appendix 2 f

7/29/2019 Appendix 2 f

1/21

PDX/073120002.DOC

APPENDIX 2F

Vessel Cooling Water

Discharge Analysis


2/21


3/21

1

T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M

Screening Level Thermal Plume Evaluation of LNGVessels Cooling Water System Discharges to the

Columbia RiverPREPARED FOR: Oregon LNG

PREPARED BY: David Wilson, Senior Scientist, CH2M HILLBrad Paulson, Modeler & Oceanographer, CH2M HILL

COPIES: Mark Bricker, Program Manager, CH2M HILLGretchen Honan, Environmental Scientist, CH2M HILL

DATE: September 10, 2008

Contents

Objectives and Approach .............................................................................................................1Background ....................................................................................................................................2Oregon Water Quality Standards for Temperature..................................................................2

Biologically Based Numeric Criteria for Protection of Salmon..................................2Temperature Criteria and Human Use Allowance......................................................3Antidegradation Policy....................................................................................................4

Receiving Waters Characteristics and LNGC Thermal Discharge Assumptions.................4Results of Thermal Plume Modeling ..........................................................................................5Summary ........................................................................................................................................6

Objectives and Approach

This screening level technical evaluation has been prepared to identify and evaluate theeffects of cooling water system discharges to the Columbia River from liquefied natural gascarriers (LNGCs) docked at Warrenton, Oregon. Memorandum objectives are as follows:

Review the cooling water systems used by classes of LNGCs that would be unloading atWarrenton148,000-cubic-meter (m3), 213,000 m3, and 266,000 m3 vessels.

Develop a range of receiving water conditions for the Warrenton site. Develop and apply worst-case cooling water discharge scenarios for modeling. Present the results of thermal plume modeling for the cooling water discharges. Compare these results to Oregon water quality standards.


4/21

SCREENING LEVEL THERMAL PLUME EVALUATION OF LNG VESSELS COOLING WATER SYSTEM DISCHARGES TO THE COLUMBIA RIVER

2

Background

Ballast and cooling water systems vary between vessels, including vessels of similar sizeand capacity. In general, most LNGCs under 150,000 m3 are steam powered and many of thenewer ships with capacities greater than 150,000 m3 are diesel powered. Most of the LNGCs

in the world fleet are 150,000 m3

or less, and are powered by steam.Diesel- and steam-powered vessels differ in the amount of cooling water required. Steamvessels require a large quantity of water to cool the condensers, even while the vessel isdocked at the terminal, because the vessel is still producing steam while docked. Coolingwater is also required for the ships equipment (e.g., generators), but at a much lower flowrate. Diesel ships require cooling water primarily for the ships equipment. Diesel ships donot use condensers. Therefore, the quantity of seawater required is substantially less forlarger diesel-powered ships.

The cooling water system operates independently of the ballast water system. However, thecooling water system can, and sometimes will, use the same seawater intakes as the ballast

water system. Cooling water pump sizes and capacities vary from ship to ship.A typical steam-powered vessel will use a large pump rated at 10,000 m3/hour for the maincondenser cooling water, and a smaller pump rated at 3,000 m3/hour for the shipsequipment. The total flow that is actually used is normally less than the maximum capacityof the pumps; total use is 1,090 m3/hour for main condenser cooling and 1,300 m3/hour forauxiliary equipment, or a total cooling water flow rate of approximately 2,478 m3/hour. Incomparison, the typical cooling water requirements for the new diesel-powered vessels areexpected to be 2,040m3/hour (e.g., 1,300 m3/hour for main condenser cooling and 740m3/hour for auxiliary equipment).

According to industry sources, the water taken for cooling the vessels machinery is warmed

by 6 to 9 degrees Celsius (C) at the point of discharge. The degree of heating depends inpart on the ambient temperature of the water. Industry sources indicate that the change in

discharge temperature is expected to be 6.6C for steam-powered LNGCs and 8.9C fordiesel-powered LNGCs.

Oregon Water Quality Standards for Temperature

The applicable Oregon water quality standards for temperature are set forth in OAR-340-041-0028 (Temperature) and in OAR-340-041-0053 (Mixing Zones). The temperature sectionin these standards (OAR-340-041-0028) includes biologically based numeric criteria for theprotection of salmon species, implementation of the temperature criteria, and specific

human use allowance for insignificant additions of heat to water bodies.

Biologically Based Numeric Criteria for Protection of Salmon

The beneficial fish use designation for the Columbia River at the Warrenton site (River Mile11) is salmon and steelhead migration. The biologically based numeric criterion for thissalmon and steelhead migration corridor use at RM 11 is as follows: a 7-day average

maximum temperature that may not exceed 20.0C due to human activities; and when

natural conditions exceed 20.0 C, no temperature increase will be allowed that will raise the


5/21


3

receiving water temperature by greater than 0.3C above the criterion after mixing in the water

body; nor shall such temperature increases exceed 0.3C due to a single source or due to all suchactivities combined. The proposed LNG terminal at Warrenton is isolated from otherpotential thermal discharge sources by many miles along the river.

