demand centers.

Pressure (Psig)
Off take points [6]
Actual Simulated Error (%) Calculated Error (%)
Ashulia CGS 275 278 1.1 276.34 0.5
Aminbazar CGS 241 242 0.4 245.01 1.7
PUFF 527 534 1.3 533.98 1.3
GUFF 527 534 1.3 533.87 1.3
GPS 528 534 1.1 533.42 1.0
Demra CGS 208 205 1.4 204.74 1.6
Meghnaghat PP 354 350 1.1 350.16 1.1
AFCCL 750 740 1.3 742.68 1.0
Ashuganj 725 733 1.1 733.4 1.2
Fouzdarhat CGS 304 308 1.3 305.34 0.4
Fenchuganj PS 936 924 1.3 923.95 1.3
Haripur PP 221 225 1.8 226.56 1.9
Siddirgonj 420 425 1.2 423.45 0.8
APCL 725 733 1.1 730.82 0.8
JFCL 660 653 1.1 657.46 0.4
TGTDCL Demra 775 780 0.6 781.76 0.9
RPCL 420 417 0.7 419.65 0.1
Feni TBS 820 806 1.7 812.45 0.9
Baghabari 744 745 0.1 740.12 0.5
Bogra 740 752 1.6 748.89 1.2

36
 Figure 5.5: Pressure of different demand centers.

The simulated and calculated data are obtained against a particular input data whereas the
actual value is recorded over the full day range. The simulated, calculated and actual
pressure is plotted in the graph shown in Figure 5.5 to compare with each other at
particular off-take/outlet point. The pressure and gas flow of major junction are tabulated
in Table 5.8 and the pressure comparison are shown in Table 5.9.

Table 5.8: Actual and simulated gas flow, pressure data at major junctions

Name Type Gas Flow Pressure

(MMscfd) (psig)
Actual [6] Simulated Error Actual [6] Simulated Error
(%) (%)

Muchai Manifold Junction 1123 1120 0.27 1087 1085 0.18

AshugonjMS Junction 1486 1485 0.07 860 855 0.58
Bakhrabad HUB Junction 850 848 0.24 850 848 0.24
Elenga TBS Junction 85 84 1.18 770 765 0.65

37
 Table 5.9: Pressure comparison (before and after B-D line)
Pressure (psig)
Off take points
Before B-D pipeline After B-D pipeline
Ashulia CGS 161 275
Aminbazar CGS 106 241
PUFF 449 527
GUFF 449 527
GPS 451 528
Demra CGS 190 208
Meghnaghat PP 335 354
AFCCL 670 750
Ashuganj 645 725
Fouzdarhat CGS 282 304
Fenchuganj PS 873 936
Haripur PP 206 221
Siddirgonj 122 420
APCL 645 725
JFCL 557 660
TGTDCL Demra 284 775
RPCL 295 420
Feni TBS 700 820
Baghabari 322 744
Bogra 340 740

Analysis of present situation

The simulated result for both off take points and different junctions is compared with both
the real field data and the calculated value. Simulated value is quite equal to real value,
though little variation (in the range of 0.1% - 1.9% error) is observed. It is to be noted that
the pressure of different off take points in the West Zone such as Baghabari CGS,
Sirajganj DRS and Bogra as well as different District Regulating Station (DRS), City
Gate Station (CGS), Town Border Station (TBS) in the entire network boosted up after
commissioning of BD line.

38
5.3 Flow rate and pressure scenario of the existing pipeline network with (24" × 137
Km) of Bibiyana- Dhanua (BD) pipeline.

The (36" × 137 km) Bibiyana- Dhanua pipeline is designed by GTCL to carry 650
MMscfd of gas. But at present situation, Bibiyana gas field is not capable to transmit such
volume of gas through this pipeline as Bibiyana gas field planned to maintain the plateau
of 1200 MMscfd gas for at least next 5 years. In this study Bibiyana to Dhanua pipeline is
considered 24 inch instead of 36 inch diameter to check the handling capacity of gas. It is
to be mentioned here that currently about 200 MMscfd gas is supplied through this
[6]
pipeline and total 2490 MMscfd gas is supplied through the entire network. The gas
flow of different gas fields are tabulated in Table 5.10 and pressure at different sinks
obtained from the network simulation are tabulated in Table 5.11.

Table-5.10: Input parameters (actual value) as of 2nd February 2015 [6]

Gas Flow
Name Type
(MMscfd)
(Gas Fields)
Bakrabad Source 40
Bangora Source 110
Beanibazar Source 10
Bibiyana Source 1040
Fenchuganj Source 38
Hobigonj Source 225
Jalalabad Source 220
Kailashtilla Source 74
Maulvibazar Source 50
Meghna Source 10
Narsingdi Source 28
Rashidpur Source 60
Salda Source 10
Semutang Source 10
Srikail Source 40
Titas Location 1 Source 240
Titas Location 3 Source 130
Titas Location 5 Source 100
Titas Location 7 Source 55
Total 2490

