|Theme||Visible||Selectable||Appearance||Zoom Range (now: 0)|
The American Petroleum Institute (API) has developed RP 14C, a safety-analysis approach based on a number of traditional hazards-analysis techniques such as failure-mode-effects analysis (FMEA) and hazard-and-operability studies (HAZOPS). The purpose of a safety analysis is to identify undesirable events that might pose a threat to safety and define reliable protection measures that will prevent such events or minimize their effects should they occur. Potential threats to safety are identified through proven hazards-analysis techniques that have been adapted to hydrocarbon-production processes. Recommended protective measures are common industry practices proved through many years of operating experience. The hazards analysis and protective measures have been combined into a "safety analysis" for onshore and offshore production facilities. The RP 14C safety analysis is based on the following premises. This page explains the basic concepts of protection used in the analysis, discusses the methods of analyzing the process, and establishes design criteria for an integrated safety system.
As SPE's Distinguished Lecture series wraps up its SPE section presentations for 2020–2021, a new series of virtual presentations stretches through the summer, providing access for all SPE members. Three of the live virtual presenters will be speaking on topics in the health, safety, environment, and sustainability (HSES) discipline. Each year, SPE selects industry experts, nominated by their peers, to share their knowledge and expertise at SPE section meetings. Despite the many challenges faced this season, SPE's Distinguished Lecturers gave more than 450 virtual presentations to members in more than 191 SPE sections countries around the world. Starting on 22 June, 22 presentations will be made available live virtually, broadening the audience from SPE section meetings to all of SPE's membership.
With operations often classified as high risk from a financial and physical standpoint, and costs often in excess of a quarter of a million dollars per day, capable personnel and a defined management structure are essential. Running a drilling operation in the oil and gas business requires unique knowledge, and the ability to adjust to new problems and challenges every day. It is definitely not like manufacturing widgets day in and day out. Personal safety and health has increasingly become more of a factor and focus in offshore operations over the years. Whereas the LTI rate (incidents per 200,000 hours) was commonly more than 10, it is now common to be less than 1 and often less than 0.5.
Abstract Recently, flood kill applications have been evaluated to cure blowouts due to gas migration from behind the casing while keeping the well integrity intact for further production. Traditionally, deterministic evaluations are used in planning these operations, ignoring the uncertainties in the characteristics of the gas sources behind the casing. This work focuses on using reservoir simulation-based workflow to evaluate the uncertainty providing probabilistic operating conditions to control the gas rates coming from behind the casing. The results of the simulations are combined to provide general guidelines for performing an effective flood kill operation. The studied parameters are divided in different categories based on their influence/impact on the effective kill. For example, the relationship between the best relief well position and reservoir permeability and anisotropy are studied, and the guidelines for the definition of the best location is identified. Based on the results of the analysis, the optimum required proximity of the wells can be determined. The analysis identifies the main factors for a successful flood kill operation. The situations where flood kill could be beneficial are identified and the success rate could be evaluated. This paper presents a methodology and guidelines for the design of an effective flood kill application. This methodology will help in positioning of the relief well and provide required control mechanisms to increase the chances of a successful operation. The methodology also provides insight on the required operating parameters, such as pump rates and total volume to be injected, for the operation to be successful. In addition, the developed workflow can be updated as more information is gathered while drilling the relief well. This will help in improving the chances of a flood-kill operation while providing tighter controls on the operational conditions.
Oilfield disasters shine a light on industry shortcomings. Below are three of the infamous events in industry history and the changes to equipment, procedures, and culture that have since been made to prevent their recurrence. What happened: In 1909, Julius Fried, a grocer, purchased land in Kern County, California, and founded the Lakeview Oil Company. In March 1910, after months of unsuccessful drilling that forced the sale of a controlling stake to Union Oil, oil struck at 2,200 ft. While running a bailer, the workers heard and felt a rumbling from under the well. What followed was the world's largest oil spill on land.
Key Takeaways - Beliefs in the myths of zero energy and zero risk coupled with myths of guarding constrain efforts for prevention through design (PTD). - Understanding the history of OSHA and the agency’s encouragement of the use of voluntary standards allows safety professionals to have a realistic assessment of the current state. - With safety professionals leading the way for risk assessment and feasible risk reduction based on the hazard control hierarchy, PTD can move forward with potential significant strides in the decade of the 2020s. Significant advances in prevention through design (PTD) have been made in recent years. ANSI B11.0-2010 introduced a model for life cycle risk assessment in general industry machinery and equipment. That voluntary standard has continued to build on the concepts of PTD with its updates in 2015 and 2020. Other ANSI standards and articles continue to keep opportunities and challenges at the forefront in the global community of safety professionals. This article addresses the narrow slice of PTD for machine guarding and control of hazardous energy to explore several issues: 1. how we got to today’s current state; 2. how beliefs of safety professionals and engineers sometimes conflict with the strict language of OSHA; and 3. how voluntary ANSI standards can guide us in pursuits of PTD. With that understanding, this article builds on the work of Main (2020) in “New Opportunities in Safety: Lessons From a Risk Assessment Journey.” It also shows how ANSI B11.0 can be used to comply with OSHA’s General Duty Clause and assist in compliance with the complexities of process safety management.
