DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Gas Pipeline Accident Consequence Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Gas Pipeline Accident Consequence Analysis © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: Oil and Hydrocarbon Spills III, CA Brebbia (Editor). ISBN 1-85312-922-4 Natural gas pipeline accident consequence analysis P.L. Metropoloi & A.E.P. Brown2 ‘Unidade de Pat.his, Paulinia/SP, Brazil ~EscolaPolitecnica, USP, Rua Jacatirlo, 240, S. Paulo/SP, Brazil Abstract Industry licensing activities require safety andenvironmental studies to enhance safe~and enviromental prevention andprotection applied to the pipeline, Afler World War II, industry activities have given a great jump in progress but, associated to it, potential accident risk has also been enlarged. Most common accidents like toxic emissions, fire and explosion must be avoided. Risk analysis is a world wise technique used to forseen those undesired events to occur, Accident scenarios consequence analysis wasprepared and results presented, as well people vulnerability totheinvestigated event's consequences, 1 Introduction With the outcome of natural gas fuel exploitation in South America and the increase of energy costs, industry is ready to use this new source of energy. This source of energy uses natural gas as fhel. Natural gas comes from Bolivia field towards Brazil in an 18“ pipeline up to the consumers. The total confirmed reserves of the Bolivian natural gas is ca. 108 billions m3, Within the Brazilian Program to thermoelectrical units installation in the next 20 years, assuming a capacity factor of 70Y0,the units will consume ca, 16 billions m3 of natural gas. Considering preventive and protection concepts, risk analysis was performed, aiming gas pipeline licensing by the federal environmental agent y (IBAMA). Hazard identification techniques [1,2,3], such as preliminary hazard analysis (PHA) and event tree analysis (ETA), were utilized. Consequences and vulnerability of potential hazard scenarios were simulated with the software CHEMS-PLUS [4] that also determined the hazard damages to people and materials. Finally, process safety measures were recommended to increase pipeline risk acceptability. © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: Oil and Hydrocarbon Spills III, CA Brebbia (Editor). ISBN 1-85312-922-4 2 Frequency occurrence estimation Event tree analysis (ETA) shows graphically the possible sequence of a potential accident that can result from an initiating event [1,2,3]. ETA considers the responses of safety systems and operators to the initiating event to be analyzed. ETA requires a good knowledge of potential initiating failures or systems upsets (that can potentially cause a non desired event), safety systems fmctions or emergency procedures, which can potentially mitigate the consequences of each initiating event. It also depends of the initiating events complexity and safety systems. Delphi technique was used to solve ETA’s [1,3,5]. In the study, it was constructed one quantitative graphical model of ETA, as shown Figure 1, From to PHA results, it was decided to model ETA to the event sequence of a leakage of natural gas from the pipeline, because it was considered as a moderate risk. Frequencies occurrence estimation resulted in jet fue and flash fue probabilities of 3.3 E-7 occurrences/yr and natural gas dispersion of 3.2 E-05 occur. /yr. ,,“ !, ,,, , , ,,, .0!>’.!, ~– >,, .,s ,%, s,’ “A, ,’,.,,,,.,.. ,., -”0. ,.,1s ,Ho, rlw, ,i=, !,, ,,, s +------ “’’”’’” “’’””’”’”r 0.! t’” ‘“‘o” . S,, ?!,:I.4 , ,’, .,,!,.. + E.(15= 10> No ,-,,””,, d<t<(,,, m ."8<n. t"?., 18,6$Sm,8c, ,>P,l#". "8\h C"\h, ,?, m(,,, o,Lh, ,.. trP l."\ Figure 1: ETA - Natural Gas Pipeline Leakage 3 Consequence and vulnerability analyses Computer simulations used the CHEMS-PLUS [4] software considering flammable product release from the gas pipeline, followed by fire or explosion. From the hypothetical scenario studied, it was considered jet fire scenario as the worst to people, materials and to the enviromnent. To accident modeling calculations, these hypotheses were considered: Natural gas was considered similar to methane; Product toxicity was not considered; Turbulent flow of the jet fire. 3,1 Accident scenario Accident scenario of jet fue due natural gas pipeline failure was studied. This scenario considers a flammable or explosive atmosphere formation due gas © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: Oil and Hydrocarbon Spills III, CA Brebbia (Editor). ISBN 1-85312-922-4 oil a)zdHvdt-ocarbon Spills 111 457 pipeline failure. So, gas leakage also carries air through the gas effluent stream. The gas dilution starts at the leaking point, because of the high pressure of the gas pipeline. Therefore, a turbulent free jet is formed, wherein the gas concentration and velocity along its axis depend on the orifice diameter. The mass of this turbulent jet, composed by a vapor and air mixture, can be or not within the flammability limits, In case of an immediate ignition, a typical flame, called jet f~e, is formed, which depends directly on the gas leakage duration. The flame is extinguished when the gas leakage ceases. The velocity along the axis of the jet decreases progressively with the distance flom the leakage point. The point where this velocity gets equal to the wind velocity is considered as the transition point between the dispersion due to the jet effect and the dispersion due to the vertical turbulence of the atmosphere. In case