Sarulla Geothermal Power

Project 3 x 110 MW

6th International Geothermal Workshop

Bandung Institute of Technology
March 22, 2017
GEOTHERMAL - RENEWABLE ENERGY 1
Table of Contents

The Project Overview

Brief History of the Project
Project Financing Scheme
Upstream development program
Reservoir Chemistry and Model
Drilling History
Drilling Challenges
The Power Plant System and Technology
Project challenges
Questions

2
3
 Project Overview

Project Name Sarulla Geothermal Power Project

Location Pahae Jae and Pahae Julu Sub District, North Tapanuli Regency, North Sumatra
Province, Indonesia
Capacity 3 X 110 MW

Sponsors PT Medco Power Indonesia (In June 2015, INPEX acquired 49% of Medco’s interest)
Itochu Corporation
Kyushu Electric Power Co., Inc.
Ormat International, Inc.

Project Co. Sarulla Operations Ltd (“SOL”)

Financial Close 23 May 2014

Total Project Cost USD 1.6 Billion (original budget)

Commercial SIL : November 2016 (original schedule)

Operation Date NIL-1 : November 2017
NIL-2 : May 2018

Contract Period 30 years after NIL-2 COD

4
 Stakeholders’ Structure
Medco INPEX
(51%) (49%)

Joint Operation Agreement (JOA)

Medco ITOCHU Kyushu Electric ORMAT
Subsidiary Subsidiary Subsidiary Subsidiary
(99% X 37.25%) (99% X 25%) (99% X 25%) (99% X 12.75%)

ADB
Business Viability
Guarantee Letter
JBIC Loan Agreement Gov. of
SOL (BVGL)
(1%) Indonesia
Commercial
Banks Drilling Energy Sales
Contract Contract (ESC)
Construction
Supply Contract Contract Joint Operation
Halliburton Contract (JOC) PLN

HDEC Pertamina
HDEC Geothermal Energy (PGE)
Multifab
5
HDEC: Hyundai Engineering & Construction Ltd.
Project Location and General Siting

Pahae Jae Subdistrict

Pahae Julu Subdistrict Silangkitang (SIL) -110MW
Namora-I-Langit (NIL)
2 x 110MW

Pahae Jae and Pahae Julu Sub

District, North Tapanuli
Regency, North Sumatra
Province, Indonesia

6
7
 Brief Project History
Period Events
Feb 27, 1993 Unocal North Sumatra Geothermal (“UNSG”) signed JOC (with Pertamina) and
ESC (with PLN)
1993 - 1997 UNOCAL conducted drilling exploration in Silangkitang, Namora I Langit (5 wells
at SIL, 4 wells at NIL) and Sibual Buali, acquired partial land
1998 Economic crisis occurred in Asia, project was halted
Jan 23, 2004 Project assigned to PLN (effective February 24, 2004) by UNSG through Deed of
Assignment
Dec 1, 2004 Bid Submission for taking over of Project
Jul 25, 2006 Letter of Award to SOL Consortium
Dec 14, 2007 ESC Amendment (among PLN, Pertamina Geothermal Energy (“PGE”) and
Consortium) and JOC Amendment (between PGE and Consortium) were signed
Tariff
Mar 10, 2011 New Tariff (staged tariff) Approval by Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources
Tariff – 3-stage tariff;
Apr 4, 2013 Second ESC/JOC Amendments were signed
Mar 28, 2014 Loan agreements were signed
May 23, 2014 Financial Close achieved / Notice to Proceed issued
8
9
Financing scheme
US$1.17 billion 20-year tenor project financing
Japan Bank for International Cooperation – US$492 million
Asian Development Bank – US$250 million
ADB-administered concessional lending – US$100 million
Clean Technology Fund (US$80 million)
Canadian Climate Fund for Private Sector in Asia (US$20 million)
Commercial banks (backed by JBIC extended political risk guarantee) - US$328 million

Setting the precedent

First greenfield non-recourse project financing in Indonesian geothermal sector since 1997.

Integrated project financing (non-recourse)

Three generation plants financed as one entity rather than unit-by-unit.
Steam fields development (drilling costs etc) also covered.

Tight covenants under the financing docs. Close coordination with the lenders required.

