A methodology for overall consequence assessment in oil and gas pipeline industry

Abstract

Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) has been widely used in the oil and gas pipeline industry. QRA mainly includes four steps, namely, hazard identification, probability calculation, consequence assessment, and risk quantification. Consequence assessment is an integral part of QRA, which aims to quantify the negative impacts when pipeline failure events take place. However, the current consequence assessment methods mainly pay attention to the determination of the influence area around accidents and to simple assimilations of the losses, ignoring the components of these losses. This leads to the deterioration of the quality of the QRA. In this article, a methodology for overall consequence assessment in the oil and gas pipeline industry is proposed. The methodology mainly involves three stages, namely, identification of the accident scenario, the determination of influence area, and the calculation of possible losses. The most important innovation spot is integrating four aspects of release accident loss into a quantitative model, to calculate a quantitative result of the loss value of a release accident. Therefore, this study can overcome the limitations of current QRA methodologies and improve the quality of QRA for oil and gas pipelines.

Improving Emergency Response Systems in the Oil and Gas Industry To Reduce Environmental Damage

“…Effective localization and elimination of accidents is possible only with the mobilization of all available resources and forces [2]. The main criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response is the speed [3], which can be achieved at any hazardous production facility in the oil and gas industry using the proposed mobile emergency response system. Reducing the response time allows you to reduce material and environmental damage, as well as damage that can be caused to the engineering complex.…”

Reliability analysis of gas turbine engine by means of bathtub‐shaped failure rate distribution

“…Also, TBF of the system is assumed to be independent and identically distributed random variables. 36,37 HPP implies that the system is independent of aging factor and assumes that the system is restored in the same condition as it was before failure. On the other hand, NHPP represents events with nonconstant failure rate specifically for repairable systems.…”

“…37 Most commonly, power law and log-linear models are employed for NHPP. Reliability approaches have also largely been used for other applications in the past such as oil and gas pipeline risk assessment and evaluation, 36,37 wind turbines for reliability analysis, 26 and other systems. The current study focuses, however, on reliability assessment of gas turbine using a Weibull distribution for improving their availability and aid in maintenance to avoid unplanned shutdowns.…”

“…PRP assumes that system is brought back to its perfect health conditions upon repair. Also, TBF of the system is assumed to be independent and identically distributed random variables . HPP implies that the system is independent of aging factor and assumes that the system is restored in the same condition as it was before failure.…”

Comparing conditional probabilities and statistical independence in layers of protection analysis

“…[1][2][3] QRA methods include hazard identification, probability calculation, consequence assessment, and risk quantification. 4 In this work, conditional probability-based methods are explored, which do not require that all layers of protection function (and fail) independently of each other. Most current QRA approaches assume that events, such as the failure of a layer of protection, are statistically independent and/or have a single-point failure.…”