Natural gas network resiliency to a "shakeout scenario" earthquake.

Ellison, James; Corbet, Thomas F.; Brooks, Robert

doi:10.2172/1089984

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, among the 87 quantitative studies, 48 are probabilistic. Many deterministic and probabilistic methods have been applied to quantify the resilience curve, including complex networks theory (Afgan & Cvetinovic, 2013;Akhavein & Fotuhi Firuzabad, 2011;Anghel et al, 2007;Bagchi et al, 2013;Bilal et al, 2016;Bompard et al, 2010;Carvalho et al, 2014;Cavalieri et al, 2014;Cimellaro et al, 2012;Cong et al, 2018;Ellison et al, 2013;Esposito et al, 2013;Fang & Sansavini, 2018;Hernandez-Fajardo & Dueñas-Osorio, 2013;Hines et al, 2010;Holmgren, 2007;Kim et al, 2017;Kyriakidis et al, 2018a;Layton, 2004;Li et al, 2017;Lustenberger et al, 2017;Martinez-Anido et al, 2012;Montoya, 2010;Moslehi & Reddy, 2018;Nadeau, 2007;Nan et al, 2013;Nezamoddini et al, 2017;Ouyang & Dueñas-Osorio, 2014;Ouyang et al, 2012Ouyang et al, , 2009Panteli et al, 2017;Poljansek et al, 2010;Rocchetta et al, 2018;Schiel et al, 2017;Shinozuka et al, 2004;Su et al, 2017Su et al, , 2018Veeramany et al, 2017;…”

Section: Energy Systems Resilience Assessment Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, they evaluate aspects of organizational resilience within a plant or facility (Furniss et al, 2011;Gong & Liang, 2017;Labaka et al, 2015;Shirali et al, 2012). Available quantitative studies use again complex network theory to compare different network topologies (Anghel et al, 2007;Ellison et al, 2013;Hines et al, 2010;Kim et al, 2017;Nan et al, 2013;Ouyang et al, 2012), and to analyse the effects of randomly removed links or nodes on the flows (Anghel et al, 2007;Hines et al, 2010;Kim et al, 2017). The idea is to reconfigure the network's topology to increase its performance.…”

Section: Energy Systems Resilience Assessment Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review on resilience assessment of energy systems

Gasser¹,

Lustenberger²,

Cinelli³

et al. 2019

Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy systems are regularly subject to major disruptions affecting economic activities, operation of infrastructure and the society as a whole. Resilience assessment comprises the pre-event oriented classical risk assessment as a central element, but it goes beyond that because it also includes and evaluates post-event strategies to improve the functioning of the system during its future operation. First, an overview of resilience definitions used across various scientific disciplines is presented, followed by an in-depth analysis of resilience assessment and quantification for energy systems. The relevant literature is classified by approach and according to four key functions of resilience: resist, restabilize, rebuild, and reconfigure. Findings show that irrespective of the research field, a resilient system always operates with an aim to minimize the potential consequences resulting from a disruptive event and to efficiently recover from a potential system performance loss.

show abstract

Section: Energy Systems Resilience Assessment Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Energy Systems Resilience Assessment Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review on resilience assessment of energy systems

Gasser¹,

Lustenberger²,

Cinelli³

et al. 2019

Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In summary, South Stream offers the option to import largescale (i.e., twice as much as Nabucco) gas volumes from non-European countries, gas transported via South Stream would have to be contracted with the mainly Russian state-owned natural gas company Gazprom, even if it originally stems 6. A similar modeling approach for the US market is presented by Ellison (2007). from a Caspian country, and South Stream offers an alternative route to the existing routes from Russia.…”

Section: The South Stream Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulating Security of Supply Effects of the Nabucco and South Stream Projects for the European Natural Gas Market

Dieckhöner¹

2012

The Energy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractDue to the increasing European import dependency, significant additional natural gas volumes will be required. In addition to the Nord Stream pipeline, the Nabucco and South Stream pipeline are projects planned for the next decade to provide further gas supplies to the European market. As one of the European Union's energy policies' foci is security of supply, the question can be raised if and how these projects contribute to this objective not only in terms of diversification but also in case of supply disruptions such as occurred in 2009 during the Russia-Ukraine gas crisis. This paper discusses the impact of these two major gas import pipeline projects on the South-Eastern Europe gas supply and analyzes their effects on gas flows and marginal cost prices in general and in case of gas supply disruptions via Ukraine in a model-based analysis with the European natural gas infrastructure and dispatch model TIGER.

show abstract

Advancing Hazard Assessment of Energy Accidents in the Natural Gas Sector with Rough Set Theory and Decision Rules

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impacts of energy accidents are of primary interest for risk and resilience analysts, decision makers, and the general public. They can cause human health and environmental impacts, economic and societal losses, which justifies the interest in developing models to mitigate these adverse outcomes. We present a classification model for sorting energy accidents in the natural gas sector into hazard classes, according to their potential fatalities. The model is built on decision rules, which are knowledge blocks in the form of “if (condition), then (classification to hazard class x)”. They were extracted by the rough sets method using natural gas accident data from 1970–2016 of the Energy-related Severe Accident Database (ENSAD) of the Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI), the most authoritative information source for accidents in the energy sector. This was the first attempt to explore the relationships between the descriptors of energy accidents and the consequence (fatalities). The model was applied to a set of hypothetical accidents to show how the decision-making process could be supported when there is an interest in knowing which class (i.e., low, medium, high) of fatalities an energy accident could cause. The successful use of this approach in the natural gas sector proves that it can be also adapted for other energy chains, such as oil and coal.

show abstract

Natural gas network resiliency to a "shakeout scenario" earthquake.

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

A review on resilience assessment of energy systems

A review on resilience assessment of energy systems

Simulating Security of Supply Effects of the Nabucco and South Stream Projects for the European Natural Gas Market

Advancing Hazard Assessment of Energy Accidents in the Natural Gas Sector with Rough Set Theory and Decision Rules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About