One of the key challenges in preventing major process safety accidents in an operating plant is the lack of an integrated system/model that brings together the risks posed by the deficiencies / deviations on the safety critical barriers, for operational decision making. Based on this context, an exploratory study was undertaken to develop a model/framework for visualizing the accumulation of process safety risks arising from safety critical barriers impairments in petroleum facilities in Niger-Delta Nigeria. A “focused group” was used to test/validate the model/framework using two case studies. The results indicate that the process safety cumulative risk assessment framework/model offers a transparent mechanism for assessing and visualizing the cumulative risks arising from the barrier impairment problems. For the facility in the first case study, 3.2% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas compression functional location. For the facility in the second case study, 1.7% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas dehydration functional location. When applied properly, the model/framework will reduce the risk of major accident in petroleum facilities by (a) aiding better management of safety critical barriers deviations through improved risks visual and (b) eliminate variability in human interpretation of process safety risk levels. One improvement area identified in the model/framework is the need for a web-based software for automation of barrier impairment data collection and real-time visualization of the cumulative risk picture.
| Published in | American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology (Volume 9, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13 |
| Page(s) | 21-31 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Process Safety, Cumulative Risk Assessment, Risk Visualization, Major Accident Prevention, Petroleum Operations
| [1] | Bhusari A, A. Goh, H. Ai, Sathanapally, S. Jalal, M and Mentzer, R (2020). “Process safety incidents across 14 industries. Proc Safety Prog. 2020; e12158. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.12158 |
| [2] | Boogaerts G and Toeter, L. (2020). “Process safety education: Selecting the concepts for a process safety program” (article 1/2). Proc Safety Prog. 2020; e12186. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.12186 |
| [3] | Behie, S. W., Halim, S. Z., Efaw, B., O’Connor, T. M., & Quddus, N. (2020). Guidance to improve the effectiveness of process safety management systems in operating facilities. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 68(June), 104257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104257 |
| [4] | Ismail, Z. Kong, K. Othman, S. Law, K. Khoo, S. Ong, Z, and Shirazi, S (2014) “Evaluating accidents in the offshore drilling of petroleum: Regional picture and reducing impact,” Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 18–33, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2014.01.027 |
| [5] | Refsdal, I and Urdahl, O (2014). “Technical integrity management in Statoil,” Soc. Pet. Eng. - 30th Abu Dhabi Int. Pet. Exhib. Conf. ADIPEC 2014 Challenges Oppor. Next 30 Years, vol. 2, no. November, pp. 1456–1467, 2014, https://doi.org/10.2118/171813-ms |
| [6] | Lee J, Cameron I, and Hassall M (2019). “Improving process safety: What roles for digitalization and industry 4.0?, Process Safety and Environmental Protection (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.10.021 |
| [7] | Pawłowska, Z. (2015). “Using lagging and leading indicators for the evaluation of occupational safety and health performance in industry,” Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 284–290, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2015.1081769 |
| [8] | Maduabuchi, E. Ugbebor, J and Oyet, G (2023c) “Analysis of critical risk factors in five iconic major accidents in petroleum and chemical operations. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports Volume 29, Issue 7, Page 57-70, 2023; Article no. JSRR.101097 ISSN: 2320-0227. https://doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2023/v29i71760 |
| [9] | Jones, S. (2019). “Managing process safety in the age of digital transformation”. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 77(June), 619–624. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1977104 |
| [10] | Tamim, N. Mentzer, R. Hasan, A. Mannan, M. (2016) “A Framework for Developing Leading Indicators for Offshore Drillwell Blowout Incidents. Process Safety and Environment Protection. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.01.005 |
| [11] | Neill, M. (2015). “Improving risk-based decision making by connecting PSM systems to day-to- day plant operations”. AIChE National Spring Meeting, 11th Global Congress on Process Safety. 2015. |
| [12] | Omidi, L. Dolatabad, K and Pilbeam, C (2022). “Differences in perception of the importance of process safety indicators between experts in Iran and the West”. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2022.11.002 |