39
 Table- 5.11: Simulated pressure at different demand centers.

Gas Flow Pressure

Name Type
(MMscfd) (psig)
AES Haripur Sink 55 134.01
AES Meghnaghat Sink 75 349.86
AFCCL Sink 50 742.35
Aminbazar CGS Sink 120 237.82
APCL Sink 145 728.41
Ashulia CGS Sink 160 270.35
Baghabari Sink 60 739.06
Barabkunda Sink 10 537.18
Bogra Sink 20 742.18
Brahmanbaria Sink 30 903.88
Chandpur Sink 27 457.93
Comilla Sink 10 855.18
CTG CGS Sink 300 300.25
EPZ DRS Sink 20 631.45
Fenchuganj PS Sink 52 920.05
Feni TBS Sink 6 800.87
Gozaria Sink 15 419.3
GPS Sink 140 533.67
GTCL Demra Sink 120 200.03
Haripur Sink 70 221
Iswardi EPZ Sink 5 751.81
JDP Sink 100 440
JFCL Sink 50 648.49
KTL off take Sink 70 934
Moymensing Sink 85 415
PUFF Sink 15 530.27
Rajshahi Sink 5 603
Shahjibazar PS Sink 50 306
Siddhirgonj Sink 200 428
Sirajgonj Sink 50 738.39
Sonargaon Sink 10 299.21
Tangail DRS Sink 15 702.22
Tarabo Sink 35 220.99
TGTDCL Demra Sink 270 771
UFFL Sink 45 530.15
Total 2490

40
The comparison between two cases, the simulated data for 24 inch BD pipeline and 36
inch BD pipeline is shown in Table 5.12 which is plotted in the graph shown in Figure
5.6.

Table 5.12: Simulated pressure data for both case at major off-take/outlet.

Pressure (psig)
Off take points BD pipeline BD pipeline Difference
(36 inch) (24 inch) (%)
Ashulia CGS 278 270 2.9
Aminbazar CGS 242 238 1.7
PUFF 534 530 0.7
GUFF 534 530 0.7
GPS 534 530 0.7
Demra CGS 205 200 2.4
Meghnaghat PP 350 349 0.3
AFCCL 740 742 0.3
Ashuganj 733 728 0.7
Fouzdarhat CGS 308 300 2.6
Fenchuganj PS 924 920 0.4
Haripur PP 225 221 1.8
Siddirgonj 425 428 0.7
APCL 733 728 0.7
JFCL 653 648 0.8
TGTDCL Demra 780 771 1.2
RPCL 417 415 0.5
Feni TBS 806 800 0.7
Baghabari 745 739 0.8
Bogra 752 742 1.3

41
 Figure 5.6: Pressure of different demand centers.

Analysis of the study

Before commissioning of BD line simulated pressure at Ashulia CGS, Aminbazar CGS,

Chittagong CGS was 158 psig, 108 psig and 287 psig respectively. But after
commissioning of BD line simulated pressure at Ashulia CGS, Aminbazar CGS,
Chittagong CGS is 278 psig, 242 psig and 308 psig respectively. Now from the analysis it
is observed that for 24 inch pipeline the simulated pressure at this particular CGS points
is very close though there is little difference - maximum 8 psig (2.9%) against the
simulated value for (36" × 137 km) pipeline. The overall value is seemed to be very close
and the pressure data of the off take points maintain the desired pressure. So, it can be
said that the existing network is capable of meeting the present demand with
(24" × 137 km) BD pipeline.

42
5.4 Prediction Case-1: Minimum pressure in Khulna at present demand considering
Bibiyana-Dhanua (BD) line 24inch in diameter.

This case study is made for additional 177 km pipeline with existing network from
Iswardi to Khulna which has already been constructed except Padma River crossing [14].
After successful completion of HDD Padma River crossing, this pipeline section will be
hooked-up with the existing network and will be brought under operation to supply gas to
Bheramara power plant and Kushtia, Jhenaidah, Jessore and Khulna region.

At Khulna 150 MW combined cycle power plant has already been installed. The plant is
producing power by high speed diesel as gas is not available there at this moment. About
35 MMscfd gas would be required to run this plant for power generation. Taking into
account other industrial, commercial demand at this moment, it is anticipated that about
40 MMscfd gas might have required for Khulna at present. Around 30 MMscfd gas is
considered for Bheramara as a gas based power plant (360 MW) is under installation
there. Though this plant will need at least 90 MMscfd gas for its full capacity production,
only 30 MMscfd is considered at this stage considering its first phase of production. For
Kushtia, Jhenaidah and Jessore 5 MMscfd are set for each as there is no bulk consumer at
this moment in these areas. Considering existing demand it can be assumed that around
85 MMscfd gas for Bheramara power plant and Kushtia, Jhenaidah, Jessore and Khulna
region and total 210 MMscfd gas would be needed to meet the demand in West Zone
right now [15]. The demand of different demand centers of West Zone at present situation
is tabulated in Table 5.13 and pressure at different sinks obtained from the network
simulation are tabulated in Table 5.14.

In this study the diameter of BD line is considered 24 inch for 137 km pipeline instead of
36 inch diameter to analyze the pressure drop profile and predicts the minimum pressure
at Khulna. It is to be mentioned that about 300 MMscfd gas is supplied through BD line.

43
Inputs: The input of the network model is tabulated in Table- 5.13.

Table-5.13: Input parameters [15].