The lower Columbia River is listed on Oregons 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies for

temperature. In September 2002, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10issued a Preliminary Draft Temperature total maximum daily load (TMDL) for theColumbia and Snake Rivers. This preliminary draft TMDL identified the Columbia Riverdams as the primary contributor to thermal loads in the river system, and no further draftsor actions have been taken by EPA.

Temperature Criteria and Human Use Allowance

The water quality standards section on the implementation of the temperature criteria andhuman use allowance for insignificant additions of heat to water bodies (OAR-340-041-0028(12)) states the following: Prior to the completion of a temperature TMDL or othercumulative effects analysis, no single NPDES point source that discharges into atemperature water quality limited water may cause the temperature of the water body toincrease more than 0.3 degrees Celsius (0.5 degrees Fahrenheit) above the applicable criteriaafter mixing with [a maximum of] either twenty-five (25) percent of the stream flow, or thetemperature mixing zone, whichever is more restrictive. Assuming that the LNGCdischarge of cooling water will be treated as a NPDES point source, then the cooling waterdischarge would not be allowed to cause the temperature of the water body to increase

more than 0.3C (0.5F) at the boundary of a defined temperature mixing zone.

The temperature standards section on implementation of the temperature criteria andhuman use allowance also specifies that point sources must be in compliance with theadditional mixing zone requirements in OAR-340-041-0053(2)(d). Section OAR-340-041-0053

(Mixing Zones) of the Oregon water quality standards defines Temperature Thermal PlumeLimitations. These additional temperature standards apply in proximity to thermal pointsources (including within mixing zone boundaries), and they include the following:

Impairment of Active Salmon SpawningPrevented by limiting potential fishexposure to temperatures of 13C or less if salmon or steelhead are spawning near thelocation. (Not applicable to Warrenton site because there are no spawning areas.)

Acute Impairment of Instantaneous LethalityPrevented by limiting potential fishexposure to temperatures of 32C or more to 2 seconds. (Not applicable to LNGC discharge

because no discharge temperatures approach 32C.)

Thermal ShockPrevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure totemperatures of 25C or more to less than 5 percent of the cross-section of 100 percent ofthe 7Q10 low flow of the water body.

Migration BlockageUnless the ambient temperature is 21.0C or greater, migrationblockage is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures

of 21C or more to less than 25 percent of the cross section of 100 percent of the 7Q10 lowflow (the 7-day period with the lowest river flow with a recurrence interval of 10 years)of the water body.


6/21


4

The thermal shock and migration blockage conditions have been evaluated with the thermalplume modeling and the results provided show no LNGC discharge would violate theseconditions.

Antidegradat ion Po licy

In addition to the temperature standards in the Oregon water quality standards, Oregonprovides antidegradation policy guidance inAntidegradation Policy Implementation InternalManagement Directive for NPDES Permits and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications (ODEQ,March 2001). This antidegradation policy provides direction for permit approval of thermalsources into water quality limited waters (WQLW). The antidegradation policy directivestates the following:

For WQLWs that are limited for temperature, a surface water temperature management plan mustbe developed and implemented if the proposed discharge will increase temperature by 0.25F [0.14C]or more. New or increased discharge loads may be allowed to increase ambient water temperature(measured at the edge of the mixing zone, if existing) by less than or equal to 0.25F [0.14C] inWQLW limited for temperature if such a plan is in place. However, this increase must not have a

measurable impact on beneficial uses (see OAR 340-041-0026(3)(a)(D)-(H)). Adischarger/applicant/source may petition DEQ for an exception of the above stipulations, if it 1)demonstrates that the discharge will result in less than 1.0F [0.55C] increase at the edge of themixing zone; 2) provides the necessary scientific information describing how no designated beneficialuses will be adversely impacted; and 3) demonstrates that it is implementing all reasonablemanagement practices, its activity will not affect beneficial uses, and the environmental cost oftreating the parameter to the level necessary to assure full protection would outweigh the risk to theresource. A discharger/applicant/source may petition the EQC for an exception to the previouslymentioned stipulations if 2 and 3 apply.

With a temperature mixing zone, the LNGC thermal discharges would be allowed toincrease ambient water temperature (measured at the edge of the mixing zone) by no morethan 0.25F or 0.14C.

Receiving Waters Characteristics and LNGC Thermal DischargeAssumptions

This screening level technical evaluation has been developed for a wide range of receivingwater conditions that occur at the Warrenton site. The evaluation is based on worst-casecooling water discharge scenarios for the two classes of LNGCs (148,000 m3 steam-poweredvessels and 213,000 m3 or 266,000 m3 diesel-powered vessels) that would be unloading atWarrenton.