| [13] | OGUK, “Cumulative Risk Guidelines,” no. 1, pp. 1–34, 2016. |
| [14] | Al-shanini, A., Ahmad, A., & Khan, F. (2014): Accident modelling and analysis in process industries. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 32, 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2014.09.016 |
| [15] | Khakzad, N., Khan, F., & Amyotte, P. (2012). “Dynamic risk analysis using bow-tie approach”. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 104, 36–4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.04.003 |
| [16] | Yang, X., & Haugen, S. (2015). Classification of risk to support decision-making in hazardous processes. Safety Science, 80, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.011 |
| [17] | Deng, Y., Sadiq, R., Jiang, W., & Tesfamariam, S. (2011). Risk analysis in a linguistic environment: A fuzzy evidential reasoning-based approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(12), 15438–15446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.018 |
| [18] | Andersen, S., & Mostue, B. A. (2012). Risk analysis and risk management approaches applied to the petroleum industry and their applicability to IO concepts. Safety Science, 50(10), 2010– 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.07.016 |
| [19] | Ishola, A. (2017). “Advanced Safety Methodology for Risk Management of petroleum refinery operations”. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Liverpool John Moores University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2017. |
| [20] | Sarshar, S., & Haugen, S. (2018). Visualizing risk related information for work orders through the planning process of maintenance activities. Safety Science, 101(September 2017), 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.001 |
| [21] | Pitblado, R., Fisher, M., Nelson, B., Fløtaker, H., Molazemi, K., & Stokke, A. (2016). Dynamic barrier management - Managing safety barrier degradation. Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 2016-January (161), 1–8. |
| [22] | Nwankwo, C D. (2020). Development of an Integrated Process Safety Management and Climate Change Model for the Oil and Gas Industry. https://pureportal.coventry.ac.uk/files/37907377 |
| [23] | Jonassen, Ø., & Sjølie, E. (2016). Barrier management in operation for the rig industry - A joint industry project. Offshore Technology Conference Asia 2016, OTCA 2016, 1980, 388–395. https://doi.org/10.4043/26819-ms |
| [24] | Haugen, S., Edwin, N. J., Vinnem, J. E., Brautaset, O., Nyheim, O. M., Zhu, T., & Tuft, V. L. (2016). Activity-based risk analysis for process plant operations. Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 2016-January (161), 1–12. |
| [25] | Nawaz, Z. and Jain, P. (2017). “Barrier Status Panel Tool for barrier management” 2nd International Conference on System Reliability and Safety 2017. |
| [26] | K. Lee, H. myun Kwon, S. Cho, J. Kim, and I. Moon. (2016) “Improvements of safety management system in Korean chemical industry after a large chemical accident,” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., vol. 42, pp. 6–13, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.08.006 |
| [27] | A. Blacklaw, A. Ward, and K. Cassidy, “The cumulative risk assessment barrier model,” Soc. Pet. Eng. - Offshore Eur. Oil Gas Conf. Exhib. 2011, OE 2011, vol. 2, no. September, pp. 915–925, 2011, https://doi.org/10.2118/146255-ms |
| [28] | Haugen, S. and Edwin, N. J. (2017). “Dynamic risk analysis for operational decision support” EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 5(1–4), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070- 017-0067-y |
| [29] | Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). “Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice”, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 |
| [30] | OGUK. (2016). Cumulative Risk Guidelines. 1, 1–34. |
| [31] | Singh, P.; van Gulijk, C.; Sunderland, N. (2023) “Online Process Safety Performance Indicators Using Big Data: How a PSPI Looks Different from a Data Perspective”. Safety 2023, 9, 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety9030062 |
| [32] | Mahmood, R and Panwar. M. (2019) “Real Time Data Analytics for Process Safety Governance-Case Study”. Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 11-14 November 2019 SPE-197649-MS. |
| [33] | Liu, Y. (2020). Safety barriers: Research advances and new thoughts on theory, engineering and management. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 67(August). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104260 |
APA Style
Maduabuchi, E., Israel, G. O. (2024). Development of Process Safety Cumulative Risk Assessment and Visualization Model/Framework for Petroleum Facilities in Niger-Delta Region, Nigeria. American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 9(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13
ACS Style
