Baseline operational benefits

Once a set of recommendations has been developed, the options must be analyzed to determine the benefits, or essentially the level of risk reduction. The risk analysis method utilized to assess the baseline operational risks should be the same method used to analyze each of the potential risk mitigation options. Therefore, if a semi-quantitative technique was used to assess the baseline risk, then the same assumptions, techniques, and risk evaluation criteria (risk matrix, risk index, etc.) should be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk reduction options. 

Figure 7.4 shows that risk reduction Option 1 resnlts in a benefit of 25% reduction in risk, as compared to the baseline risk level. The level of risk calculated for the baseline operation and the options is the sum of the F-N pairs used to create Figure 7.5. The combination of Option 1 and Option 2 increases the benefit by an additional 25%, to a total of 50% redaction from the baseline, but at a cost eight times higher than Option 1 alone.. This type of information not only clarifies the risk mitigation associated with each design option, but also illustrates the comparison on a cost -benefit basis. Using the resnlts from the F-N curve in Figure 7.3 alone may have influenced the decision that Option 1 should be selected over Option 2. However, considering both the benefits and costs enables a comparison that will result in better informed risk management decisions.

This additional lag time likely reduces the economic benefits of induction of indirect defenses relative to those of direct defense. Plants may have developed various strategies to minimize the lag time of indirect defense induction. Maintaining some baseline nectar production in undamaged plants could be such a strategy. By accommodating at least a few natural enemies, the indirect defense can begin to operate quickly once the plant is attacked. 

For some areas, especially for those new areas, water drive will continue in operation for a long period. If sludge injection (CO2 and water alternative injection) is adopted, not only can oil output be increased, but also CO2 mitigation benefits can be achieved additionally. In this case the baseline option is water drive, by which the CO2 emission is mainly caused by the electricity consumption for water pumping and oil production, and the cost levels are lower. 

Figure 7.3 shows another example that compares a base case level of operational risk with two risk reduction options using quantitative risk analysis techniques. This F-N curve from Chapter 5 illustrates that both options reduce the likelihood and the potential maximum consequence(s). However, Option 2 results in the greatest risk reduction benefits of lower maximum impacts and lower frequencies. Since both options result in risk reduction, as compared to the baseline, an additional cost-benefit analysis would be required to determine which (if either) of these two options should be considered for implementation. 

---