The Columbia River at Warrenton has dynamic receiving water characteristics that aredetermined by tidal exchanges (affecting salinities and currents), river flow (seasonal andstorm flow conditions), wind conditions, and water circulation. For this evaluation,representative receiving water data were obtained from the Columbia River DataDevelopment Program, CORIE, Oregon DEQ LASAR monitoring data, and National OceanSurvey tidal current predictions to represent the range of water column density stratificationconditions and tidal currents at the Warrenton site. Three water column densitystratification conditions were selected from the available records to represent the range of


7/21


5

conditions: complete freshwater water column, mixed estuarine water column, andstratified (freshwater over salt water) water column. The National Ocean Survey tidalcurrent predictions were extracted for a 20-year period at the Youngs Bay entrance site andthese were applied to develop the lowest tenth-percentile ebb and flood tide currentvelocities.

The worst-case cooling water discharge scenarios for the classes of LNGCs that would bedocked at the Warrenton terminal are summarized as follows:

148,000 m3 LNGC2,478 m3/hour cooling water flow rate, discharge water temperature by6.6C greater than intake water temperature, discharge port diameter of 0.46 meter, depth ofdischarge port of 6.1 meters, and the discharge port at horizontal angle and orthogonal toambient currents.

213,000 m3 LNGC2,040 m3/hour cooling water flow rate, discharge water temperature by8.9C greater than intake water temperature, discharge port diameter of 0.46 meter, depth ofdischarge port of 6.1 meters, and the discharge port at horizontal angle and orthogonal toambient currents.

266,000 m3 LNGC2,040 m3/hour cooling water flow rate, discharge water temperature by8.9C greater than intake water temperature, discharge port diameter of 0.46 meter, depth ofdischarge port of 6.1 meters, and the discharge port at horizontal angle and orthogonal toambient currents. Note that because this vessel configuration is identical to the 213,000 m3 LNGC,both are represented by the same modeling scenarios.

Results of Thermal Plume Modeling

Various EPA-approved discharge plume dilution models were reviewed and considered forthis application including Visual Plumes (UM3 and DKHW), UDKHDEN, and CORMIX1.

The model UDKHDEN was developed for thermal plume applications and was selected forapplication because of its rigorous representation of submerged thermal plume mixingprocesses. Six modeling scenarios were developed, three to represent the standard LNGCsize class (148,000 m3) and three to represent both the 210,000 m3 and 266,000 m3 vessels. Theobjectives of the thermal plume modeling were to (1) define the distance from the coolingwater discharge port where the cooling water/receiving water mixture achieves specifictarget temperatures (0.3C and 0.14C above ambient temperature), (2) define the depth ofthe discharge plume at the target temperature distances, and (3) calculate the percent ofriver cross-section used by the thermal plume.

The target temperature of 0.3C above ambient temperature is the threshold for compliancewith the biologically based numeric criterion for salmon and steelhead migration at the

Warrenton site. It is also the threshold for compliance with the water quality standardssection on the implementation of the temperature criteria and human use allowance forinsignificant additions of heat to water bodies (OAR-340-041-0028(12)) prior to thecompletion of a temperature TMDL. The target temperature of 0.14C above ambienttemperature is the threshold for compliance with the antidegradation policy for water-quality-limited waterbodies that are limited for temperature.


8/21


6

Table 1 summarizes the results of the thermal plume modeling for the LNGC size classesand the three different receiving water modeling scenarios. The output data for eachmodeling scenario are provided in Attachment 1.

The modeling results for scenarios 1a, 1c, 2a, and 2c, as shown in Table 1, demonstrate thatthe thermal plume discharged from the submerged cooling water outlet port on the LNGC

ship is very rapidly mixed with the ambient receiving water. The cooling water/receivingwater mixture achieves the specific target temperature of 0.3C above ambient temperaturewithin a distance of 2.0 to 2.5 meters from the port for the 148,000 m3 vessel, and within adistance of 4.2 to 5.6 meters from the port for the 213,000 m3 and 266,000 m3 vessels. Theplume is submerged at a depth of about 6 meters when the mixture achieves 0.3C aboveambient temperature.

To reduce the mixed plume temperature to 0.14C above ambient temperature requires asomewhat longer plume travel distance. The cooling water/receiving water mixtureachieves 0.14C above ambient temperature at a distance of 7 to 9 meters from the dischargeport for the 148,000 m3 vessel, and 14 to 21 meters for the 213,000 m3 and 266,000 m3 vessels.

The plume is predicted to remain submerged at 5.8 to 6.0 meters when the mixture achieves0.14C above ambient temperature.

There are no modeling results for scenarios 1b and 2b (stratified water column, flood tide)because the model did not execute under this set of discharge and ambient conditions. Thiswas a result of the effluent density exceeding the ambient density at the depth of discharge(6.1 meters). The model that was used for this evaluation is not capable of simulatingnegatively buoyant plumes.

The mixing time for the cooling water/receiving water mixture to reach 0.3C aboveambient temperature is approximately 3 to 10 seconds for both LNGC vessel classes. Themixing time for the cooling water/receiving water mixture to achieve 0.14C above ambient

temperature is approximately 15 to 30 seconds for both the steam-powered LNGC vesselclass and the diesel-powered LNGC vessel classes.