of a non-immediate ignition, two accidental events may occur: - Flash fue that is the delayed ignition of a gas cloud, with short time duration and without overpressure effects, but presenting thermal effects. - UVCE (unconfined vapor cloud explosion). According to Wiekema [8], more than one ton of methane within the flammability limits is required to the occurrence of this event. Consequence study to a possible flash f~e was not performed because there is no consequence model (thermal radiation) associated to it, considering that, unless there is a person within the area occupied by the flammable cloud, this event will not take to any injuries to any person, The analysis of the results of the consequences simulations concluded that in fracture and crack scenarios of the gas pipeline, the mass of natural gas existing within the flammability limits is lower than one ton, since this product is rapidly dispersed into air. Therefore, UVCE was only considered for the collapse scenario. The input data to simulate accident scenario with CHEMS-PLUS was: A natural gas leakage occurs at 18” carbon steel pipeline, at a minimum depth of 1 meter fi-om the ground level, The operational pressure of the pipeline is 100 kg/cm2, and the temperature 25”C, considered as constants during the whole leakage period. The analysis supposes that the gas can be released through the soil (1 meter) with no resistance to its flow, as a conservative condition; Gas leakage cannot be interrupted quickly and the yield of the methane in the UVCE was assumed as 2Yo; Meteorological data assumed was: amual atmosphere temperature of 26°C, prevailing wind direction: SW, with average velocity of 3 rrds, and air relative humidity of 70’%o; The rupture classes assumed in the study are in accordance with the standards of the World Bank [2], where D is the internal diameter of the gas pipeline, equivalent diameter and released gas quantities are also shown in Table 1. © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: Oil and Hydrocarbon Spills III, CA Brebbia (Editor). ISBN 1-85312-922-4 458 01[~lttliH\~irocc]rbol~ Spills Ill Table 1: Pipeline Rupture Classes RuptureClass IntervaloftheDiameterof Equivalent ReleasedQuantity theRuptureEquivalentLine Diameter (m) (Kg/s) Fracture Upto5%D 0.023 7 Crack Between 5?’oD and 20% D 0.092 112 Collapse More than 20% D 0.46 2,800 Tables 2 and 3 present computer simulation results considering gas pipeline rupture. Table 2: Overpressure Darnages Overpressure (bar) Distances(m) 0.05 564 0.14 268 0.5 125 1 83 Explosivemass (kg) 172,000 Table 3: Thermal Radiation Effects Radiation (kW/mz) Distances(m) 0.7 280 20 260 37 190 100 119 The vulnerability model for fire scenarios was based in studies published by TNO [6] that uses the dose concept. The Probit equation (1) defines the probability of fatality [7]: Pr = -38.48 + 2.561n(Dose) (1) The vulnerability analysis results concerning jet fue formation and UVCE scenarios are presented in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. © 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved. Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] Paper from: Oil and Hydrocarbon Spills III, CA Brebbia (Editor). ISBN 1-85312-922-4 oil und Hydrocartxm .Ypiils [11 459 Table 4: People Vulnerability in Scenario of Immediate Ignition Scenario Distance to Distance to Incident Probability of Observer Thermal Radiation to Fatality At Distance Rddiation Observer at (%) Level of Distance XO (%) 1 kW/m2 (KW/m2) (m) 55 270 20 0 Fracture 7 70 100 65 41 270 37 7 Crack 26 270 100 91 260 560 20 24 Collapse 190 560 37 84 710 c~n 1 nn 4 nn Table 5: People Vulnerability in Scenario of Non-Immediate Ignition –UVCE Scenarios Type of injury People Overpressure Distance Affected Value (m) (?6) (Bar) Lung [ 1,019 4 Hemorrhage Fracture Eardrum I 0.17 11 Rupture 90 0.86 4 Lung 1 1.019 16 Hemorrhage Crack Eardrum 1 0.17 45 Rupture 90 0.86 18 Lung ~ 1.019 83 Hemorrhage Collapse Eardrum 1 0.17 237 Rupture 50 044 140 90 0.86 92 4 Conclusions Computer simulations do not consider obstacles between the event and the observer to the resulted distances.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Forensic Analysis Involving Fugitive Natural Gas and Propane
    199.pdf A SunCam online continuing education course Forensic Analysis Involving Fugitive Natural Gas and Propane by Michael E. Weyler, Ph.D., P.E., CFI Weyler Engineering, PC 199.pdf Forensic Analysis Involving Fugitive Natural Gas and Propane A SunCam online continuing education course I. Overview Engineers are frequently called upon to perform forensic analyses of the origin and cause of explosions1 and fires involving fuel gas systems that use either natural gas or propane. This course will concentrate on those cases where the natural gas or propane vapor has escaped from its normal confinement, and caused an explosion or fire or both. Propane explosion inside house, propane tank in background at top of photo Natural gas explosion inside house, gas meter seen at foundation wall 1 National Fire Protection Association definition of explosion, which will be used in this course: The sudden conversion of potential energy (chemical or mechanical) into kinetic energy with the production and release of gases under pressure, or the release of gas under pressure. These high-pressure gases then do mechanical work such as moving, changing, or shattering nearby materials. An ignition that produces sound alone does not qualify as an explosion in this context. www.SunCam.com Copyright 2014 Michael E. Weyler Page 2 of 37 199.pdf Forensic Analysis Involving Fugitive Natural Gas and Propane A SunCam online continuing education course The operations of gas-fired systems are based on the release of heat energy by the burning of either natural gas or propane. The presence of a flame or fire is, in and of itself, an integral part of such systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Dust Or Gas Explosion: Case Study of Dryer Explosion and Design Venting