Consumption/Demand MMscfd
Sirajgonj 50
Baghabari 50
Bogra 20
Iswardi 5
Rajshahi 2
Bheramara Power Plant 30

Kustia 3

Jhenaidah 5
Jessore 5
Khulna 40

Total 210 MMscfd

44
 Table 5.14: The output of the simulated data at different off-take/outlet.

Name Type Gas Flow Pressure

(MMscfd) (psig)
AES Haripur Sink 55 180.06
AES Megnaghat Sink 75 336.67
AFCCL Sink 50 711.03
Aminbazar CGS Sink 120 264.07
APCL Sink 150 700.08
Ashulia CGS Sink 160 279.58
Barabkunda Sink 15 485.82
Brahmanbaria Sink 30 818.29
Chandpur Sink 20 597.96
Comilla Sink 10 825.4
CTG Sink 300 309.98
EPZ DRS Sink 20 541.69
Feni Sink 5 664.01
Fenshuganj PS Sink 50 928.01
Gojaria Sink 15 448.22
GPS Sink 150 595.89
GTCL Demra Sink 100 228.96
Haripur Sink 70 229.31
JDP CGS Sink 110 580.87
JFCL Sink 50 656.69
KTL off take Sink 100 1000
Laksam Sink 5 714.85
PUFF Sink 15 581.42
RPCL - Mymensing Sink 85 365.82
Shahajibazar Ps Sink 50 303.48
Siddhirganj Sink 200 432.27
Sonargaon Sink 10 334.21
Tangail DRS Sink 15 570.55
Tarabo Sink 35 762.81
TGTDCL Demra Sink 250 717.68
UFFL Sink 50 573.69
Bharamara Sink 30 350.31
Iswardi Sink 5 333.95
Rajshahi Sink 2 344.96
Bogra Sink 20 358.61
Baghabari Sink 50 350.85
Sirajgonj Sink 50 361.95
Jessore Sink 5 304.9
Kustia Sink 3 343.17
Jhinaydah Sink 5 340.3
Khulna Sink 40 315
Total 2578

45
Analysis of prediction case-1

This case study is made for additional 177 km pipeline from Iswardi to Khulna with
existing network. The pressure situation against the present demand in west zone is
predicted. From the simulated result it is observed that the minimum pressure of Khulna
is 315 psig against the present demand of 210 MMscfd gas in West Zone. This minimum
pressure (315 psig) of the network in Khulna, is quite enough to meet the requirement of
Distribution Company’s required pressure (300 psig) and also the pressure in different off
take points of the West Zone is above against the desired pressure.

So, from the analysis it can be said that with (24" × 137 km) BD pipeline the network is
capable of meeting the present demand in West Zone as well as countrywide demand
maintaining required pressure in Khulna.

46
5.5 Prediction Case-2: Maximum possible volumetric flow rate maintaining 350 psig
in Khulna with boost up device.

At present the overall national gas grid pressure is not well enough to maintain the
distribution companies minimum required pressure. Distribution companies especially
Titas Gas Transmission and Distribution Company Limited (TGTDCL) in Greater Dhaka
region and Karnafuly Gas Distribution Company Limited (KGTCL) in Chittagong region
are continuously facing low pressure problem so they cannot supply gas to their
customers at required pressure as they received gas from the grid at pressure lower than
that of required at upstream of their distribution network. To boost up the national gas
grid pressure, compressor station had been installed by Chevron at Muchai, Moulavibazar
and GTCL installed compressor station at Ashuganj, Brahmanbaria as well as Elenga,
[16-17]
Tangail . These three compressor stations are synchronized and suppose to maintain
the grid pressure as shown in Figure 5.7.

Muchai –CS Ashuganj –CS Elenga –CS

Pi=721psig Pi=680psig Pi=650psig
Po=1120psig Po=1000psig Po= 1000psig
Q=1160MMscfd Q=1500MMscfd Q=500MMscfd

Legend:
CS- Compressor Station
Pi- Inlet/Suction Pressure
Po-Outlet/Discharge Pressure
Q-Gas Volume

Figure 5.7: Synchronized boost up device for gas grid

The compressor station established at Muchai, Habigonj will feed gas to Ashuganj hub at
pressure not less than the minimum required pressure of 680 psig at the inlet of Ashuganj
compressor that will boost up pressure to 1000 psig at its outlet to feed gas to Chittagong
and greater Dhaka franchise area along with West Zone.

47
Ashugonj compressor is designed in such a way that it will feed gas to Elenga at pressure
not less than minimum required pressure of 650 psig at the inlet of Elenga compressor
that will boost up pressure to 1000 psig to feed gas to the West zone.

By this case study, it is analyzed the effect of compressor and 24 inch diameter instead of
36 inch BD pipeline to the West Zone network, the pressure drop profile, maximum
volume of flow maintaining minimum pressure 350 psig at Khulna .The input of the
network model is tabulated in Table- 5.15 and the output of this case study is summarized
in Table 5.16.

Table-5.15: Input Parameters [15].