The Columbia River at Warrenton is 3.5 nautical miles wide, or 6,488 meters. Table 1includes a calculated cross-sectional width that the thermal plume occupies within the totalcross-sectional width of the Columbia River at Warrenton. The cross-sectional width of theColumbia River that the thermal plume would occupy ranges from 0.26-0.33 percent for thediesel-powered LNGC vessels to 0.29-0.36 percent for the steam-powered LNGC vessels.These results indicate that the LNGC cooling water discharge plumes will have a very smallarea of influence and the region and time duration of mixing will be limited.

SummaryCompliance with the Oregon water quality standards thermal plume limitations issummarized as follows:

Impairment of Active Salmon SpawningNot applicable to Warrenton site because thereare no spawning areas.


9/21


7

Acute Impairment of Instantaneous LethalityPrevented by limiting potential fish exposureto temperatures of 32C or more to 2 seconds. Not applicable to LNGC discharge

because no discharge temperatures approach 32C.

Thermal ShockPrevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure totemperatures of 25C or more to less than 5 percent of the cross-section of 100 percent ofthe 7Q10 low flow of the water body. Results presented in Table 1 show no violation.

Migration BlockageUnless the ambient temperature is 21.0C or greater, migrationblockage is prevented or minimized by limiting potential fish exposure to temperatures

of 21C or more to less than 25 percent of the cross-section of 100 percent of the 7Q10low flow of the water body. Results presented in Table 1 show no violation.

The thermal shock and migration blockage conditions have been evaluated with the thermalplume modeling and the results provided show that no LNGC discharge would violatethese conditions.


10/21

Distance from Distan

LNGC Cooling Water Cooling Water Receiving Water Tidal Receiving Water Discharge to 0.3oC Plume Depth at Discharg

Scenario Class Discharge Flow Discharge Temp. Conditions Currents Temperature Temp. Change 0.3oC Delta T Temp.

1a148,000 m

3

2,478 m

3

/hour 21.44

o

C

Freshet (1.5 ppt

Salinity) -

Unstratified

Ebb (0.33

m/s) 16.67

o

C1.9 meters 6.1 meters 6.8 m

1b 148,000 m3

2,478 m3/hour 21.44

oC

Stratified

(Fresh/Marine)

Flood (0.57

m/s)16.67

oC --

2--

2-

1c 148,000 m3

2,478 m3/hour 21.44

oC

Estuarine Mixed (15

ppt Salinity) -

Unstratified

Flood (0.57

m/s)16.67

oC 2.5 meters 6.1 meters 9.2 m

2a213,000 m

3&

266,000 m3 2,040 m

3/hour 23.74

oC

Freshet (1.5 ppt

Salinity) -

Unstratified

Ebb (0.33

m/s)16.67

oC 4.2 meters 6.0 meters 14.0

2b

213,000 m3

&

266,000 m3 2,040 m

3

/hour 23.74

o

C

Stratified

(Fresh/Marine)

Flood (0.57

m/s) 16.67

o

C --

2

--

2

-

2c213,000 m

3&

266,000 m3 2,040 m

3/hour 23.74

oC

Estuarine Mixed (15

ppt Salinity) -

Unstratified

Flood (0.57

m/s)16.67

oC 5.6 meters 6.1 meters 20.7

Notes:1

Based on the model-predicted plume width at the completion of initial (nearfield) dilution and a cross-sectional Columbia River width of 6,488 meters.2

The model did not execute for this scenario because the effluent density exceeds the ambient density at the depth of discharge (e.g., plume is negatively buoyant).

Table 1

Summary of Cooling Water Discharge Thermal Plume Modeling Results


11/21

ATTACHMENT

UDKHDEN Model Output


12/21


13/21

UNIVERSAL DATA FILE: orlng1a.in

Oregon LNG Case #1a: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.688,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,1.50,21.44

0,1.50,16.8,0.33

2,1.50,16.8,0.33

4,1.50,16.8,0.33

6,1.50,16.7,0.33

8,1.50,15.76,0.33

1

PROGRAM UDKHDEN

SOLUTION TO MULTIPLE BUOYANT DISCHARGE PROBLEM WITH

AMBIENT CURRENTS AND VERTICAL GRADIENTS. AUG 1985


CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #1a: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C

SINGLE PORT DISCHARGE CASE

DISCHARGE= .6880CU-M/S ** TEMPERATURE= 21.44-C ** SALINITY= 1.500-PPT ** DIAMETER= .4572

** NUMBER OF PORTS= 1 ** SPACING=1000.00-M ** DEPTH= 6.10-M

0 AMBIENT STRATIFICATION PROFILE

DEPTH (M) TEMP (C) SALINITY (PPT) DENSITY (G/CM3) VELOCITY (M/S)

.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .3302.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .330

4.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .330

6.00 16.70 1.50 1.00004 .330

8.00 15.76 1.50 1.00020 .330

0 FROUDE NO= 64.12, PORT SPACING/PORT DIA= 2187.23,

+ STARTING LENGTH= 1.822

ALL LENGTHS ARE IN METERS-TIME IN SEC. FIRST LINE ARE INITIAL CONDITIONS.

