T. Dessein, B. Ayton, A. Fraser, Shawn Smith, Mari Shironishi, Travis Sera
{"title":"A Quantitative Risk Assessment Framework for Natural Gas Storage Wells","authors":"T. Dessein, B. Ayton, A. Fraser, Shawn Smith, Mari Shironishi, Travis Sera","doi":"10.1115/ipc2022-86833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n A quantitative framework for risk assessment of natural gas storage wells, including the wellhead and connected piping, has been developed to assess SoCalGas’s underground gas storage sites in California. The approach has been developed to meet and exceed the risk assessment requirements of API RP 1171 (incorporated by reference in U.S. regulation 49 CFR 192.12) and the recent changes to the California Code of Regulations. Further, several of the recommendations made in the recent PHMSA study, “Risk Assessment and Treatment of Wells” (2021), have been addressed and incorporated.\n The framework uses a dynamic fault tree to aggregate the barrier failure rates from over 80 potential failure mechanisms to quantify the combined probability of an accidental release to the atmosphere and the resulting hazards. The modular architecture allows operators to use threat-specific models with differing levels of sophistication. Additionally, the framework accounts for the interplay between barriers to failure in a well, the benefits of continuous monitoring, and the effect that wellhead spacing, cement quality, and well-inflow performance have on the expected consequences.\n Priority to develop quantitative models is given to the threats that potentially have high probability or high consequences and to threats with effective mitigation options, such as corrosion and external interference threats. For threats with very low consequences or likelihood of occurrence, simple models with conservative assumptions are typically sufficient because the contribution to overall risk is low. This process minimizes the overall analysis complexity and allows mitigations to be tailored to the higher-risk threats.\n This paper describes example assessments to illustrate how the framework can quantify the benefits of integrity management activities, such as an erosion monitoring program, continuous pressure monitoring of the annuli, and adding protections to minimize risk from vehicle collisions.","PeriodicalId":21327,"journal":{"name":"Risk Management","volume":"222 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/ipc2022-86833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A quantitative framework for risk assessment of natural gas storage wells, including the wellhead and connected piping, has been developed to assess SoCalGas’s underground gas storage sites in California. The approach has been developed to meet and exceed the risk assessment requirements of API RP 1171 (incorporated by reference in U.S. regulation 49 CFR 192.12) and the recent changes to the California Code of Regulations. Further, several of the recommendations made in the recent PHMSA study, “Risk Assessment and Treatment of Wells” (2021), have been addressed and incorporated.
The framework uses a dynamic fault tree to aggregate the barrier failure rates from over 80 potential failure mechanisms to quantify the combined probability of an accidental release to the atmosphere and the resulting hazards. The modular architecture allows operators to use threat-specific models with differing levels of sophistication. Additionally, the framework accounts for the interplay between barriers to failure in a well, the benefits of continuous monitoring, and the effect that wellhead spacing, cement quality, and well-inflow performance have on the expected consequences.
Priority to develop quantitative models is given to the threats that potentially have high probability or high consequences and to threats with effective mitigation options, such as corrosion and external interference threats. For threats with very low consequences or likelihood of occurrence, simple models with conservative assumptions are typically sufficient because the contribution to overall risk is low. This process minimizes the overall analysis complexity and allows mitigations to be tailored to the higher-risk threats.
This paper describes example assessments to illustrate how the framework can quantify the benefits of integrity management activities, such as an erosion monitoring program, continuous pressure monitoring of the annuli, and adding protections to minimize risk from vehicle collisions.
为评估SoCalGas在加州的地下储气井(包括井口和连接管道)的风险,已经开发了一个定量框架。该方法的开发是为了满足并超过API RP 1171的风险评估要求(通过参考纳入美国法规49 CFR 192.12)和最近对加州法规的修改。此外,PHMSA最近的研究“井的风险评估和处理”(2021)中提出的一些建议也得到了解决和采纳。该框架使用动态故障树来汇总来自80多种潜在故障机制的屏障故障率,以量化意外释放到大气中的综合概率和由此产生的危害。模块化架构允许操作人员使用具有不同复杂程度的特定于威胁的模型。此外,该框架还考虑了井中失效障碍、连续监测的好处、井口间距、水泥质量和井流入性能对预期结果的影响。对于可能具有高概率或高后果的威胁以及具有有效缓解办法的威胁,如腐蚀和外部干扰威胁,优先考虑开发定量模型。对于后果或发生可能性非常低的威胁,具有保守假设的简单模型通常就足够了,因为对总体风险的贡献很低。此过程将整体分析的复杂性最小化,并允许针对高风险威胁进行调整。本文描述了示例评估,以说明该框架如何量化完整性管理活动的好处,例如侵蚀监测程序,环空的连续压力监测,以及增加保护以最大限度地降低车辆碰撞风险。