Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
Abstract Swaged pipe in pipe construction has been increasingly used for offshore pipeline system. Double joint pieces of swaged pipe-in-pipe are typically welded together on a J-lay/S-lay vessel. The swaged end joint is fabricated through a cold deformation process to the outer pipe that is then welded to the inner pipe. The pipe-in-pipe system has excellent thermal insulation characteristics. However, the integrity assessment of pipe-in-pipe swage weld is outside the range of validity of existing engineering critical assessment (ECA) codes, and this presents challenges in developing welding defect acceptance criteria, associated welding qualification and automatic ultrasonic testing (AUT). This paper highlights the assessment and inspection challenges faced and efficient solutions developed for the swage weld system. Comprehensive 3D finite element (FE) analyses were developed to consider mixed mode fracture for defects at the swage weld. Representative fracture testing was carried out as part of welding qualifications. The methodology was deployed to derive and optimise weld defect acceptance criteria specific to flowline and pipeline end termination (PLET) special joints, considering laydown, initiation and normal lay installation scenarios. The welding defect acceptance criteria were applied to the swage weld through a newly developed AUT system which can fit in small diameter pipelines. The developed assessment solutions will greatly benefit the future pipe-in-pipe swage weld system assessment and potentially bring significant cost savings to the industry.
Abstract The sudden and exponential increase of projects for the production of energy from renewable sources has drastically increased in the last decade, by also triggering a widespread citizens' disapproval towards such initiatives worldwide. Consequently, research on public acceptance of renewable energy initiatives has become an important and well-established topic in energy research, too. Social research mostly investigated the phenomenon via case-based approach. Our research departs it and adopts a bibliometric perspective on existing contributions to draw general insights on public acceptance for diverse renewable energy technologies. Results show a significant difference in the motivations of public opposition towards the implementation and realisation of technological infrastructures and processes for the exploitation of different renewable energy. Introduction Despite renewable energy production systems are often framed as socially, and environmentally more sustainable, just and, therefore, desirable than their fossil-fuelled or carbon-intensive counterparts [1, 2], energy transition plans and renewable energy infrastructures emerged in the last decade as objects of contestation themselves [3,4,5,6]. Opposition to the installation of energy infrastructures is not new [7]. For instance, Luque-Ayala and Silver [8] noted that, in general, an energy infrastructure for public opinion "becomes a material technique for incorporating populations into economic markets and circuits of capital [….]. [It] is a contested space, disrupted by different stakeholders to advance their rights and social values" (p.6). Whether and how renewable-energy plans are backed up on diverse socio-political values and materialise, on their turn, in distinctive infrastructures is a currently disputed research topic. Several authors noted a discrepancy between ideal adhesion to renewable energy transition plans and the practical measures that could make them possible [9]. Despite a general acknowledgement of the opportunity to shift toward renewable sources, the practicalities connected with the design and installation of necessary infrastructures for renewable energy production and distribution (further than the transformation of collective and personal routines in energy consumption) proved to be controversial [10,11]. At the implementation stage, social acceptance often represents a significant barrier when discontents spring out into outspoken forms of opposition so that infrastructure realisation is setback by the resistance of local groups to specific projects.
- Asia (0.94)
- Europe > United Kingdom (0.68)
- North America (0.68)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.48)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.34)
- Energy > Renewable > Solar (1.00)
- Energy > Renewable > Hydroelectric (1.00)
- Energy > Renewable > Wind (0.98)
- (2 more...)
Abstract Current rig acceptance workflow practiced by many operators globally has been inefficient and this gap has been apparent for years. Redundancy, accountability issues and resource wastages can be quite complicated. In a typical workflow, the issues encountered include lack of accountability by inspectors toward item closure, inability to generate snapshots of current status, limited access, and an unfit sharing process. Report formats are not standardized across different disciplines hence the experience is not seamless as there is no one-stop center to view aviation, marine, and HSE inspection items. The digitalization of rig acceptance workflow can help to overcome these pain points by having a single platform to allow multidiscipline parties to keep tabs on rig activation status and updates throughout company-wide operations globally during the rig acceptance process. This initiative introduces a much leaner and more seamless method of conducting rig acceptance. Migrating the manual paper-based workflow to a web-based one-stop center for all things related to rig acceptance (i.e., marine, rig, HSE, and aviation) is the main strategy. It grants the ability for inspectors and designated personnel to insert comments for each finding as well as the ability for inspectors to assign and edit severity levels for each finding. The single platform approach allows the possibility to link up the other checklist and findings on the same system and immediately reduce the redundancy of certain items that is similar to other checklists, which can be streamlined online. Therefore, implementation of this Digital Rig Acceptance Workflow (DRAW) solution can produce a user-friendly online platform to allow inspectors, project teams, management, and rig equipment subject matter experts to access the system anywhere, anytime. DRAW allows status updates and clarifications to be communicated via a single platform. It utilizes data input to produce actionable insights hence generating direct business value via improving process cycle efficiency in a project's well life cycle.
Abstract In 2012, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released the ‘Golden Rules for a Golden Age of Gas’ - a set of best practice guidelines for unconventional gas development designed to address key environmental and social risks and gain public acceptance of the industry. This study sought primarily to understand the extent to which the experience of developing a large-scale coal seam gas (CSG) to liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry in Queensland, Australia was seen to have aligned with the Golden Rules, and how well the Golden Rules were seen to contribute to public acceptance of the industry. An evaluation tool was developed where the seven Golden Rules and their subclauses were adopted as criteria in a scorecard approach. We conducted interviews with 32 senior people who had been directly involved in the development of the CSG industry in Queensland, from local, state and federal governments, gas companies, host communities as well as researchers and consultant ‘experts’. The Queensland experience of unconventional gas development rated reasonably well in relation to the Golden Rules, with scores of three or higher out of five for four of the seven rule categories. Across all the Golden Rules, industry performance scored more highly than the effectiveness of the policy/regulatory environment, highlighting the complex and sometimes conflicted roles of governments in developing a new industry. The rules addressing baseline measurement, full disclosure and engagement were seen as most important for public acceptance. This study developed a new tool to evaluate perceived social and environmental performance of industry and effectiveness of governance in unconventional gas development applicable across different jurisdictional contexts. This application suggests that baseline measurements, open disclosure and public engagement should be the focus for building public acceptance. For new gas developments, these findings highlight the importance of having a robust regulatory environment in place that can coordinate activities and manage cumulative impacts.
In the last few years, there have been strong efforts to reduce the turnaround time of G' review and publication. I am happy to report the significant results of these efforts, including the adoption of the online manuscript handling, the creation of rapid-review sections, and the recent implementation of the accelerated review schedule. The review time has been cut by half. The median time from first submission to first decision (Figure 1) is now 8 weeks, down from 18 weeks before 2004. The time from submission to acceptance (Figure 2) is now 6 months, down from 13 months before 2004.