Minimum required pressure at Khulna 350 psig

Consumption/Probable Demand MMscfd
Sirajgonj 100
Baghabari 50
Bogra 100
Rajshahi 20
Iswardi EPZ 10
Bheramara 100
Kushtia 20
Jhenaidah 30
Jessore 20

48
 Table 5.16: The output of the simulated data of different off take points

Gas Flow Pressure

Name Type
(MMscfd) (psig)
AES Haripur Sink 55 562.31
AES Megnaghat Sink 75 523.9
AFCCL Sink 50 775.4
Aminbazar CGS Sink 120 328.27
APCL Sink 150 723.83
Ashulia CGS Sink 160 338.83
Barabkunda Sink 15 466.42
Brahmanbaria Sink 30 494.4
Chandpur Sink 20 620.58
Comilla Sink 10 807.98
CTG Sink 300 309.87
EPZ DRS Sink 20 523.51
Feni Sink 5 587.64
Fenshuganj PS Sink 50 905.66
Gojaria Sink 15 433.98
GPS Sink 150 584.72
GTCL Demra Sink 100 516.78
Haripur Sink 70 499.48
JDP CGS Sink 110 676.5
JFCL Sink 50 502.1
KTL off take Sink 100 950
Laksam Sink 5 724.51
PUFF Sink 15 560.74
RPCL - Mymensing Sink 85 558.44
Shahajibazar Ps Sink 50 496.05
Siddhirganj Sink 200 620.22
Sonargaon Sink 10 421.57
Tangail DRS Sink 15 609.71
Tarabo Sink 35 545.98
TGTDCL Demra Sink 250 406.74
UFFL Sink 50 553.82
Iswardi Sink 10 494.01
Rajshahi Sink 20 515.67
Bogra Sink 100 483.47
Baghabari Sink 50 538.94
Sirajgonj Sink 100 585.28
Bheramara Sink 100 570.07
Kustia Sink 20 463.07
Jhinaydah Sink 30 426.01
Jessore Sink 20 389.83
Khulna Sink 80 350
Total 2900

49
Analysis of prediction Case-2

This case study shows that maximum 2900 MMscfd gas is supplied through the entire
network. It can supply 530 MMscfd gas to the West Zone maintaining 350 psig pressure
at Khulna. Pressure at major demand centers such as Bheramara, Kustia, Jinaydah and
Jessore also above the desired pressure. It can be predict that 80 MMscfd gas would be
possible to transmit to Khulna with maintaining the desired pressure.

Analysis also shows that 24 inch diameter BD pipeline can carry 400 MMscfd gas
maintaining 350 psig pressure at Khulna and fulfilling the future demand of West Zone.

50
5.6 Prediction case-3: Maximum demand and effect of additional gas from LNG.

The main source of energy of Bangladesh is indigenous natural gas. In this respect it must
understand and take into consideration the demand-supply situation of the natural gas in
the country. There is a widening gap between the amount of gas supplies available and
the growing demand for natural gas. There are lot of industrial units exists in the country
which just cannot go into operation in absence of gas. Many industries in Chittagong are
already in idle condition because of non-availability of gas. There are lots of industries
other than Chittagong area which cannot undertake the expansion activities of their
present operations. From practical point of view, it has been observed that if
infrastructures like road communication, power generation and or expansion of gas
networks are established in some areas, industrial units are set up in those areas quickly.
Once the Nalka-Khulna gas transmission pipeline is brought into operation, within a short
span of time, the installation of industrial units in those areas will increase. As the present
gas reserve is not in a position to deliver the required quantities of gas, it is must to look
for alternative source of gas supply. Gas consumption will continue to increase despite
the declining domestic supply and imports can help to fill the growing gap. In absence of
natural gas, power generation with costly liquid fuel is being planned with lot of logistics
problem. In this situation Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) could be the alternative of natural
gas to mitigate the problem.

The government took the initiative to import LNG and it has been planned to use the
Floating Storage & Regasification Unit (FSRU) near Moheshkhali where required
draught is available at about 5-6 km offshore of Moheshkhali coast. The mother vessel
carrying LNG would be transferred to the FSRU which would be moored at about 5-6 km
off-coast of Moheshkhali. An offshore pipeline would be installed from the FSRU and a
delivery point will be stationed on-shore at Moheshkhali Island. From the delivery point,
a gas transmission pipeline of about 85-90 km would be installed to bring the gas at the
port city of Chittagong as shown in Figure 5.8. In Chittagong, it would be hooked up
with Karnaphuly gas system and the gas would be supplied to the customers. Thus the
supply-demand gap between production area and demand area will be solved [18].

51
 Figure 5.8: Proposed pipeline route for additional gas from LNG

The government may take various measures in the future to cope with the gas
demand/supply imbalance. However, it is forecast that the potential gas demand would
increase to 4500MMscfd in near future and the gas supply would fall. According to
Petrobangla, the existing gas fields are capable of produce maximum 3000 MMscfd gas.
Under such circumstances to secure the gas supply for future gas demand around 1500
MMscfd gas from LNG will be supplied to the pipeline network in Bangladesh [19]. The
predicted demand of the marketing companies is shown in Table 5.17

Table 5.17: Estimated Demand in 2030 [19]

Estimated demand
Company Name
(MMscfd)
TGTDCL 2276
BGDCL 617
JGTDSL 510
KGDCL 800
PGCL 220
SGCL 77
Total 4500

52
This case study will show how 4500 MMscfd gas cope with the total pipeline network
considering the local gas production from existing gas field remain same as case 2. This
is the maximum possible gas that needs to be handled by the entire network in near
future. In other words, this study analyzes the effect of additional 1500 MMscfd gas from
LNG to the network. The gas flow of different gas fields along with additional gas from
LNG as source of the network is shown in Table 5.18. Predicted gas consumption of
different demand centers and simulated pressure at different sinks obtained from the
network simulation are tabulated in Table 5.19.