10
11
Project Status – Drilling
Wells Drilled to date - 32 drilled at present
Location Production Injection Drilled / From Previous
abandoned developer
SIL 3 7 0 1P
NIL 10 9 3 1R
Total 13 16 3 2 (P&R)

P – production well; R- reinjection well

4 drill rigs were working at Site until early 2016
Reduced to 3 drill rigs until early 2017
Reducing to 1 drill rig at NIL March 2018
at WJP-1n, drilling the 3rd production well

Plant Design Requirements SIL: 110 MW

Achieved: 166 MW
Plant Design Requirements NIL: 220 MW
Achieved: 252 MW
12
Project Status – Reservoir Model (SIL)
 main geological structures and well location :

Outflow

Heat Source

Outflow

13
Project Status – Reservoir Model (SIL)

Physical properties
Depth Pressure Temperature Enthalpy Permeability-
thickness products
(m) (bara) (oC) (kJ/kg) (kh)
(darcy-m)
1900 - 2200 150 - 170 264 - 329 1250 - 1420 11 - 95

Chemical properties

Brine pH Cl in reservoir SO4 in reservoir SiO2 in reservoir NCG in steam*

(@25oC) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (wt%)
6.4 - 8.0 880 - 980 32 - 41 650 - 760 3.1 - 4.2
* Non-condensable gas content in steam separated at 22 barA

14
Project Status – Well Drilling (SIL)
 Current status of well for SIL :
Drilling Estimated Well Capacity
PAD Well Type
Spud in Finish Production Injection
SIL1-2 P 4/12/1995 6/19/1995 21.1 MW -
(Existing)

SIL1N-6 R 3/10/2015 5/5/2015 - 312 t/h

SIL1N-5 R 5/12/2015 7/25/2015 - 75 t/h
SIL1N
SIL1N-4 P 8/6/2015 10/15/2015 35.2 MW -
SIL1N-1 P 11/10/2015 12/19/2015 54.7 MW -
SIL1N-2 P 12/24/2015 1/31/2016 55.1 MW -
SIL2-1 R 2/11/1995 4/3/1995 - 200 t/h
(Existing)

SIL2N SIL2N-1 R 8/21/2015 8/21/2015 - 603 t/h

SIL2N-2 R 10/8/2015 11/1/2015 - 638 t/h
SIL2N-3 R 11/8/2015 11/27/2015 - 456 t/h
SIL3N-3 R 2/15/2016 4/1/2016 - 567 t/h
SIL3N SIL3N-2 R 4/9/2016 5/22/2016 - 834 t/h
SIL3-1 R 6/28/1995 8/9/1995 - Reservoir Monitoring well
(Existing)

TOTAL 166.1 MW 3,685 t/h

• P = Production well:; R = Reinjection well:

• The estimated well capacity at designed steam turbine inlet pressure from individual production test
15
Project Status – Well Drilling (SIL)
 Current status of well for SIL :
Drilling Estimated Well Capacity
PAD Well Type
Spud in Finish Production Injection
SIL1-2 P 4/12/1995 6/19/1995 21.1 MW -
(Existing)

SIL1N-6 R 3/10/2015 5/5/2015 - 312 t/h

SIL1N-5 R 5/12/2015 7/25/2015 - 75 t/h
SIL1N
SIL1N-4 P 8/6/2015 10/15/2015 35.2 MW -
SIL1N-1 P 11/10/2015 12/19/2015 54.7 MW -
SIL1N-2 P 12/24/2015 1/31/2016 55.1 MW -
SIL2-1 R 2/11/1995 4/3/1995 - 200 t/h
(Existing)

SIL2N SIL2N-1 R 8/21/2015 8/21/2015 - 603 t/h

SIL2N-2 R 10/8/2015 11/1/2015 - 638 t/h
SIL2N-3 R 11/8/2015 11/27/2015 - 456 t/h
SIL3N-3 R 2/15/2016 4/1/2016 - 567 t/h
SIL3N SIL3N-2 R 4/9/2016 5/22/2016 - 834 t/h
SIL3-1 R 6/28/1995 8/9/1995 - Reservoir Monitoring well
(Existing)

TOTAL 166.1 MW 3,685 t/h

• P = Production well:; R = Reinjection well:

• The estimated well capacity at designed steam turbine inlet pressure from individual production test
16
Project Status – Reservoir Model (NIL)

Physical properties
Depth Pressure Temperature Enthalpy Permeability-
thickness products
(m) (bara) (oC) (kJ/kg) (kh)
(darcy-m)
1060 - 1800 85 - 150 261 - 273 1183 - 1220 5 - 127

Chemical properties

Brine pH Cl in reservoir SO4 in reservoir SiO2 in reservoir NCG in steam*

(@25oC) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (wt%)
2.5 - 8.2 740 - 1050 290 - 780 530 - 620 6.0 – 9.0
* Non-condensable gas content in steam separated at 11.5 barA