X Y Z TH1 TH2 WIDTH DRHO DTCL DSCL TIME DILUTION

.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .46 1.000 1.000 1.000 .00 1.00

1.82 .06 .00 4.23 .08 1.25 1.000 1.000 .000 .43 1.95

4.92 1.76 .02 50.32 .44 5.92 .169 .189 .000 3.28 15.19

6.74 4.91 .05 66.76 .66 8.39 .097 .110 .000 9.60 28.23

7.98 8.35 .10 72.94 .78 10.01 .061 .069 .000 17.74 39.16

8.95 11.88 .15 76.21 .84 11.24 .047 .054 .000 26.80 48.81

9.75 15.45 .21 78.28 .89 12.25 .039 .044 .000 36.38 57.5810.44 19.04 .26 79.71 .93 13.11 .032 .037 .000 46.29 65.73

11.06 22.64 .33 80.78 .96 13.88 .027 .031 .000 56.42 73.40

11.62 26.26 .39 81.60 .98 14.56 .023 .026 .000 66.72 80.68

12.13 29.88 .45 82.27 1.00 15.19 .019 .021 .000 77.12 87.64

12.61 33.50 .51 82.81 1.00 15.77 .015 .017 .000 87.62 94.33

13.47 40.77 .64 83.66 .99 16.81 .009 .011 .000 108.82 107.05

14.23 48.04 .77 84.30 .95 17.74 .004 .005 .000 130.20 119.05

PLUMES HAVE REACHED EQUILIBRIUM HEIGHT - STRATIFIED ENVIRONMENT

14.93 55.32 .88 84.80 .88 18.57 .000 .000 .000 151.73 130.45

15.25 58.97 .94 85.01 .84 18.96 -.002 -.002 .000 162.53 135.96

15.56 62.61 .99 85.20 .80 19.34 -.004 -.004 .000 173.35 141.35

15.86 66.25 1.04 85.38 .75 19.70 -.005 -.006 .000 184.19 146.64

16.15 69.90 1.09 85.53 .69 20.05 -.007 -.008 .000 195.05 151.82

16.43 73.55 1.13 85.68 .64 20.38 -.008 -.009 .000 205.92 156.91

16.70 77.19 1.17 85.81 .58 20.71 -.009 -.010 .000 216.81 161.90

16.97 80.84 1.20 85.94 .52 21.02 -.010 -.011 .000 227.71 166.81

17.22 84.49 1.23 86.05 .46 21.32 -.011 -.012 .000 238.62 171.6417.47 88.14 1.26 86.16 .39 21.62 -.011 -.013 .000 249.54 176.39

17.71 91.79 1.28 86.26 .33 21.90 -.012 -.014 .000 260.47 181.07

17.95 95.44 1.30 86.35 .27 22.18 -.012 -.014 .000 271.40 185.68

18.18 99.09 1.32 86.44 .20 22.45 -.013 -.014 .000 282.35 190.22

18.40 102.74 1.33 86.52 .14 22.72 -.013 -.015 .000 293.30 194.71

18.62 106.39 1.34 86.60 .08 22.97 -.013 -.014 .000 304.26 199.14

18.84 110.04 1.34 86.67 .02 23.23 -.013 -.014 .000 315.22 203.52

PLUMES HAVE REACHED MAXIMUM HEIGHT - STRATIFIED ENVIRONMENT

TRAPPING LEVEL= 5.22 METERS BELOW SURFACE, DILUTION= 130.20


14/21

UNIVERSAL DATA FILE: orlng1b.in

Oregon LNG Case #1b: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.688,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,13.96,21.44

0,1.27,16.8,0.57

2,1.66,16.8,0.57

4,1.85,16.8,0.57

6,2.47,16.7,0.57

8,13.96,14.8,0.57

COMPUTATIONS CEASE FOR

CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #1b: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C

CORRECT THE FOLLOWING AND REENTER DATA.

EFFLUENT DENSITY MUST BE .LE. AMBIENT DENSITY AT THE DISCHARGE DEPTH

GOING TO NEXT DATA SET IF THERE IS ONE.