Table-5.18: Input parameters

Gas Flow
Name Type (MMscfd)

Bakrabad Source 60
Bangora Source 110
Beanibazar Source 10
Bibiyana Source 1225
Fenchuganj Source 38
Hobigonj Source 225
Jalalabad Source 250
Kailastilla Source 170
Maulvibazar Source 60
Meghna Source 10
Narsingdi Source 27
Rashidpur Source 100
Salda Source 30
Semutang Source 35
Srikail Source 40
Titas Location 1 Source 245
Titas Location 3 Source 165
Titas Location 5 Source 130
Titas Location 7 Source 70
LNG Source 1500
Total 4500

53
 Table 5.19: The simulated pressure data of different off take points.

Gas Flow Pressure

Name Type
(MMscfd) (psig)
AES Haripur Sink 150 465.38
AES Meghnaghat Sink 100 276.37
AFCCL Sink 50 779.77
Aminbazar Sink 120 339
APCL Sink 200 732.67
Ashulia Sink 200 396
Baghabari Sink 80 527.46
Barabkunda Sink 10 465.05
BGTDCL Sink 100 673.2
Bheramara PP Sink 100 477.84
Bogra Sink 30 539.05
Brahmanbaria Sink 50 864.38
Chandpur Sink 25 404.55
Comilla Sink 40 475.39
CTG Region Sink 800 370
EPZ DRS Sink 35 440
Fenchuganj PS Sink 100 907.55
Feni TBS Sink 40 385.58
Gozaria Sink 30 360.33
GPS Sink 165 450.48
GTCL Demra Sink 300 161.18
Haripur Sink 150 147.93
Iswardi EPZ Sink 15 462.53
JDP Sink 130 310
Jessore Sink 15 294.66
JFCL Sink 60 451.46
JGTDSL Sink 100 911.79
Jhenaidah Sink 15 363.06
Khulna Sink 80 279.75
KTL off take Sink 100 933.67
Kushtia Sink 15 437.56
Moymensing Sink 85 721
PUFF Sink 40 451.38
Rajshahi Sink 20 469.63
Shahjibazar PS Sink 100 350.1
Siddhirgonj Sink 300 516.29
Sirajgonj Sink 50 556.38
Sonargaon Sink 30 222.54
Tangail DRS Sink 40 478.84
Tarabo Sink 35 394.29
TGTDCL Sink 125 516.57
TGTDCL Demra Sink 200 490
UFFL Sink 70 451.13
Total 4500
54
Analysis of prediction Case-3

This case study is made for 1500 MMscfd gas from LNG. The pressure situation against
the 4500 MMscfd gas demand is predicted. Around 800 MMscfd gas is consumed in
Chittagong region maintaining 370 psig pressure and rest of the maximum gas is
consumed to feed Dhaka region. The pressure at West Zone downstream point Khulna is
279 psig which is enough for running power plant. If additional power plant is going to
install for Khulna region, a small boost up device will be needed to install for that power
plant in near future to maintain desired pressure. Otherwise existing network can handle
4500 MMscfd gas.

So from the analysis it can be said that the entire network is capable to cope with 4500
MMscfd gas. Time to time analysis needed for better performance of transmission
network.

55
5.7 Summary of case studies

In present situation 24 inch diameter Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline is capable of meeting the

present demand as the simulated pressure data matched with actual pressure data with
little difference.

From the prediction case studies one thing is clear that 24 inch diameter BD pipeline
meets the all required condition for future demand. It is to be noted that about 400
MMscfd gas is supplied through the BD line in all prediction cases.

Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) has planned to install a new 300-450
MW Gas based Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) at Bibiyana, Nabiganj, Habiganj.
The natural gas for the proposed power plant will be supplied from the Bibiyana Gas
Field, which is near the power plant and is also connected to the gas grid network.
Bibiyana will be required to feed about 175-200 MMscfd gas to feed the power plants
[20]
near the gas field . Now Bibiyana gas field maintain the high production rate of about
1200 MMscfd and has planned to continue in next 5 years. After that production rate will
decrease. In this situation Bibiyana gas field will not be able to feed more than
300MMscfd gas through Bibiyana-Dhanua Pipeline where (36" × 137 km) BD pipeline is
designed by GTCL to carry 650 MMscfd of gas.

Upstream Downstream Q (MMscfd) Q (MMscfd)

Pressure (psig) Pressure (psig)
(36" × 137 km) (24" × 137 km)
1000 650 921 379
1000 700 864 346
1000 750 799 320

From the calculation by using modified Panhandle ‘B’ equation, if Upstream Pressure is
1000 psig and Downstream Pressure is 650 psig, (36" × 137 km) pipeline can handle
maximum 921 MMscfd of gas and (24" × 137 km) pipeline can handle 379 MMscfd of
gas. Bibiyana gas field will not able to feed more than 300 MMscfd gas through BD line
in near future. So feeding Bibiyana –Dhanua pipeline with high pressure gas will not be
required by Elenga Compressor station and reduce gas supply to upstream of Ashuganj
Compressor station will not permit it to operate as per design.

56
So it can be said that (36" × 137 km) Bibiyana-Dhanua transmission pipeline was
overdesigned as it can easily transmit around 400 MMscfd gas through 24 inch pipeline.

5.8 Bottleneck of the transmission network

Government has planned to install a gas transmission pipeline of about 30 inch diameter
to bring the gas from LNG at the port city of Chittagong. But from the analysis, a 36 inch
diameter pipeline will have to install to transmit 1500 MMscfd gas from Moheshkhali to
Chittagong ring main. The diameter of transmission pipeline will must increase to 42 inch
if it is needed to transmit more than 1500 MMscfd gas.

