|Theme||Visible||Selectable||Appearance||Zoom Range (now: 0)|
Abstract Traditional efforts concerning occupational safety and health with the focus on individuals and the physical working environment are often not sufficient to meet the spectrum health problems in modern working life. The target of health promotion programs in the workplace has often been the individual rather than the underlying working conditions that affect health and wellness. Traditional workplace practices need to be complemented by a wider public health perspective that integrates the level of the individual with the group and the company or organisation. The idea of healthy organisations can only be reached by a stronger involvement of employees and a closer collaboration with managers. One way to reach this aim is Workplace Health Promotion (WHP) and a specific tool is Health Circles. These Circles should develop proposed solutions for job design in a manner, which promotes health, and to increase the individual's responsibilities and competencies for his/her own health - so it is a bottom - up approach tool, which requires the active involvement of the workforce. Health Circle focuses on short- and mid-term improvements of working conditions and aspects of job design and will not alter the organisational structures of the company. Health Circles should look at the working environment in their particular work units - like workstation ergonomics or organisational dynamics, which have impact on the health. According to the fact, that this tool demonstrated its effectiveness in some works sites of OMV since 1996, it was decided to implement Health Circles group-wide in OMV. An OMV Health Circle has at least one moderator, who guides the group and reports the findings to the OMV Health Circle Steering Committee. These moderators should have experience in their specific work, should be accepted by their peers and should have to follow a specific Health Circle moderator training, where the participants learn about the aims of WHP, Health Circle and methods of moderating and presenting.
This year, the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition (ATCE) was held in Dubai during 26–28 September. The Dubai World Trade Center was a place where students, graduates, young professionals (YPs), and experienced engineers from all over the world exchanged knowledge, innovative ideas, and futuristic technologies. Participants had the opportunity to connect with people from different organizations, countries, and cultures. Many YPs dedicated their time and extended their involvement in the Dubai conference to challenge themselves in new roles as moderators, speakers, judges, advisers, and teachers. Students representing sections from around the world participated in the PetroBowl championship.
Abstract This OTC manuscript is intended to introduce a panel discussion, " Challenges to Delivering Tomorrow's Energy - Achieving a Balance between Energy Security and Climate Security,?? scheduled for Tuesday morning, May 6th, 2008. At the time of publication of this manuscript, the planned participants of this discussion panel are:The Moderators: Bob Fryklund, Vice President, IHS Energy Ann Oglesby, Manager of Climate Change and Sustainable Development, ConocoPhillips The Panelists: Fatih Birol, Chief Economist, International Energy Agency Jaleel Al Khalifa, SPE President and Saudi Aramco Manager David Hobbs, Vice President and Managing Director of Global Research, CERA Amy Jaffe, Fellow, Baker Institute Kevin Leahy, Managing Director, Climate Policy, Duke Energy Randall B. Luthi, Director of Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Kate Hampton, Head of Policy, Climate Change Capital The Organizers of this panel include Bob Fryklund, Ann Oglesby, and Shawn Huang (who is serving as AIChE/OTC Subcommittee Vice-Chair and a member of OTC Programs Committee.) Introduction The current energy security can be characterized by expanding global connections, growing role of non-traditional fuels, and new paths to regulatory reform. Amid a matured global oil market, a global gas market is emerging through trading of liquefied natural gas cargos and through trans-national natural gas pipelines. Energy security and greenhouse gas emission reduction targets are driving the use of non-traditional fuels around the globe: biofuels, solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, and unconventional gas. The regulatory reform focuses not only on energy security and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in energy consuming countries, but also on easing the tension surrounding sharing the wealth generated by oil and gas production in energy producing countries. 1 The U.S. Congress is currently considering further energy policy legislation. As debate around energy policy continues, solutions for reducing the risk of climate change are commanding increasing attention in Congress and in many states. At the federal level, lawmakers have said that they will pass an energy policy act and then a climate change bill. This sequential approach presents an obvious concern since energy policy and climate change response are difficult to consider separately. 2 Given the current landscape of energy security and climate change issues, what are the challenges to delivering tomorrow's energy? Will the prices of oil and gas continue to rise till unconventional energy sources can play a significant role in the market?
