According to sources, the project of the regasification terminal at the Colombian Pacific coast would be in Buenaventura. The connecting node for the imports and exports of gas from and to Colombia. The terminal will provide an efficient solution for thermal energy at a greater risk for domestic use.
PUERTO SOLO GAS TERMINAL
- The project that would already have an environmental license and is in the “detailed engineering” stage prior to the financial closure. Puerto Solo is to be developed by the Colombian firm PIO SAS with Sea One of Houston USA. leading the investment of USD 300M (infrastructure, eight 2,000 barrel storage tanks and two thermal power plants).
- Puerto Solo would be the third point of regasification of propane gas in Colombia after Okianus and Plexaport in Mamonal, Cartagena.
- The infrastructure would be operational in the third quarter of 2020 and will supply gas to the TermoSolo 1 (148 Mw) and TermoSolo 2 (80 Mw) power generation thermal plants as well as the demand for propane gas in homes and businesses.
- The thermal plants are in the early phase of assembly and will go into operation in December 2022.
- The PND – National Development Plan will launch a diesel replacement program for LPG in thermal plants to reduce the impact on the environment.’
LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) OR LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas)
- The energy supply and generation project in the Colombian Pacific was considered to receive LNG or LPG
- LPG being cheaper in price, handling, storage, and transport than LPG will be the fuel handled ai the regasification plant.
- LPG is more efficient in heat generation and cleaner combustion than LNG. However, despite its lower cost, it is more dangerous to handle due to the fact that LPG is denser than air then floats on the surface, which is an imminent risk in the case of ignition.
- Therefore, LPG is more efficient for thermal plants but more dangerous for domestic use.
THE AUTHORITIES REPLIED TO THE PROJECT
- The DIMAR and the Navy warn of the geographical disadvantages of the place for the assembly of the maritime terminal by means of a letter.
- The place where the infrastructure is planned to be mounted affects the port operation of the Buenaventura port cluster.
- DIMAR carried out an analysis of the conditions and aspects of maritime safety, life at sea and the prevention of pollution of the marine environment related to the port of Buenaventura taking into account the operations required for the execution, the pipeline, the depth of the dock and the transfer of cargo ship to ship.
- The associated risks found would directly affect maritime safety and plant operations.
TECHNICAL DISADVANTAGES
- Technically, the Navy and DIMAR detailed maritime traffic in the port of Buenaventura for the past 5 years. They also refer to the current traffic of wider and deeper vessels such as gas vessels (Qmax) which limits the room for maneuverability.
- They agree that there would be an affectation to maritime traffic and the execution of maneuvers and operational mobility in the access channel. International norms and recommendations establish that the access channel must be at least twice the size of the vessel.
- The depth of the minimum maneuvering or turning area must be operational for Qmax vessels, currently, the vessel could maneuver with an operational draft of 9.57 meters.
The pier clarifies that it must have a minimum berthing line of 450 meters long (slightly larger than the longest ship) and 123 meters wide (two ships). - The depth at the berthing dock must be a minimum of 13.69 meters (regardless of tidal changes) for the safe stay of the Qmax vessel type.’
GENERAL DISADVANTAGES
- The inner bay of the port of Buenaventura is a protected water area with restricted spaces, which makes it difficult to maneuver Qmax ships.
- The Navy, for its part, affirms that the installation of the infrastructure is complicated and exposes its reservations before the initiative to the ANI (National Infrastructure Agency) with the following section “The Ministry of Defense – National Navy – opposes due to inconvenience to the process of granting the location of the Regasification Terminal.
- The Navy notes that the location of the regasification plant represents operational and human fatality risks by not covering the minimum safety distances required by the international standard “The plant would be located 500 meters from the Marine infantry battalions 21 and 25, and the coast guard station, with a greater risk for the military and civilian personnel that works and lives there, since there are fuel and explosives warehouses and ammunition depots.”