It is assumed that around 800 MMscfd gas will be consumed in Chittagong region from
additional 1500 MMscfd gas and rest of the gas will supply to the network. The existing
24 inch pipeline from Bakhrabad HUB to Chittagong CGS will not able to carry
additional gas from Chittagong to rest of the country. So a 30 inch parallel pipeline
should be installed from Chittagong to Bakhrabad HUB for the transportation of the
additional gas to rest of the country.

57
5.9 Costing of Bibiyana-Dhanua (BD) pipeline

The following cost categories are typically considered in pipeline costing.

Investment cost: Including planning and design fees, costs of materials and equipment,
transport and construction works. Some projects may also include compression stations.
The length and size (i.e. the diameter) of the pipeline, the cost of steel and the type of
terrain would usually be among the key determinants of the investment cost.

Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs: Including personnel, gas compression

cost, maintenance costs and administrative and other general costs. Note that depreciation
is not to be included in the analysis, as costs are only considered on a cash-flows basis.
[21]
The revised cost of transmission pipeline is summarized in Table 5.20 and annual gas
output of Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline is shown in Table 5.21.

Table 5.20: Cost of Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline

Taka in million
Cost
Component 36"OD × 137 km 24"OD × 137 km
(BD pipeline)
Pay of Officer and Staff 85 56
Supply and service 80 96
Land acquisition 954 636
Land requisition and Compensation 382 253
Pipeline Materials (All Pipes, Valves and Fitting 5400 3600
Vehicles and Equipment’s 25 7
Pipeline Construction 1405 936
Civil Works 270 180
Regulation and Metering Station 1350 900
River Crossing 1300 850
SCADA 450 300
CD-VAT, IDC and Land Charge 2610 1740
Contingency and others 45 30
Total Cost 14356 9584
Cost per Km length/inch diameter of pipeline 2.9 2.9

58
 Table 5.21: Annual value of output of Bibiyana - Dhanua gas transmission pipeline

Transmission Transmission
Annual Gas Output
year charge rate charge
MMCF MMCM (TK/CM) (In Lakh Taka)
Year -1 (2011-2012) 0 0 0.156 0
Year -2 0 0 0.156 0
Year -3 0 0 0.156 0
Year -4 0 0 0.156 0
Year -5 (2016-2017) 160600 4551.18 0.156 7099.8408
Year -6 160600 4551.18 0.156 7099.8408
Year -7 160600 4551.18 0.156 7099.8408
Year -8 160600 4551.18 0.156 7099.8408
Year -9 (2020-2021) 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -10 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -11 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -12 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -13 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -14 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -15 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -16 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -17 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -18 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -19 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -20 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -21 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -22 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -23 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -24 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044
Year -25 233600 6619.9 0.156 10327.044

59
Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL) is mandated to operate any and all high
pressure gas transmission pipelines and deliver gas to any end-users. Any section of
transmission pipeline in Bangladesh remains open-access and GTCL is mandated a
wheeling charge (Transmission Tariff). As a Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission
(BERC)-regulated gas utility, GTCL has the right to ask for wheeling charge adjustment
for any new transmission facility required to transport genuinely stranded gas to a
potential downstream market. For this study gas price is considered 0.156 TK/CM and
assumed to be constant through the whole prediction period. From Table 5.20, daily gas
output through BD pipeline is 440 MMscfd which will continue for 4 years then gas
output will increase to 640 MMscfd and will continue for 15 years. The investment cost
for (36" × 137 km) BD pipeline is 143560 lakh taka. Using this cost discounted total cost
and discounted total benefit has been evaluated (using 12% bank interest rate). The details
calculations are shown in Appendix. From the calculation Net Present Value (NPV) is
- 95556.56 lakh taka and Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is .34 for financial case. For economic
case NPV is - 50239 lakh taka and BCR is .58.

From the analysis one thing is clear that (36" × 137 km) Bibiyana – Dhanua transmission
Pipeline would be a loss project as Net Present Value (NPV) for both economic and
financial is negative. GTCL could minimize cost by installing 24 inch diameter pipeline
instead of 36 inch diameter pipeline as it was over designed which is mentioned earlier.
Because for installing (24"×137 km) pipeline cost is 95840 lakh taka where
(36" × 137 km) pipeline installation cost is 143560 lakh taka.

While Bangladesh suffers investment constraints, the big investment in the largest cross-
country Bibiyana-Dhanua gas transmission pipeline will become a chronic pain in the
neck of the gas sector. Now this big investment of GTCL will make it bleed financially.

60
5.10 Gas reserve of Bibiyana gas field

At present Bibiyana gas field produces 1200 MMscfd gas and it is the highest production
[22]
rate till now . If this gas field continues this plateau rate it would be possible to
produce gas for next 8 years from the remaining reserve as shown in Table 5.22.

Table 5.22: Life time estimation of Bibiyana gas field

Daily Yearly Recoverable Cumulative Remaining Life

Production Production Reserve[2] Production[22] Reserve Time
(MMscfd) (BCF) (BCF) (September 2015) (BCF) (year)
(BCF)
1200 438 5754 2152.65 3601.35 8.22

5.11 Cost recovery projection of Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline

This study also cover the estimated field life of Bibiyana against different transmission
rate through B-D line as shown in Table 5.23. Currently Bibiyana gas field is supplying
around 400 MMscfd gas through Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline. Considering the highest
supply through B-D line as 400 MMscfd for next 8 years , the wheeling charge for B-D
line should be at least Tk 0.45/ CM for break even the project as shown in Table 5.23.

