Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Table of Contents
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 2
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3
Abstract
The growing interests in Arctic oil and gas resources has increased in recent times. It
has been estimated that 25% of the remaining worlds oil reserves can be found in
Arctic. It is a challenge for the development of projects in Arctic regions due to harsh
and vulnerable climatic conditions which can increase the risk related to human and
environment. Highly complexed and technologically advanced system are needed for
development of such projects. However, risks and failure are inevitable and while
operating in artic, it should always be considered about such risks and ways to
mitigate it.
This project gives an overview of the risks involved in artic operations. Working
under Arctic conditions will be influenced by covariates like snow, ice, waves, low
temperature, human factors, etc. Reliability and maintainability, process of
maintenance, support activities, and reliable data and information are some of the
factors that might be affected due to the presence of covariates. Risk management in
Arctic is utterly a must to make decisions and to decrease the probability of hazards
and deadly consequences. The effects of covariates in Arctic operations has been
discussed in this paper and focus has been made to do a risk assessment for such
challenge.
1 Introduction
1.1 Overview
Risk analysis can be either quantitative or qualitative approach in evaluating the
unwanted event, analyzing the consequences, applying the mitigating measures and
lowering down the impact as low as possible. Steps that can be followed in this
concept of risk analysis can be as following :
Reduce uncertainty
Take decisions
A proper risk analysis helps in controlling the unwanted situation, estimating damage
of potential and facilitates in making decisions to control such situations by
evaluating the effective measures. Hazard identification is one of the important
process in the risk analysis. Use of barriers to prevent unwanted event is a must in
lowering the risk. With every operational activities, maintenance or installation, there
The change in the operational environment can influence the reliability and
maintainability performance for any kind of operations to a certain extent [1]. The
tough and harsh climatic conditions of the Arctic is one of the main challenge faced in
exploring hydrocarbons in these areas. Taking such issues under considerations,
Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (PSA) focuses on the safety barriers [2,3].
Implementing these safety barriers can somehow lower the impact level and degree of
severity of the consequences in case if unwanted event took place. This report will
focus on Risk in Arctic under different covariates or uncertainties.
1.4 Limitations
There are lots of potential factors that can bring uncertainty in Arctic operations. Here
in this report, impact on logistics, spare parts inventory will not be discussed in depth.
More focus will be made upon the critical factors brought by the environment and its
related issues.
2 Arctic issues
2.1 Overview
Arctic has large potential for energy. Offshore activities in the Arctic has created a
new horizon for the oil and gas field developments. Such developments in Arctic are
new and challenging. The working conditions can be harsh and challenging [5].
Arctic is characterized by a very low temperature and most of the time it is dark. Such
factors could lead in the reduction of efficiency of working personnel or the
functionality of the safety system which can eventually lead to potential hazards.
Experiences with working in cold climates are few, which has build a challenge for
the operations in Arctic.
With growing interests in Arctic, new technologies have been developed for safe and
sustainable operations thus lowering down the risk. Even in the presence of
uncertainties, development of the technologies are promising and reliable to perform
the offshore activities well. For example, ice conditions in Arctic can be a challenge
and apart understanding the mechanics of ice and developing guidelines to predict
such ice formations and mitigating measures to perform the work effectively.
With the fact that in the coming years more activities will head towards north, hence
it is important to take in to considerations the hazards associated with Arctic and
apply the mitigating measures. The key consideration is design element and for this
the knowledge about the conditions related to physical environment is put in the
priority [7]. Spare parts need to be highly reliable. Installed materials and equipment
should be able to withstand the harsh conditions of Arctic. The constructions in Arctic
depends highly on weather conditions and so as its operability. Limitations of the
equipment performance and interruption in transportation can also lead to hazardous
result, thereby increasing the risk degree.
Icing on vessels
Unpredictable weather
Such factors can affect the reliability and maintainability issues. Hence to avoid such
effects, it is important to understand the conditions of Arctic and implement necessary
strategies. However, lack of data is one of the important challenge in defining the
system in Arctic. Introductions of mathematical modeling like Proportional hazard
model and Accelerated failure time model can somehow be used to study the effects
of the covariates in the production performance [1]. These models basically shows the
effect under the influence of different factors while operating in Arctic. The hazard
rate is influenced by the presence of covariates along the passage of time as shown in
the figure below.