Maduabuchi, E.; Israel, G. O. Development of Process Safety Cumulative Risk Assessment and Visualization Model/Framework for Petroleum Facilities in Niger-Delta Region, Nigeria. Am. J. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2024, 9(1), 21-31. doi: 10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13,
author = {Emeka Maduabuchi and Gogomary Oyet Israel},
title = {Development of Process Safety Cumulative Risk Assessment and Visualization Model/Framework for Petroleum Facilities in Niger-Delta Region, Nigeria},
journal = {American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology},
volume = {9},
number = {1},
pages = {21-31},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajset.20240901.13},
abstract = {One of the key challenges in preventing major process safety accidents in an operating plant is the lack of an integrated system/model that brings together the risks posed by the deficiencies / deviations on the safety critical barriers, for operational decision making. Based on this context, an exploratory study was undertaken to develop a model/framework for visualizing the accumulation of process safety risks arising from safety critical barriers impairments in petroleum facilities in Niger-Delta Nigeria. A “focused group” was used to test/validate the model/framework using two case studies. The results indicate that the process safety cumulative risk assessment framework/model offers a transparent mechanism for assessing and visualizing the cumulative risks arising from the barrier impairment problems. For the facility in the first case study, 3.2% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas compression functional location. For the facility in the second case study, 1.7% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas dehydration functional location. When applied properly, the model/framework will reduce the risk of major accident in petroleum facilities by (a) aiding better management of safety critical barriers deviations through improved risks visual and (b) eliminate variability in human interpretation of process safety risk levels. One improvement area identified in the model/framework is the need for a web-based software for automation of barrier impairment data collection and real-time visualization of the cumulative risk picture.
},
year = {2024}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Development of Process Safety Cumulative Risk Assessment and Visualization Model/Framework for Petroleum Facilities in Niger-Delta Region, Nigeria AU - Emeka Maduabuchi AU - Gogomary Oyet Israel Y1 - 2024/03/19 PY - 2024 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13 DO - 10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13 T2 - American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology JF - American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology JO - American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology SP - 21 EP - 31 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2578-8353 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajset.20240901.13 AB - One of the key challenges in preventing major process safety accidents in an operating plant is the lack of an integrated system/model that brings together the risks posed by the deficiencies / deviations on the safety critical barriers, for operational decision making. Based on this context, an exploratory study was undertaken to develop a model/framework for visualizing the accumulation of process safety risks arising from safety critical barriers impairments in petroleum facilities in Niger-Delta Nigeria. A “focused group” was used to test/validate the model/framework using two case studies. The results indicate that the process safety cumulative risk assessment framework/model offers a transparent mechanism for assessing and visualizing the cumulative risks arising from the barrier impairment problems. For the facility in the first case study, 3.2% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas compression functional location. For the facility in the second case study, 1.7% of the total number of safety-critical barriers was deviated and the model revealed risk accumulation in the gas dehydration functional location. When applied properly, the model/framework will reduce the risk of major accident in petroleum facilities by (a) aiding better management of safety critical barriers deviations through improved risks visual and (b) eliminate variability in human interpretation of process safety risk levels. One improvement area identified in the model/framework is the need for a web-based software for automation of barrier impairment data collection and real-time visualization of the cumulative risk picture. VL - 9 IS - 1 ER -
Centre for Occupational Health, Safety and Environment, Faculty of Engineering, University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Nigeria
Centre for Occupational Health, Safety and Environment, Faculty of Engineering, University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Nigeria
Information