15/21

UNIVERSAL DATA FILE: orlng1c.in

Oregon LNG Case #1c: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.688,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,15.00,21.44

0,15.00,16.8,0.57

2,15.00,16.8,0.57

4,15.00,16.8,0.57

6,15.00,16.7,0.57

8,15.00,15.76,0.57

1

PROGRAM UDKHDEN




CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #1c: Q=2,478 m3/hr, T=21.44 C


DISCHARGE= .6880CU-M/S ** TEMPERATURE= 21.44-C ** SALINITY=15.000-PPT ** DIAMETER= .4572




.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .5702.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .570

4.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .570

6.00 16.70 15.00 1.01035 .570

8.00 15.76 15.00 1.01053 .570





.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .46 1.000 1.000 1.000 .00 1.00

1.51 .08 .00 7.45 .07 1.25 1.000 1.000 .000 .36 2.01

3.96 2.55 .01 66.11 .27 4.85 .196 .214 .000 3.16 16.02

5.08 6.03 .03 75.58 .37 6.34 .121 .133 .000 8.34 26.54

5.88 9.60 .06 79.03 .44 7.31 .085 .094 .000 14.13 35.02

6.51 13.20 .09 80.97 .47 8.08 .062 .068 .000 20.18 42.56

7.04 16.82 .12 82.23 .49 8.71 .049 .055 .000 26.37 49.457.51 20.44 .15 83.12 .51 9.27 .043 .047 .000 32.62 55.86

7.92 24.08 .19 83.80 .53 9.76 .037 .041 .000 38.93 61.91

8.30 27.72 .22 84.32 .54 10.20 .033 .037 .000 45.27 67.66

8.65 31.36 .25 84.75 .55 10.61 .029 .033 .000 51.63 73.16

8.97 35.00 .29 85.11 .56 10.99 .026 .029 .000 58.00 78.47

9.56 42.29 .36 85.67 .57 11.68 .021 .023 .000 70.79 88.56

10.08 49.59 .43 86.09 .58 12.29 .016 .018 .000 83.61 98.09

10.56 56.89 .51 86.43 .57 12.85 .012 .014 .000 96.45 107.18

11.00 64.19 .58 86.70 .56 13.36 .009 .010 .000 109.30 115.90

11.40 71.49 .65 86.92 .55 13.83 .006 .006 .000 122.16 124.31

11.78 78.80 .72 87.11 .53 14.28 .003 .003 .000 135.03 132.46

12.14 86.10 .79 87.27 .50 14.70 .000 .000 .000 147.90 140.38


12.36 90.67 .83 87.37 .49 14.95 -.001 -.001 .000 155.95 145.22

12.52 94.32 .86 87.43 .47 15.15 -.002 -.002 .000 162.39 149.0412.68 97.98 .89 87.50 .46 15.34 -.003 -.004 .000 168.83 152.80

12.84 101.63 .92 87.56 .44 15.52 -.004 -.005 .000 175.27 156.52

12.99 105.28 .94 87.61 .42 15.70 -.005 -.006 .000 181.71 160.20

13.15 108.94 .97 87.67 .40 15.88 -.006 -.007 .000 188.15 163.83

13.29 112.59 .99 87.72 .38 16.05 -.007 -.007 .000 194.59 167.43

13.44 116.25 1.02 87.76 .36 16.22 -.007 -.008 .000 201.03 170.98

13.58 119.90 1.04 87.81 .34 16.39 -.008 -.009 .000 207.47 174.49

13.72 123.56 1.06 87.85 .32 16.55 -.009 -.010 .000 213.91 177.96

13.85 127.21 1.08 87.89 .30 16.71 -.009 -.010 .000 220.35 181.40

13.99 130.87 1.10 87.93 .28 16.87 -.010 -.011 .000 226.80 184.80

14.12 134.52 1.12 87.97 .26 17.02 -.010 -.011 .000 233.24 188.17


16/21

14.24 138.18 1.13 88.01 .23 17.17 -.010 -.012 .000 239.68 191.51

14.37 141.83 1.15 88.04 .21 17.32 -.011 -.012 .000 246.12 194.81

14.49 145.49 1.16 88.07 .19 17.46 -.011 -.012 .000 252.57 198.08

14.62 149.15 1.17 88.10 .17 17.60 -.011 -.013 .000 259.01 201.33

14.74 152.80 1.18 88.13 .15 17.74 -.012 -.013 .000 265.45 204.54

14.85 156.46 1.19 88.16 .12 17.88 -.012 -.013 .000 271.89 207.73

14.97 160.11 1.20 88.19 .10 18.02 -.012 -.013 .000 278.33 210.89

15.09 163.77 1.20 88.22 .08 18.15 -.012 -.013 .000 284.78 214.03

15.20 167.42 1.21 88.24 .06 18.28 -.012 -.013 .000 291.22 217.14

15.31 171.08 1.21 88.27 .04 18.41 -.012 -.013 .000 297.66 220.23

15.42 174.74 1.21 88.29 .02 18.54 -.012 -.013 .000 304.10 223.30

15.53 178.39 1.21 88.31 .00 18.66 -.011 -.013 .000 310.55 226.34




17/21


Oregon LNG Case #2a: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.567,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,1.50,23.74

0,1.50,16.8,0.33

2,1.50,16.8,0.33

4,1.50,16.8,0.33

6,1.50,16.7,0.33

8,1.50,15.76,0.33

1

PROGRAM UDKHDEN




CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #2a: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C


DISCHARGE= .5670CU-M/S ** TEMPERATURE= 23.74-C ** SALINITY= 1.500-PPT ** DIAMETER= .4572




.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .3302.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .330

