A matrix-based risk assessment approach for addressing linear hazards such as pipelines

Henselwood, Fred; Phillips, Gerry

doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2005.10.005

Cited by 39 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both approaches have been adopted in the literature, mainly devoted at identifying the frequency of occurrence of a release (Henselwood and Phillips, 2006;Han and Weng, 2010) rather than at calculating the probability of the different possible events following a release (Rew et al, 2000;Moosemiller, 2011). Overall values of the accidents and release frequencies are also available in the generic literature (De Haag and Ale, 1999;Lees, 2005;EGIG, 2008;PHMSA, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditional probabilities of post-release events for hazardous materials pipelines

Bubbico

Carbone

Ramírez-Camacho

et al. 2016

Process Safety and Environmental Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pipelines are commonly considered a safe alternative for the transportation of hazardous materials. However, in case of failure, pipelines still pose major risks to the environment and to the population potentially exposed. The aim of the present work is to provide occurrence probabilities of the intermediate and final events following the accidental release of hazardous materials from pipelines. A collection of incidents and accidents occurred worldwide in connection with the use of onshore long-distance pipeline networks, has been gathered to make up a specific database for the analysis of incidents in pipelines. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data has allowed to develop detailed event trees for the different classes of hazardous materials, and to calculate the probability of occurrence of the final outcomes. The investigation has also aimed at identifying, for each type of release, the relationship between the final events and the causes of the pipeline failure. The results obtained represent a useful and needed starting point in Quantitative Risk Analysis of hazardous materials transportation via pipelines.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditional probabilities of post-release events for hazardous materials pipelines

Bubbico

Carbone

Ramírez-Camacho

et al. 2016

Process Safety and Environmental Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The previous studies focusing on quantitative analysis by Jonkman et al (2003) and Henselwood and Phillips (2006) allocated HHSL loss with individual and societal risk. However, the risk is considered on the population as proposed by Arunraj and Maiti (2009) to be in line with industrial needs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison Study on Human Health and Safety Loss for Rural and Urban Areas in Monetary Value Subjected to Gas Pipeline Failure

Hanafiah

Zardasti²,

Yahaya³

et al. 2015

J. of Environmental Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consequence assessment is an integral part of the risk assessment process carried out by the industry to minimize impact of assets failure on the environment, human safety, assets integrity and business reputation. A few components of consequences loss occur due to the pipeline failure, such as asset loss, environmental loss, production loss, public loss and Human Health and Safety Loss (HHSL). This study focuses on HHSL by considering the losses in term of monetary value between rural and urban areas due to pipeline failure. Based on the current technical standard practiced in the industry, the calculated consequences are speculated to generate an equal risk value to any area of the pipeline throughout the country, regardless of the areas unique local factors and consequences. Hence, this would lead to the deterioration in the quality of the estimated risk. As for the damaged area, Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres (ALOHA) software was employed in the calculation of risk by considering the pipeline data and the details of selected sites such as atmospheric and demographic condition. The HHSL was calculated using a developed mathematical equation of quantitative risk assessment in terms of the number of fatalities or injuries or both in monetary value. The results of the assessments from rural and urban areas were then compared with one another to identify the occurrence of any significant dissimilarity. The major finding of this research showed that there is a possibility to enhance the decisive value of risk by implementing the proposed approach of HHSL estimation for consequence assessment.

show abstract

“…Returning to the context of natural gas pipelines, Henselwood and Phillips (2006) assert that these factors may influence the likelihood of an accidental ignition of a natural gas leak. As an example, in an industrial region, the ignition, due to the presence of large numbers of ignition sources, of leaking gas is more likely than in a rural area, where the population density and the presence of ignition sources are low.…”

Section: Defining and Selecting Alternativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidimensional Risk Analysis

Almeida

Cavalcante

Alencar

et al. 2015

International Series in Operations Research &Amp; Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accidents involve critical consequences that require an appropriate and efficient form of risk management. A multidimensional risk analysis allows a broader view. MCDM/A approaches enable more consistent decision-making, taking into account the DM's rationality (compensatory or non-compensatory), DM's behavior regarding risk (prone, neutral or averse) and the uncertainties inherent in the risk context. This chapter presents numerical applications illustrating the use of multicriteria models in two different contexts: a natural gas pipeline and an underground electricity distribution system. Two different MCDM/A approaches are considered: MAUT (Multiattribute Utility Theory) and the ELECTRE TRI outranking method. In the numerical applications, MCDM/A approach steps for building decision models are presented: identifying hazard scenarios, estimating the set of payoffs, eliciting the MAU function (Multi-attribute Utility function), computing the probability function of consequences and estimating multidimensional risk. Loss functions are introduced in the models to calculate the probability distribution functions over the multiple criteria such as impact on humans, and environmental and financial losses. Therefore, Decision Theory concepts are applied to estimate risk in industrial plants and modes of transportation. Finally, other decision problems related to multidimensional risk analysis, using MCDM/A, are considered in different contexts, such as: power electricity systems, natural hazards, risk analysis on counter-terrorism, nuclear power plant. Justifying the Use of the Multidimensional RiskThe perceived level of risk is directly linked to the perceived intensity of consequences to people and society as well as to issues related to the level of probability. These consequences are multidimensional and are associated to the objectives, represented by criteria and can be approached with an MCDM/A or a multiobjective method (see Chap. 2). Many studies show that using a single dimension of risk may not be realistic (Morgan et al.

show abstract

A matrix-based risk assessment approach for addressing linear hazards such as pipelines

Cited by 39 publications

References 1 publication

Conditional probabilities of post-release events for hazardous materials pipelines

Conditional probabilities of post-release events for hazardous materials pipelines

Comparison Study on Human Health and Safety Loss for Rural and Urban Areas in Monetary Value Subjected to Gas Pipeline Failure

Multidimensional Risk Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About