Wildlife
Weather conditions
Technical risks:
Incomplete design
Inadequate design
Appropriateness of specifications
Logistic risks :
Availability of resources
Operational risks:
Downtime
Low performance
however the scope of this project cannot cover all of these factors like logistic and
technical issues due to the lack of data.
Presence of hazards in Arctic can cause unwanted event. Identifying the hazards and
building proper barriers can reduce the accident. Hazard is a source of physical
damage and risk is the measure of possibility of the conversion of hazard that can give
rise to loss or damage.
10
Controlling measures
Working
staffs
protected
by
working areas
Reliable
should
the
materials
be
enclosing
should
be
selected
Ice presence for most of the parts of the
of
low
temperatures,
long
periods
Vulnerable environments
also a challenge
Escape, evacuation and rescue of
11
12
3 Risk Assessment
Defining the problem is the main task in risk analysis. Different hazards can be
identified while doing Arctic operations and identifying those hazards is the first step.
Arctic has vulnerable environment and hence the probability of failure in Arctic is
high. Defining the problem is followed by the analysis which in this case would be
HAZID. The cause and consequences are developed to develop a risk picture. Based
upon the risk picture, different alternatives are proposed that can considerably provide
greater risk reduction.
In the Arctic, one of the major challenge is to identify the potential risks and to
develop the measures to control them.
Some of the factors that characterize the Arctic are
Long distance
Ice
Cold
Poor communication
Polar lows
13
The risk factors in Arctic can be avoided by different means of controlling methods,
but however to what extent such measures could be applied or how far can it be
reasonably practicable is the key issue.
14
The main aim of the risk management is to make the scenario free from unwanted
event and drive the process in the acceptable zone of risk or negligible risk. The major
developments in the high North is seeking such attributes which is a major challenge
due to the lack of information and uncertainties. So, basically understanding the
problems is an issue and designing corresponding barriers might be the solution to
some extent.
Identify hazards
PI
Probability
Definition
Extremely remote
Very remote
Remote
Little possibility
Reasonable Probable
Probable
Frequent
Very frequent
In the HAZID, the risk matrix is of order 8 8 for which the the severity level was
also divided in to 8 categories as shown in the table below. The main problem with
these tables was to assign the values which was made through discussion.
Below is the table for the consequence classification on the basis of the severity.
15
Severity factor
Consequence description
No impact
Unrecoverable damages
Again, the product of the probability and severity gives the risk measure for which it
has been categorized in to four parts. They are low, medium, high and very high.
Low (L) [ 6]
Medium(M) [8-20]
On the following basis, a HAZID has been made which is shown below. Again, an
intuition was made that, the high and medium risk measure have to be brought down
either by lowering down the probability or consequence. Hence after applying the
mitigating measures, it has been considered that the most of the risk level was brought
down to the acceptable limit which is shown in HAZID.
16
17
Based on the HAZID, the 1st level risk matrix was developed which is shown below. From the table it is seen that the some of the risk value are
in red zone which strictly needs some controlling measures by all means possible. The sequence number in [] represents the corresponding
events from HAZID.
8
7
[4,1]
[4,2]
[4,3]
[5,2]
[7,1]
[5,3]
[6,1]
[6,2]
[5,7][7,2]
[8,1] [9,1]
[4,5]
[4,6]
[1,4]
[5,5]
[1,5]
[11,1]
[3,1][3,3] [5,4]
[5,6] [10,1]
[4,4]
[3,2] [12,1]
[2,2] [3,4]
[5,1] [5,8]
[9,2]
[1,2]
[5,9]
[2,1]
[1,1][1,3]
2
1
1
18
8
7
6
5
[1,4][7,1][7,2]
[8,1]
[1,5][5,2]
[1,2] [3,1]
[5,1][5,2][5,5]
[6,1]
[1,3][3,2][4,3]
[4,6][5,3][6,2]
[3,3][3,4][4,1][4,2]
[2,2][5,9]
[1,1][5,7] [9,1][12,1]
3
2
1
[2,1][4,5][5,4][8,2]
[9,2] [10,1][11,1]
[4,4]
[5,8]
1
Among many potential hazard, one of the hazard is presence of ice in Arctic. Hence, to make more comprehensive illustrations in this issue, I
have chose to do risk analysis for the offshore platform in the presence of icebergs which is the second part of this project.