17
Project Status – Well Drilling (NIL)
 Current status of well for NIL : P=Production well; R=Reinjection well
Drilling Estimated Well Capacity
PAD Well Type
Spud in Finish Production Injection
NIL1N-7 P 12/24/2014 4/11/2015 30.01 MW -
NIL1N
NIL1N-3 P 4/22/2015 6/25/2015 Abandoned -
NIL2N-1 P 9/23/2014 1/16/2015 27.6 MW -
NIL2N-4 P 1/26/2015 3/20/2015 42.1 MW -
NIL2N-7 P 3/30/2015 5/26/2015 39.3 MW -
NIL2N
NIL2N-3 P 6/11/2015 8/26/2015 14.8 MW -
NIL2N-6 P 9/5/2015 11/3/2015 17.6 MW -
NIL2N-2 P 9/23/2015 12/26/2015 44.4 MW -
WJP1-1 P 2/17/2016 5/26/2016 No productive -
WJP1N WJP1-3 P 6/2/2016 9/12/2016 23.2 MW (acidic)
WJP1-5 P 6/2/2016 1/28/2017 13.4 MW (acidic)
(Estimated from short term test)
WJR2-1 R 2/21/2015 4/30/2015 - Abandoned
WJR2-3 R 5/12/2015 7/30/2015 367 t/h
WJR2-2 R 6/26/2016 8/9/2016 537 t/h
WJR2
WJR2-4 R 8/20/2016 10/8/2016 953 t/h
WJR2-5 R 11/11/2016 1/1/2017 872 t/h
WJR2-6 R 1/18/2017 Drilling in progress - -
WJR1 WJR1-1 R 7/28/2015 10/19/2015 - Abandoned
NIL3 NIL3-1 R 1/21/1996 2/11/1998 - 292 t/h
(Existing)
NIL3N-1 R 1/11/2016 5/11/2016 - 920 t/h
NIL3N-2 R 5/19/2016 8/12/2016 1361 t/h
NIL3N NIL3N-3 R 8/21/2016 10/3/2016 1883 t/h
NIL3N-4 R 10/26/2016 12/25/2016 544 t/h
NIL3N-5 R 1/10/2017 2/11/2017 1442 t/h
TOTAL 252.4 MW 9,171 t/h
• Well capacity from flow test results estimated at separation pressure (11 bars); WJP1N-5 is estimated based on the short term test
18
(injection test); long terms test (production test) yet to be executed.
• Reinjection capacity targeted (based on design enthalpy; to be revised)– 9,862 TPH:
Drilling Challenges for the Sarulla project
General
Challenging logistics for 4 rig
simultaneous operation.
Drilling Water Supply/Pumping
Stations
Material
Delivery/fuel/warehousing
Large Base camps, over 400
personnel
Drilling and flow testing on a
pad at the same time
Drilling and Constructing Power
plants at the same time.
Drilling Challenges for the Sarulla project

SIL

Production pad near Sumatra

Highway/local residence-social
challenge
Discrepancy between the fault
distributions shown in the old
UNOCAL geological model and the
drilling results. Very low
permeability in originally planned
injection area. Need to change
injection targets.
Stuck Pipe when near to the GSF
due to clays in the fracture
formations
EPC Schedule, Constructing
separator stations while drilling
Higher pressure/enthalpy than
estimated, mis-match with EPC
design
Drilling Challenges for the Sarulla project

NIL
NIL formation much more fractured
as compared to SIL.
Difficulties drilling wells through a
high pressure shallow gas (CO2) zone at
pads NIL1N, WJR1 and WJR2.
Two abandoned injection wells
due to shallow high CO2 gas
pressure.
One abandoned production well
due to shallow high steam
pressure.

Multiple Stuck Pipe/Lost in

Hole/Sidetracks due to paleosol (clay)
formations.
Cold water encountered in first
production well on WJP-1 pad.
Acid fluids encountered in second
and third wells drilled on pad WJP1.
Drilling Challenges for the Sarulla project

Field Variability Summary

Average Drilling Days for Productions wells:

SIL 47 NIL: 78
Standard casing program: 13 3/8 inch casing to 3,000 ft, 10 ¾ inch slotted liner to
6,000 ft

Cost per Production well at NIL was 70% higher as compared to SIL

Average Drilling Days for Injection Wells:

SIL 44 NIL: 65
Standard casing program: 9 5/8 inch casing to 3,000 ft, 7 inch slotted liner to 6,000 ft

Shortest Drilling Duration: SIL-2-3 (20 days) (completed shallow)