4.00 16.80 1.50 1.00002 .330

6.00 16.70 1.50 1.00004 .330

8.00 15.76 1.50 1.00020 .330





.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .46 1.000 1.000 1.000 .00 1.00

1.71 .06 .00 5.15 .17 1.25 1.000 1.000 .000 .50 1.97

4.60 2.06 .03 56.38 .82 5.55 .168 .195 .000 3.97 15.60

6.16 5.36 .10 70.31 1.14 7.65 .095 .112 .000 11.18 27.91

7.22 8.85 .18 75.38 1.33 9.01 .069 .083 .000 20.03 38.02

8.05 12.41 .27 78.12 1.48 10.06 .055 .066 .000 29.63 46.98

8.75 16.00 .37 79.86 1.59 10.92 .045 .054 .000 39.64 55.169.35 19.61 .47 81.08 1.68 11.67 .038 .045 .000 49.90 62.78

9.89 23.23 .58 82.00 1.74 12.33 .032 .038 .000 60.32 69.99

10.37 26.85 .69 82.71 1.79 12.93 .026 .032 .000 70.85 76.87

10.82 30.48 .81 83.29 1.81 13.48 .022 .026 .000 81.48 83.47

11.23 34.11 .92 83.77 1.82 13.99 .018 .021 .000 92.16 89.85

11.97 41.38 1.15 84.51 1.80 14.92 .011 .013 .000 113.68 102.04

12.64 48.66 1.38 85.07 1.72 15.75 .005 .006 .000 135.33 113.61


13.24 55.95 1.59 85.51 1.60 16.50 .000 .000 .000 157.08 124.64

13.52 59.60 1.69 85.69 1.53 16.85 -.002 -.003 .000 167.98 129.96

13.79 63.24 1.79 85.86 1.44 17.18 -.004 -.005 .000 178.90 135.17

14.05 66.89 1.88 86.01 1.35 17.51 -.006 -.007 .000 189.84 140.26

14.30 70.54 1.96 86.15 1.26 17.82 -.008 -.009 .000 200.79 145.24

14.54 74.19 2.04 86.27 1.15 18.11 -.009 -.011 .000 211.75 150.11

14.77 77.84 2.11 86.39 1.05 18.40 -.010 -.013 .000 222.72 154.8815.00 81.49 2.17 86.49 .95 18.67 -.010 -.012 .000 233.71 159.54

15.22 85.14 2.23 86.59 .85 18.94 -.010 -.012 .000 244.70 164.11

15.43 88.79 2.28 86.68 .76 19.20 -.010 -.012 .000 255.70 168.59

15.64 92.44 2.32 86.77 .67 19.45 -.009 -.011 .000 266.70 172.99

15.85 96.09 2.36 86.85 .59 19.69 -.009 -.011 .000 277.71 177.31

16.04 99.74 2.40 86.92 .51 19.93 -.009 -.011 .000 288.73 181.57

16.24 103.40 2.43 86.99 .44 20.16 -.009 -.010 .000 299.75 185.76

16.43 107.05 2.45 87.06 .37 20.38 -.008 -.010 .000 310.78 189.88

16.61 110.70 2.48 87.12 .30 20.60 -.008 -.010 .000 321.81 193.95

16.80 114.36 2.49 87.18 .23 20.81 -.008 -.010 .000 332.84 197.97

16.97 118.01 2.51 87.23 .17 21.02 -.008 -.010 .000 343.87 201.94


18/21

17.15 121.66 2.51 87.29 .11 21.22 -.008 -.009 .000 354.91 205.86

17.32 125.32 2.52 87.34 .05 21.42 -.008 -.009 .000 365.96 209.74

17.49 128.97 2.52 87.39 .00 21.61 -.008 -.009 .000 377.00 213.59




19/21

UNIVERSAL DATA FILE: orlng2b.in

Oregon LNG Case #2b: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.567,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,13.96,23.74

0,1.27,16.8,0.57

2,1.66,16.8,0.57

4,1.85,16.8,0.57

6,2.47,16.7,0.57

8,7.47,15.76,0.57

COMPUTATIONS CEASE FOR

CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #2b: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C

CORRECT THE FOLLOWING AND REENTER DATA.

EFFLUENT DENSITY MUST BE .LE. AMBIENT DENSITY AT THE DISCHARGE DEPTH

GOING TO NEXT DATA SET IF THERE IS ONE.