Table 5.23: Cost recovery projection

Transmission charge(TK/CM) of BD line for Break Even the project

Field life Q= 200 Q= 300 Q= 400 Q= 500
(MMscfd) (MMscfd) (MMscfd) (MMscfd)
5 year 1.235 0.823 0.617 0.494
8 year 0.9 0.6 0.449 0.36
10 year 0.79 0.527 0.395 0.316
15 year 0.657 0.438 0.329 0.263

61
 CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION

The existing gas transmission pipeline network before and after commissioning of
Bibiyana-Dhanua line of Bangladesh along with newly constructed pipeline from Iswardi
to Khulna via Bheramara, Kustia, Jhenaidah and Jessore is analyzed. In this study, along
with present situation, numbers of case study are done to predict the pressure and
volumetric flow of the network at various flow conditions. Besides experimental results
are analyzed and number of analytical calculations are done to predict how long the
pipeline and boost up devices can cope up with the forecasted future demand.

Present (36" × 137 km) pipeline from Bibiyana to Dhanua is overdesigned according to
local supply of gas. An economic analysis in the form of Net Present Value (NPV) and
Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) for both economic and financial has been performed for
(36" × 137 km) of Bibiyana to Dhanua Gas Transmission Pipeline. The analysis shows
that with current gas supply situation Bibiyana-Dhanua line is going to be uneconomical
for GTCL. To reach the break even of Bibiyana-Dhanua pipeline project the wheeling
charge should be at least 0.45 Tk/CM instead of 0.156 Tk/CM.

The study shows that with (24" × 137 km) pipeline from Bibiyana to Dhanua fulfill the
present demand including the future demand of West Zone network maintaining 350 psig
pressure at Khulna.

This study also analyzed feasibility of LNG transportation from Moheshkhali to

Chittagong. A 36 inch diameter pipeline will have to install to transmit 1500 MMscfd gas
from Moheshkhali to Chittagong ring main. Also a parallel pipeline of about 30 inch
diameter from Chittagong to Bakhrabad HUB should be installed to transport the
additional gas from LNG to greater Dhaka region prior to the import of LNG.

62
REFERENCES

[1] Imam, Badrul; Energy Resources of Bangladesh (2005), University Grants

Commssion.
[2] Annual Report, 2014, Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Minerals Corporation
(Petrobangala), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[3] Annual Report 2012-2013 of Gas Transmission Company Limited, Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
[4] “National Energy Policy,” Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral Resources,
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, May 2004.
[5] “Analytical Report of Sales Line Gases of Various Gas Fields,’’ of Asuganj
Gas Manifold Station (AGMS), Ashuganj, Gas Transmission Company
Limited, prepared by Department of Petroleum & Mineral Resources
Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dkaka,
September 2010.
[6] Daily Gas Production and Supply Statistics, 02-03 February 2015, Gas
Transmission Company Limited (GTCL).
[7] Management Information System (MIS) Report, January 2015, Volume 391,
Bangladesh Oil Gas and Minerals Corporation (Petrobangla), Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
[8] PIPESIM Fundamental: Training and Exercise Guide, Version 2007.1,
Schlumberger.
[9] GPSA (Gas Processors Suppliers Association). Engineering Data Book. 11ed.
1998.
[10] Crane Co. 1988. Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings and Pipes.
[11] Management Information System (MIS) Report, November 2014, Volume
389, Bangladesh Oil Gas and Minerals Corporation (Petrobangla), Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
[12] Daily Gas Production and Supply Statistics, 16-17 October 2014, Gas
Transmission Company Limited.
[13] Monthly Progress Report, December 2014, Gas Transmission Company
Limited

63
[14] Monthly Progress Report, December 2013, Gas Transmission Company
Limited
[15] Hossain, S.M.,“Network Modeling and Analysis: West Zone Gas
Transmission Pipeline Network of Bangladesh” M.Engineering Project,
Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Engineering, Bangladesh
University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, 2014
[16] Annual Report 2013-2014 of Gas Transmission Company Limited, Dhaka.
[17] Revised Development Project Proforma/Proposal (RDPP), Compressor
Station Project, Gas Transmission Company Limited.
[18] ep-bd.com/online/details.php?cid=32&id=17538 (accessed 14 November 2015)
[19] Report January 2012 of Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
[20] http://www.jbic.go.jp/wp-content/upload/project (accessed 9 November 2015)
[21] Revised Development Project Proforma/Proposal (RDPP), September 2014,
Bibiyana-Dhanua Gas Transmission Pipeline Project (GTCL).
[22] Management Information System (MIS) Report, September 2015, Volume 399,
Bangladesh Oil Gas and Minerals Corporation (Petrobangla), Bangladesh.