On 20 April 2010, a kick and blowout in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in a series of explosions that killed 11 people and started an environmental disaster. Now, 11 years later, government and industry continue the drive to improve safety. The disaster at Macondo Prospect resulted in the largest environmental catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico; the US government estimates that 4.9 million bbl of oil spilled into the Gulf. Investigations after the disaster led to several safety initiatives from the industry and the identification of areas of improvement by government. To commemorate the date, the BBC has gathered some of those who were closest to the epicenter--those who worked on the rig or who worked so hard to staunch the flood of oil and clean up the disaster afterward--for an online program.
Abstract Safety Critical Elements (SCEs) are the equipment and systems that provide the foundation of risk management associated with Major Accident Hazards (MAHs). A SCE is classified as an equipment, structure or system whose failure could cause or contribute to a major accident, or the purpose of which is to prevent or limit the effect of a major accident. Once the SCE has been ascertained, it is essential to describe its critical function in terms of a Performance Standard. Based on the Performance Standard, assurance tasks can be stated in the maintenance system to ensure that the required performance is confirmed. By analyzing the data in the maintenance system, confidence can be gained that all the SCEs required to manage Major Accidents and Environmental Hazards are functioning correctly. Alternatively, corrective actions can be taken to reinstate the integrity of the systems if shortcomings are identified. This paper shall detail out how the MAH and SCE Management process is initiated to follow the best industry practices in the identification and integrity management of major accident hazards as well as safety critical equipment. The tutorial shall describe in detail the following important stages:Identification of Major Accident Hazards Identification of Safety Critical Equipment, involved in managing Major Accident Hazards Define Performance Standards for these Safety Critical Equipment Execution of the Assurance processes that maintain or ensure the continued suitability of the SCE Equipment, and that these are meeting the Performance Standards Verification that all stages have been undertaken, any deviations being managed and thus that Major Accident Hazards are being controlled. Analyze and Improve Through the diligent application of these stages, it is possible to meet the requirements for MAH and SCE Management process giving a better understanding and control of risks in the industry.
Abstract In the event of offshore oilfield blow-out, real-time quantification of both spilled volume, recovered oil and environmental damage is essential. It is due to costly recovery and restoration process. In order to develop a robust and accurate quantification, we need to consider numerous parameters, which are sometimes tricky to be identified and captured. In this work, we present a new modeling technique under uncertainty, which accommodates numerous parameters and interaction among them. We begin the model by identifying possible parameters that contributes to the process: grouped into (1) subsurface, (2) surface and (3) operations. Subsurface e.g. well and reservoir characteristics. Surface e.g. ocean, wind, soil. (3) Operations e.g. oil spill treatment blow-out rate, oil characteristics, reservoir characteristics, ocean current speed, meteorological aspects, soil properties, and oil-spill treatment (oil booms and skimmers). We assign prior distribution for each parameter based on available data to capture the uncertainties. Before progressing to uncertainty propagation, we construct objective response (amount of recovered oil) through mass conservation equation in data-driven and non-intrusive way, using design of experiment and regression-based method. We propagate uncertainties using Monte Carlo simulation approach, where the result is presented in a distribution form, summarized by P10, P50, and P90 values. This work shows how to robustly calculate the amount of recovered oil under uncertainty in the event of offshore blow out. There are several notable challenges within the approach: 1) determining the uncertainty range in blow-out rate in case of rupture occurs in the well, 2) obtaining data for wind and ocean current speed since there is an interplay between local and global climate, and 3) accuracy of capturing the shoreline geometry. Despite the challenges, the results are in-line with the physics and several recorded blow-out cases. Define what is blow out rate (important as has highest sensitivity). Through sensitivity analysis with Sobol decomposition (define this …), we can define the heavy hitters. These heavy hitters give us knowledge on which parameters should be aware of. In real-time quantification, this analysis can provide an insight on what treatment method should be performed to efficiently recover the spill. We also highlight about the sufficiency of the model to obtain several parameters’ range, for example blow-out rate. The model should at least capture the physics in high details and incorporate multiple scenarios. In the case of blow-out rate, we extensively model the well completion and consider leaking due to unprecedented fractures or crater formation around the wellbore. We introduce a new framework of modeling to perform real-time quantification of offshore oil spills. This framework allows inferring the causality of the process and illustrating the risk level.