Abstract The paper shares practical cases on PetroCup – a new generation of on-line petroleum asset training and testing facility which helps developing the practical asset management skills and improve practical skill in associated disciplines, such as geology, petrophysics, flow simulations, production technology, well testing, production logging, surface facilities and petroleum economics. Going through web-tournament is like a quest and represents a challenge for multi-disciplinary asset team during one or few days. The after-tournament debriefing helps asset teams understand their mistakes and learn from them. Paper explains the specifics of public and corporate sessions and brings few case studies on both. The training facility is based on PolyPlan simulator which has a very simplistic user-friendly webinterface which allows petroleum engineers perform typical routine activities (drilling, complex workers, varying pump and choke settings, well testing, logging etc.) with an intuitive button-click. The PolyPlan simulator is modelling surface infrastructure, geological model, dynamic flow model, wellbore flow model, flow metering system for production gathering and water supply systems, popular OH and CH sensors and associated data acquisition procedures and reproducing a very realistic response to the typical field activities. The paper also provides an overview of synthetic assets library and their complications and future plans on creating the new petroleum assets. The PetroCup facility provides a fast and cheap way of accumulating practical experience in petroleum asset management. It gives opportunity for people to learn new methods and tricks from sessions moderators and from each other. Participants get opportunity not only to apply their engineering knowledge but also develop the presentation skill while convincing the team in their findings and ideas. It also makes a great team building and helps people get closer and know each other while working on a project. The same facility can be used as automated unbiased assessment of accumulated experience in field development and associated petroleum disciplines. The PetroCup allows people to join from different locations which substantially extends scalability of the knowledge sharing.
THE FATALITY PREVENTION FORUM was held in early November 2007. Hosted by the Safety Sciences Department at Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP) in cooperation with the Alcoa Foundation, the forum examined key aspects of the complex relationships between the work environment, workforce and leadership, and howthese relationships affect the safety and health management system as they relate to hazards with the potential for fatal consequences. The goalwas to identify contributing causes and organizational weaknesses that increase the likelihood for occupational fatalities. Based on these aspects, solutions and best practices for preventing fatalities were identified as were areas of future research. Fatality Experience in the U.S. To provide a framework and some context regarding the extent of fatalities in the workplace, the fatality experience in the U.S. was analyzed. Summary data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) was used to prepare this analysis. The CFOI provides comprehensive counts of fatal work injuries. It is a federal-state cooperative program that has been in place in all 50 states and the District of Columbia since 1992, with data being collected through the various state agencies (BLS, 2007a). In 2006, 5,840 fatal work injuries were reported in the U.S. This was a slight increase from the revised total of 5,734 fatalities in 2005. The rate of fatal work injuries in 2006 was 4.0 per 100,000 workers, which equaled the rate for 2005 (BLS, 2007b). Fatalities by Industry The four industries with the highest fatality rates are agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting (30.0 fatalities per 100,000 workers);mining (28.1 fatalities per 100,000 workers); transportation and warehousing (16.8 fatalities per 100,000 workers); and construction (10.9 fatalities per 100,000 workers). Additional rates are shown in Table 1 (p. 30). Fatalities by Event The fourmost frequently identified fatal events are highway incidents, homicides, falls and struck-by accidents. Since 1992, highway incidents have been the most frequently cited fatal event each year. While the frequency of these events has increased or decreased year to year, the numbers remained relatively constant until 2006. While highway accidents still account for nearly one of four fatal work injuries, the number of highway incidents fell 8%in 2006. The 1,329 fatal highway incidents in 2006 was the lowest annual total since 1993 (BLS, 2007b). Occupational fatalities due to falls have seen amodest increase in frequency from 1992 to 2006. The lowest number of fatalities—600—occurred in 1992, and the number has steadily increased, with 809 fatalities reported in 2006. Of these 809 fatalities, almost 40% were due to falls from roofs and ladders. As could be expected, falls account for the greatest percentage of fatalities in the construction industry with approximately 33% of all deaths in that industry due to falls. The 32 responding organizations reported 207 fatalities. Of these, 50% reported belonging to the manufacturing industry (Janicak, 2007). Fatality Events The overall results from the survey were similar to the experience reported by U.S. industries. Struck- by and transportation accidents were the two events causing the most occupational fatalities among the respondent group.