64
 APPENDIX

SAMPLE CALCULATION

Calculation of Pressure
0.51
 P 2  P22 
Qmmscfd  0.00128084  1  d 2.53
 Lmiles 
Barbkunda - Chittagong CGS pipeline:

Pressure at Barbkunda, P1= 463 psig

Flow, Q= 300MMscfd
Inside pipe diameter, d =23.188
Length of pipeline, L = 21.35 miles
Downstream pressure at Chittagong CGS, P2 =?
From above equation,
0.51
 (463)2  P22 
300  0.00128084   (23.188) 2.53
 21.35 
0.51
Or, 392.19  214369  P22 
2
Or, 121699.07  214369  P2
2
Or, P2  92669.92
Or, P = 305.4 psig
In this same way the pressure at different off take points are calculated that are
summarized in below table:

Off take points P1 Q L d P2

Ashulia CGS 387 160 17.3 19.188 276.6622
Aminbazar CGS 325 120 19.00 19.188 244.6789
PUFF 534 15 0.061 13.376 533.986
GUFF 534 45 0.061 13.376 533.8793
GPS 534 140 0.061 15.312 533.4287
Demra CGS 205 100 0.061 19.188 204.7486
Meghnaghat PP 351 75 0.61 19.188 350.1649
AFCCL 856 50 12.81 9.5 742.6818
Ashuganj PS 856 140 1.83 9.5 733.3977
Chittagong CGS 463 300 21.35 23.188 305.344
Fenchuganj PS 927 52 0.951 11.5 923.9543
Haripur 237 70 0.9638 13.376 226.5683

65
 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF BIBIYANA-DHANUA PIPELINE

Benefit (Economic)

(In lakh Taka)

Financial Gas Consumption Benefit Benefit
(Financial) SCF (Economic)
Year MMCF MMCM
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
5 160600 4551.18 7099.84 1.4 9939.78
6 160600 4551.18 7099.84 1.4 9939.78
7 160600 4551.18 7099.84 1.4 9939.78
8 160600 4551.18 7099.84 1.4 9939.78
9 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
10 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
11 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
12 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
13 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
14 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
15 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
16 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
17 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
18 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
19 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
20 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
21 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
22 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
23 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
24 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9
25 233600 6619.9 10327 1.4 14457.9

66
 Benefit Cost Ratio (Financial)
(In lakh Taka)

Investment Operating Total Total Discount Discounted Discounted

Year
Cost Cost Cost Benefit Factor Total Cost Total Benefit
(PV) (PV) (PV) (PV) 12%
1 18137.8 0 18137.75 0 1 18137.75 0
2 93664.4 0 93664.37 0 0.89 83361.29 0
3 37089.3 0 37089.31 0 0.8 29671.45 0
4 17460.1 0 17460.05 0 0.71 12396.64 0
5 101.42 101.42 7099.841 0.64 64.9088 4543.8981
6 101.42 101.42 7099.841 0.57 57.8094 4046.9093
7 101.42 101.42 7099.841 0.51 51.7242 3620.9188
8 101.42 101.42 7099.841 0.45 45.639 3194.9284
9 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.4 40.568 4130.8176
10 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.36 36.5112 3717.7358
11 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.32 32.4544 3304.6541
12 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.29 29.4118 2994.8428
13 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.26 26.3692 2685.0314
14 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.23 23.3266 2375.2201
15 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.2 20.284 2065.4088
16 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.18 18.2556 1858.8679
17 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.16 16.2272 1652.327
18 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.15 15.213 1549.0566
19 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.13 13.1846 1342.5157
20 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.12 12.1704 1239.2453
21 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.1 10.142 1032.7044
22 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.09 9.1278 929.43396
23 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.08 8.1136 826.16352
24 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.07 7.0994 722.89308
25 101.42 101.42 10327.04 0.07 7.0994 722.89308
Total 144112.8 48556.466

NPV (Financial) = Sum of discounted benefit – Sum of discounted cost

= 48556.46 – 144112.80
= -95556.56 lakh Taka

Sum of discounted benefit 48556.46

BCR (Financial) = = = .34
Sum of discounted cost 144112.8

67
 Benefit Cost Ratio (Economic)
(In lakh Taka)

Investment Operating Total Total Discount Discounted Discounted

Year
Cost (AV) Cost (AV) Cost Benefit Factor Total Cost Total Benefit
(AV) (AV) 12%
1 14873 0 14873 0 1 14873 0
2 76804.8 0 76804.8 0 0.89 68356.3 0
3 30413.2 0 30413.2 0 0.8 24330.6 0
4 14317.2 0 14317.2 0 0.71 10165.2 0
5 91.68 91.68 9939.78 0.64 58.6752 6361.46
6 91.68 91.68 9939.78 0.57 52.2576 5665.67
7 91.68 91.68 9939.78 0.51 46.7568 5069.29
8 91.68 91.68 9939.78 0.45 41.256 4472.9
9 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.4 36.672 5783.14
10 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.36 33.0048 5204.83
11 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.32 29.3376 4626.52
12 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.29 26.5872 4192.78
13 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.26 23.8368 3759.04
14 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.23 21.0864 3325.31
15 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.2 18.336 2891.57
16 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.18 16.5024 2602.41
17 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.16 14.6688 2313.26
18 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.15 13.752 2168.68
19 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.13 11.9184 1879.52
20 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.12 11.0016 1734.94
21 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.1 9.168 1445.79
22 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.09 8.2512 1301.21
23 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.08 7.3344 1156.63
24 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.07 6.4176 1012.05
25 91.68 91.68 14457.9 0.07 6.4176 1012.05
Total 118218 67979

NPV (Economic) = Sum of discounted benefit – Sum of discounted cost

= 67979 – 118218
= - 50239 lakh Taka

Sum of discounted benefit 67979

BCR (Economic) = = = .58
Sum of discounted cost 118218

68