Risks associated with pipelines

Altogether, the risks of failure of C02 pipelines are considered lower than the risks associated with pipelines for hazardous liquids. Compared with natural gas, the occurrence of failures is considered to be in the same level but with significantly fewer harmful consequences (Gale and Davison, 2002). 

The risks associated with pipelines are generally put into one of three categories low, medium,... 

Given the widespread use of JP-8 in the military and aviation industry, concern about occupational exposure of women of child-bearing age has emerged as this workforce continues to expand. Furthermore, accidental spills associated with pipelines or storage facilities can contaminate soil or water, posing unpredictable health risks to nearby residential areas. Taken together, these concerns provide adequate basis to investigate the developmental toxicity of JP-8. 

The chemical and oil refining industries employ a variety of methods to clear and clean storage tanks, pressure vessels, and pipelines as a preparation for maintenance or the actual maintenance itself. Depending on the job, water washing may not be suitable and the planners may use various acids and alkalis for this activity. There can be risks associated with such reactive chemicals, as noted in the following paragraphs. 

The strategy should address the management of changes that may alter the risks associated with pressure systems equipment, pipelines, wells, structures, and/or maintenance and operating activities. The strategy should cover the following minimum areas ... 

The decision model applied in this paper allows the ordering of sections of pipelines in a hierarchy of multidimensional risks. The problem is well defined in the sense that the context of the problem of decision has aheady been defined as the purpose and objectives of the model, beyond the dimensions of risk to be addressed. These risks include human, financial and environmental aspects of risk, arising from the use of the sections or pipelines under analysis. A hierarchy presents therefore as an insight to the process of managing risks in pipelines and the definition of risk mitigating actions to be taken against the risks associated with each section. 

Pipeline pulling operations contain many of the risks describe above. Additional risks include risks associated with bottom pulled pipelines where post pull release of temporary buoyancy tanks may pose a risk to the diver and craft when they reach the surface. 

While planning and developing the detailed operational procedure for packing the CO2 pipeline for a particular CO2 Injection project, the operations team needs to determine the amplitude of potential Joule-Thomson cooling over a ball valve in the equalization (pressure bypass) line - in order to assess dry ice forming possibility and potential pipeline integrity risk associated with the CO2 packing process. 

Condition assessment of aU pipelines in a system may take years because of operational constraints, logistical issues, and cost. It is therefore important to determine priority, sequence, and long-term schedules for pipeline inspection. These decisions are usually driven by potential consequences of failure and perceived pipeline condition based on the history of performance and other pipeline risk factors. There are two important components in determining the risk associated with a pipeline and therefore the pipeline criticality and inspection priority (1) the likelihood of pipe failure and (2) the consequence of failure, should it occur on a given pipeline (Zarghamee et al., 2012). 

Although iron pipes suffer from the same corrosion risk as steel pipelines, associated with the generation of a galvanic cell with a small anode and a large cathode, the risk is mitigated for iron pipelines because the electrical continuity is broken at every pipe joint. For this reason long-line currents are uncommon in iron lines and cathodic protection is rarely necessary. It also accounts for the ability to protect iron lines by the application of nonadherent polyethylene sleeving . 

Offshore pipeline risk It is more difficult to repair an offshore pipeline than an onshore pipeline. It is therefore associated with an increased risk, or lower security of supply, to receive your gas from an offshore pipeline compared to an onshore pipeline. 

The distribution of hydrogen from a central production facility may be done with pipelines, trucks, or other carriers, but will very likely involve some off-board storage capability as well. Therefore, the primary materials issue associated with distribution deal with Hj effects on pipeline and vessel materials. Transport of H2 in a carrier such as ammonia, a hydrocarbon, or other form or local production of H2 could alter some of the issues but is not likely to totally eliminate them. The safety of hydrogen distribution is a primary issue that affects material choice. The closer to population centers, the higher the risk and the more conservative the design. 

Dziubinski, M. Fratczak, M. 2006. Aspects of risk analysis associated with major failures of fuel pipelines. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 19(5) 399 8. 

Some applications can be verified in several articles on creating models for analyzing risk in gas transport and in distribution in gas pipelines such as smdies hy Brito Almeida (2009) and Brito et al. (2009). These aspects are associated with improving the use of gas in many countries. Moreover, such use conglomerates the magnitude and severity associated with risks. 

The increased level of interest in computational models for ADME/Tox is influenced by the need that multinational pharmaceutical companies now have to lower costs and to increase the width of their discovery pipelines. The risks and expenses associated with developing drugs has increased to the point where companies have pulled forward to early development stages screens for ADME/Tox properties. These companies have started to utilize computational filters early on in their bid to lower costs and to improve the efficiency of developing molecules. 

Brito et al. (2010) argue that the expected value of loss, defined as the risk, should be established for each pipeline section and for each criterion, and enables the decision maker s attitude in relation to risk to be incorporated by eliciting the utility function. In this context, the interval scale for L 6, x) and r(x ) is defined as [-1,0], where -1 is associated with lowest risk and 0 with the highest risk. 

For each criterion related to a pipeline section and for each accident scenario, the risk is defined as the expected value of losses, as per the definitions found in Berger (1985) and Keeney and Raiffa (1976). In this statement, the risk is considered to be the result of summing the losses associated with each specific scenario 6 and each section x for the three consequence dimensions considered, multiplied by the probabilities of accident scenarios added to the losses indexed... 

Another step of the model includes estimating the risks and ranking them as presented in Table 1. To estimate the risk assigned to each section of the pipeline, the multi-attribute utility function is associated with the probability density function of the consequences. 

A corrosion index for pipeline risk evaluation. A risk assessment technique is described in much detail in the second edition of a popular book on pipeline risk management. The technique proposed in that book is based on subjective risk assessment, a method that is particularly well adapted to situations in which knowledge is perceived to be incomplete and judgment is often based on opinion, experience, intuition, and other nonquantifiable resources. A detailed schema relating an extensive description of all the elements involved in creating risk compensates for the fuzziness associated with the manipulation of nonquantifiable data. Figure 4.12 illustrates the basic pipeline risk assessment model or tool proposed in that book. 

---