Longest Drilling Duration: NIL-3-1 (122 days) (sidetracked well)

Cost per Injection well at NIL was 35% higher as compared to SIL
23
The SIL Power Plant

24
 The SIL Power Plant
Steam Field and Steam aboveground Surface (SAGS) Equipment
2 sets separator systems
5 km of gathering/injection pipeline (sizes of 36” for steam, 24” for brine, 30”
for brine/condensate)
Power Plant
Integrated Geothermal Combined Cycle (IGCCU) Technology:
1 back-pressure steam turbine (62 MW gross)
4 Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC, binary cycle) condensing steam units
(7 MW gross each)
2 Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC, binary cycle) geothermal brine units (16 MW
gross each)
Integrated Control System (ICS - DCS/PLC)
A 150KV double bus Substation connected to PLN substation via 2 lines of 2.25km
- 150KV Transmission Line

25
SIL Site Plan

26
The SIL Power Plant

Wellpad
Area

27
SIL Production wellpad & Separator System

28
The NIL Power Plant

29
 The NIL Power Plant
Steam Field and Steam aboveground Surface (SAGS) Equipment combined for
both NIL 1 and NIL 2 phases - drilling is still ongoing and the following may still
change based on further drilling results
8 sets separator system and 13km of steam, brine and brine/condensate
pipelines
Integrated Geothermal Combined Cycle (IGCCU) Technology. Each plant (NIL-1
and NIL-2 consists of;
1 back-pressure steam turbine (57.5 MW gross)
4 Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC, binary cycle) condensing steam units
(7.5 MW gross each)
2 Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC, binary cycle) geothermal brine units (16 MW
gross each)
Integrated Control System (ICS - DCS/PLC)
A 150KV double bus Substation connected to PLN substation via 2 lines of 10kms
150KV Transmission Line

30
NIL Site Plan

31
NIL Production Wellpad & Separator System

Wellpad
Area

32
Power Plant Technology – IGCCU
(Integrated Geothermal Combined Cycle Units)
Sarulla - Combined Cycle:
• Uses both geothermal steam &
brine;
• Reinjects 100% of the geothermal
fluid
• Uses air-cooling instead of water
• Multiple modular units

Combined Cycle (Binary) Condensing System

33
SIL Process Flow Diagram (PFD)

34
IGCCU Technology Features
Feature Advantages Disadvantages Remarks
Resource More flexible to Lower steam SIL fluid enthalpy is
enthalpy change changes – loss in efficiency as higher than design
steam, gain in brine compared to simple
or vice versa steam condensing
Modularity Expects to have More equipment to
higher availability install and maintain
factor

Lower profile; lighter

equipment and
smaller components
Air cooling Increase resource 100% injection means Expectation is that this
sustainability though more injection wells will benefit the project
100% reinjection at the initial phase in the long run

Eliminate mists and Bigger plant footprint

chemicals in water Cost/Efficiency
cooling

35
Plant Technology Features

Original Plan Current estimation

Enthalpy 1,290 kJ/kg 1,365 kJ/kg
Separator Pressure 20.4 bara 22.0 bara
Geothermal Steam 579 t/h 638t/h
fluid Brine 2,320.88 t/h 1,972 t/h
Total Flow 2,899.99 t/h 2,610 t/h
STG 62.85 MW 67.45 MW
Gross output Bottoming OEC 26.97 MW 29.40 MW
Brine OEC 27.78 MW 23.17 MW
Total (MWg) 117.60 MW 120.02 MW

Flexibility to manage changing/variation on geothermal fluid enthalpy

36
Plant Technology Features

Combined Cycle (Binary) Condensing System

Air cooling enhances 100% reinjection and eliminates mists from water cooling towers

37
 Project Challenges
Technical
Fixing plant process design and proceeding with an EPC, with
simultaneous field development.
Risk that production well enthalpy will not match equipment
design.
Risk of designing separators stations and pipelines to well
pads, before flow capacity is actually tested and known.
pH mod system design (required due to high silica in reservoir).
Corrosion, control, logistics problems.
Soil type at SIL that was hard to work under frequent raining;
required more extensive earthwork and foundation.
Public road conditions not conducive to transportation of heavy
equipment.

38
 Project Challenges
Social
SIL wellpad close to community – puts restraint even on certain
standard practices in more remote geothermal areas.
Private Roads become public roads. Traffic, house construction,
interference with pipelines.
Demands for local contracting, Employment and business
opportunities for local community.
Communities complaints expressed through demonstrations,
causing work disruptions

39
Summary and Conclusions

40
Summary and Conclusions

41