20/21


Oregon LNG Case #2c: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C

0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0

0.567,1,0.4572,0,6.1

0,0,1000

5,15.00,23.74

0,15.00,16.8,0.57

2,15.00,16.8,0.57

4,15.00,16.8,0.57

6,15.00,16.7,0.57

8,15.00,15.76,0.57

1

PROGRAM UDKHDEN




CASE I.D. Oregon LNG Case #2c: Q=2,040 m3/hr, T=23.74 C


DISCHARGE= .5670CU-M/S ** TEMPERATURE= 23.74-C ** SALINITY=15.000-PPT ** DIAMETER= .4572




.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .5702.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .570

4.00 16.80 15.00 1.01033 .570

6.00 16.70 15.00 1.01035 .570

8.00 15.76 15.00 1.01053 .570





.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .46 1.000 1.000 1.000 .00 1.00

1.40 .09 .00 9.15 .15 1.24 1.000 1.000 .000 .41 2.05

3.60 2.77 .02 71.54 .47 4.54 .195 .221 .000 3.73 16.48

4.50 6.32 .06 78.32 .65 5.66 .125 .143 .000 9.54 25.27

5.15 9.91 .10 80.95 .76 6.44 .089 .103 .000 15.74 32.59

5.68 13.53 .16 82.47 .83 7.06 .074 .085 .000 22.09 39.12

6.12 17.16 .21 83.48 .89 7.58 .063 .072 .000 28.50 45.126.51 20.80 .27 84.21 .94 8.04 .054 .063 .000 34.95 50.73

6.86 24.44 .33 84.76 .98 8.45 .048 .055 .000 41.41 56.08

7.18 28.08 .39 85.21 1.01 8.83 .042 .049 .000 47.89 61.21

7.48 31.73 .46 85.57 1.04 9.18 .038 .044 .000 54.37 66.17

7.75 35.37 .53 85.87 1.06 9.50 .034 .039 .000 60.86 70.98

8.24 42.67 .66 86.35 1.09 10.10 .027 .031 .000 73.84 80.23

8.69 49.97 .80 86.71 1.10 10.64 .021 .024 .000 86.82 89.07

9.09 57.28 .95 87.00 1.10 11.14 .016 .018 .000 99.81 97.58

9.45 64.58 1.08 87.24 1.08 11.60 .011 .013 .000 112.78 105.81

9.79 71.89 1.22 87.43 1.06 12.03 .007 .009 .000 125.76 113.79

10.11 79.19 1.35 87.60 1.02 12.43 .004 .005 .000 138.73 121.55

10.41 86.50 1.48 87.74 .97 12.81 .001 .001 .000 151.69 129.10


10.62 91.98 1.57 87.83 .93 13.08 -.001 -.002 .000 161.42 134.62

10.75 95.64 1.63 87.89 .90 13.25 -.003 -.003 .000 167.90 138.2410.89 99.29 1.69 87.94 .87 13.42 -.004 -.005 .000 174.38 141.80

11.02 102.95 1.74 87.99 .83 13.59 -.005 -.006 .000 180.86 145.32

11.14 106.60 1.79 88.04 .80 13.75 -.006 -.007 .000 187.34 148.79

11.27 110.26 1.84 88.08 .76 13.90 -.007 -.008 .000 193.82 152.21

11.39 113.91 1.89 88.13 .73 14.06 -.008 -.009 .000 200.30 155.58

11.51 117.57 1.94 88.17 .69 14.21 -.009 -.011 .000 206.77 158.90

11.62 121.22 1.98 88.20 .65 14.35 -.010 -.011 .000 213.25 162.18

11.74 124.88 2.02 88.24 .61 14.49 -.011 -.012 .000 219.73 165.41

11.85 128.53 2.06 88.27 .57 14.63 -.011 -.013 .000 226.20 168.59

11.96 132.19 2.09 88.30 .53 14.77 -.012 -.014 .000 232.68 171.72

12.06 135.85 2.12 88.33 .49 14.90 -.012 -.014 .000 239.16 174.82


21/21

12.17 139.50 2.15 88.36 .45 15.03 -.012 -.014 .000 245.63 177.87

12.27 143.16 2.18 88.39 .41 15.16 -.012 -.013 .000 252.10 180.88

12.38 146.81 2.21 88.42 .37 15.28 -.011 -.013 .000 258.58 183.85

12.48 150.47 2.23 88.44 .34 15.40 -.011 -.013 .000 265.05 186.79

12.57 154.13 2.25 88.47 .30 15.52 -.011 -.013 .000 271.52 189.70

12.67 157.78 2.27 88.49 .27 15.64 -.011 -.013 .000 278.00 192.57

12.77 161.44 2.28 88.51 .24 15.75 -.011 -.012 .000 284.47 195.41

12.86 165.10 2.30 88.53 .20 15.86 -.011 -.012 .000 290.94 198.22

12.95 168.75 2.31 88.55 .17 15.97 -.010 -.012 .000 297.41 201.01

13.05 172.41 2.32 88.57 .14 16.08 -.010 -.012 .000 303.88 203.77

13.14 176.06 2.33 88.59 .11 16.19 -.010 -.012 .000 310.35 206.51

13.23 179.72 2.33 88.61 .09 16.30 -.010 -.012 .000 316.82 209.22

13.31 183.38 2.34 88.63 .06 16.40 -.010 -.011 .000 323.29 211.92

13.40 187.03 2.34 88.64 .03 16.50 -.010 -.011 .000 329.76 214.60

13.49 190.69 2.34 88.66 .01 16.61 -.010 -.011 .000 336.23 217.25



appendix 2 f

Documents