Use of the ALARP Principle for Evaluating Environmental Risks and Impacts of Produced Water Discharged to Sea

Valeur, Jens Rosendal; Petersen, Johannes

doi:10.4043/23902-ms

All Days 2013

DOI: 10.4043/23902-ms

|View full text |Cite

Use of the ALARP Principle for Evaluating Environmental Risks and Impacts of Produced Water Discharged to Sea

Jens Rosendal Valeur

Johannes Petersen

Abstract: When produced water from offshore production is discharged to sea, it contains some oil (aliphatic and aromatic components), production chemicals and NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Substances). These groups of substances are traditionally treated in different ways in the regulations and standards.Regulations of oil in produced water are mainly related to max concentrations and the total discharge of the aliphatic (dispersed) fraction. Regulation of chemicals is based on the environmental risk profile of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2014

2020

Publication Types

Select...

Other3

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent3

Authors

Journals

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Integrated HSE ALARP Assessment - Reducing HSE Risks and Impacts in the Same Processes

Valeur

2014

All Days

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safety risk reduction to a level ALARP and environmental impact reduction using BAT/BEP are usually carried out as separate assessments. Integrated HSE ALARP assessment combines these into one overall framework. This paper outlines the principles of Integrated HSE ALARP assessment and presents examples of its use. Integrated HSE ALARP assessment is in particular useful when conflicts between HSE risk reduction and environmental reduction exist; e.g. when means to reduce safety risks cause increased environmental and/or health impact. In a traditional safety risk ALARP assessment, the safety risk reduction is weighted against the required costs defined as money, effort, and time for achieving the reduction. In the Integrated HSE ALARP assessment, the risk or impact reduction is also weighted towards possible increase in other HSE risks or impact. HAZIDs are used to identify HSE hazards and risks, whereas ENVIDs are used to identify environmental aspects and impacts. Likewise, the HSE risk reduction to ALARP process and the environmental BAT/BEP assessment process are carried out in parallel. Analysing the HSE risks and environmental impacts in the same processes allows for a balanced assessment of the reduction potential of HSE risks and impacts. The results of Integrated HSE ALARP assessments are useful in the company decision process. In particular, they are useful when justifying the chosen design concepts towards authorities, NGOs and other stakeholders. Increased HSE risks or environmental impacts may in some cases be acceptable if they are necessary for achieving other HSE risks or environmental impacts to be reduced.

show abstract

Integrated HSE ALARP Assessment - Reducing HSE Risks and Impacts in the Same Processes

Valeur

2014

All Days

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Performance Standards for Oil Spill Risk

Valeur

Andersen

2020

Day 3 Wed, July 29, 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oil spill risk assessments are carried out in different ways, depending on the background for and the purpose of the analysis. One reason for these differences is the fact that oil spill risk assessment is a discipline at the interface between the technical/statistical analysis in Quantitative Risk Assessments (QRAs) and the biological/socio-economic analysis in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). As a consequence of the EU Offshore Safety Directive (2013/30/EU), the risk of major environmental accidents shall now be included in QRAs for offshore oil & gas installations. Environmental Critical Elements (ECEs) shall be defined, in parallel to the Safety Critical Elements (SCE), which are analysed in QRAs. Moreover, limit values need to be defined for oil spill risk. Whereas including oil spill risk in QRAs has only been carried out systematically the latest few years, it has for many years been included in EIAs. But the extend of such analysis has varied significantly, also for the same type of projects in the same environmental settings. This paper reviews the background for the oil spill risk analysis in QRAs and EIAs, and outlines how the approaches used differs, where the QRAs analyse the likelihood component most detailed, and the EIAs analyse the consequence component most detailed. The reason for these differences is mainly historical. QRAs have traditionally been carried out focused on safety risk for people, calculating the likelihood of accidental scenarios and the consequences in terms of number of fatalities. Also, QRAs have been carried out with the aim of identifying which elements of the system should be improved in order to reduce the likelihood of accidental events, and to identify mitigation measures that can be applied when the likelihood has been reduced as much as reasonably practicable. In contrast, EIAs has mainly focused on the consequences of oil spills which are taking place; oil dispersion is modelled, and the biota, fishery and beaches possibly being impacted are being identified and assessed. The analysis has to a large degree been qualitative in contrast to the quantitative analysis in the QRAs; partly because the consequences of oil spills are so diverse, but probably also because EIAs typically are authored by biologist mainly focusing on qualitative analysis of the impacts on the marine life, whereas QRAs are mainly authored by engineers focused on the quantitative aspects. By highlighting the background for and the difference between oil spill risk analysis carried out in QRAs and EIAs, respectively, it is the ambition to provide a more enlightened basis for selecting methods and level of detail in oil spill risk analysis for various types of projects, and to establish a closer connection between oil spill risk analysis carried out for QRAs and oil spill risk analysis carried out for EIAs.

show abstract

Subsurface Containment Assurance Program - Key Element Overview and Best Practice Examples

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of Subsurface Containment Assurance is to ensure that no environmental damage, damage to operated assets, or impacts on well operations (drilling or production) are incurred by leakage of production or injection fluids from their intended zones. Subsurface Containment Assurance involves the integrated efforts of the subsurface (reservoir and overburden characterization), the wells (planning, construction, well integrity and abandonment) and the operations (process and well operations and management of change) teams. Disciplines must act together to develop and implement a surveillance plan to proactively monitor containment during well and injection operations. The paper will describe the elements of a Subsurface Containment Assurance Program that are required for business units operating across the entire life cycle from exploration to mature developments. The program is designed to be comprehensive yet flexible, and focuses on the critical elements and risks for individual operating units. A consistent framework has been created and implemented that draws from existing tools for reservoir and overburden characterization and field management, and combines these tools to reduce the risk of unintended subsurface fluid containment loss. Specific assessment criteria and ranking approaches and tools for qualitative and quantitative estimation of containment risks will be reviewed. Lastly, practices for deepwater subsurface containment and implications for the oil and gas industry will be discussed.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Use of the ALARP Principle for Evaluating Environmental Risks and Impacts of Produced Water Discharged to Sea

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Integrated HSE ALARP Assessment - Reducing HSE Risks and Impacts in the Same Processes

Integrated HSE ALARP Assessment - Reducing HSE Risks and Impacts in the Same Processes

Performance Standards for Oil Spill Risk

Subsurface Containment Assurance Program - Key Element Overview and Best Practice Examples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About