19
20
4.1 Overview
Among various Arctic operations, one major risk is collision with the drifting
icebergs. It is always a matter of challenge to predict such dangers mostly in oil and
gas activities in offshore. The presence of ice can actually bring a catastrophic
unwanted event if not prevented before it strikes. Operations in Arctic has to consider
such challenges for safe operations. Uncertainties in ice drift and not good enough
understanding of ice management is a major problem. In this part of the report, a
simple casual and consequence analysis has been made on iceberg collision by the use
of FTA(Fault Tree Analysis) and ETA(Event Tree Analysis) analysis. A concept of
barrier management has been described which actually can help to reduce the
probability and consequence of the unwanted event, thereby reducing the degree of
risk.
The Norsok N-003 industry standard defines approximate 100- and 10 000-year limits
for how far south a collision between an iceberg and an installation is likely. While
the Johan Castberg discovery under consideration for development lies within
the10000-year boundary, for instance, the Snhvit and Goliat fields are just outside it.
The complex nature of offshore is always a challenge to predict the risks associated
with icebergs. Determining the probability of collisions and estimating the
consequences gives the measure of risk. The expected increase in the exploitation of
hydrocarbons had lead to the increased probability of collisions. This report has
shown the risk analysis of iceberg collision and has basically try to generalize to a
certain extent about the issue and the recommendations has been provided.
4.2 Initiating event
The production platform can be assumed to be surrounded by different zones
according to the criticality of iceberg approach. For example, the zones can be divided
in to three zones. The green zone where the ice floes are detected and icebreaker are
implemented. In case, the ice has crossed the green zone, it enters in to the yellow
zone where the relative danger is high and preparation for emergency shutdown is to
be made ready. Finally in the red zone, every procedures are disconnected and
evacuated before iceberg hits the production platform. Approaching Iceberg is the
initiating event.
21
4.3 Barrier
Barriers are established to handle the risk that can be encountered by preventing the
happening of unwanted events or by applying the mitigating measures to reduce the
consequence [9]. It includes the ways, solutions and efforts necessary to reduce the
risk. In the growing business era, barrier management is a necessary evil and has been
a part of companies with HSE management and performance management.
To identify the barriers, it is important to identify their functions based upon the risk
picture. The risk management[10] describes the barrier management picture which is
shown in the figure below.
Barriers used to prevent from icebergs can be
-Net towing
- Propeller washing
-Water cannon deflection
22
23
Cause
Human error
Initiating events
a. Improper training
b. Stress
c. Overpressure of work
d. Mishandling of the towing equipment
e. Insufficient knowledge on ice
management
Data failure
Environment
k. wind
l. oceanic current
m. tsunami
n. waves
o. earthquake
p. corolois force
24
in to the forbidden zone, it is made sure that the towing has been made properly and
the ice exploders has been functioning well. In case, these options fails, evacuation
has to be made before iceberg reaches the platform.
A basic ETA can be made for such iceberg drift and the resulting consequences.
Figure below shows the ETA and the consequence category according to the
probability of occurrence.
25
26
In the case shown in the second part of the project, more efficient techniques might be
required to carry out the operations safely. Study of modeling of Arctic under
influence of various covariates, for example the drift of ice can be useful to know.
More enhanced iceberg detection technologies and exact idea about the location of
icebergs are some of the crucial information that helps in a more effective operations.
It has been said in [11] that deflection capabilities on icebergs in sea ice need more
investigation. Such issues can be emphasized. The operational scenario requires more
special attention which comprises of different issues again.
27
6. References
1. Barabadi, A., & Markeset, T. (2011). Reliability and maintainability performance
under Arctic conditions. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and
Management, 2(3), 205-217.
2. Sklet, S., Aven, T., Hauge, S., & Vinnem, J. E. (1839). Incorporating human and
organisational factors in risk analysis for offshore installations. Advances in Safety
and Reliability, 1847.
production
facility
performance
considering
Arctic
influence
28
9.Sklet, S., Safety barriers: Definition, classification, and performance. Journal of loss
prevention in the process industries, 2006. 19(5): p. 494-506.
10.Leitch, M., ISO 31000: 2009The New International Standard on Risk
Management. Risk Analysis, 2010. 30(6): p. 887-892.
11. Eik, K., & Gudmestad, O. T. (2010). Iceberg management and impact on
design
29