    GCPS 2010 __________________________________________________________________________ Dust or Gas Explosion: Case Study of Dryer Explosion and Design Venting Scott G. Davis GexCon US 7735 Old Georgetown Rd., Suite 1010 Bethesda, MD 20814 [email protected] Derek Engel and Olav R. Hansen GexCon US 7735 Old Georgetown Rd., Suite 1010 Bethesda, MD 20814 [email protected] and [email protected] [This work is the property of GexCon and cannot be reproduced without permission] Prepared for Presentation at American Institute of Chemical Engineers 2010 Spring Meeting 6th Global Congress on Process Safety San Antonio, Texas March 22-24, 2010 UNPUBLISHED AIChE shall not be responsible for statements or opinions contained in papers or printed in its publications GCPS 2010 __________________________________________________________________________ Dust or Gas Explosion: Case Study of Dryer Explosion and Design Venting Scott G. Davis GexCon US 7735 Old Georgetown Rd., Suite 1010 Bethesda, MD 20814 [email protected] Derek Engel, Olav R. Hansen GexCon US Keywords: dust explosion, gas explosion, explosion venting Abstract A recent explosion occurred in a single burner, recirculating solids ring dryer. No one was reported injured as a result of the explosion, however the explosion caused significant damage to the dryer and minor damage to sections of the facility. Despite the dryer having been designed with seven explosion doors, the explosion caused a section of the dryer recycle duct to rupture and various doors on the dryer equipment to fail. As a result of the blast, two of the explosion doors on the external ring duct were separated from their hinges, with one landing on the upper roof section, while the other fell back through the roof of the facility in the area of workers.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of the LPG Gas Explosion of a Welding and Cutting Torch at a Construction Site
    Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 56(6), 811-818 (2018) https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2018.56.6.811 PISSN 0304-128X, EISSN 2233-9558 Investigation of the LPG Gas Explosion of a Welding And Cutting Torch at a Construction Site Su-kyung Lee, Jung-hoon Lee† and Dong-woo Song Department of Safety Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232, Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul, 01811, Korea (Received 9 October 2018; Received in revised form 2 November 2018; accepted 2 November 2018) Abstract − A fire and explosion accident caused by a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) welding and cutting torch gas leak occurred 10 m underground at the site of reinforcement work for bridge columns, killing four people and seriously injuring ten. We conducted a comprehensive investigation into the accident to identify the fundamental causes of the explosion by analyzing the structure of the construction site and the properties of propane, which was the main compo- nent of LPG welding and cutting work used at the site. The range between the lower and upper explosion limits of leak- ing LPG for welding and cutting work was examined using Le Chatelier's formula; the behavior of LPG concentration change, which included dispersion and concentration change, was analyzed using the fire dynamic simulator (FDS). We concluded that the primary cause of the accident was combustible LPG that leaked from a welding and cutting torch and formed a explosion range between the lower and upper limits. When the LPG contacted the flame of the welding and cutting torch, LPG explosion occurred.
    [Show full text]
  • Accident Knowledge and Emergency Management
    Ris0-R-945(EN) DK9700056 Accident Knowledge and Emergency Management Birgitte Rasmussen, Carsten D. Gr0nberg Ris0 National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark March 1997 VOL 2 p III 1 2 Accident Knowledge and Emergency Management Birgitte Rasmussen, Carsten D. Gr0nberg Ris0 National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark March 1997 Abstract. The report contains an overall frame for transformation of knowledge and experience from risk analysis to emergency education. An accident model has been developed to describe the emergency situation. A key concept of this model is uncontrolled flow of energy (UFOE), essential ele- ments are the state, location and movement of the energy (and mass). A UFOE can be considered as the driving force of an accident, e.g., an explosion, a fire, a release of heavy gases. As long as the energy is confined, i.e. the location and movement of the energy are under control, the situation is safe, but loss of con- finement will create a hazardous situation that may develop into an accident. A domain model has been developed for representing accident and emergency scenarios occurring in society. The domain model uses three main categories: status, context and objectives. A domain is a group of activities with allied goals and elements and ten specific domains have been investigated: process plant, storage, nuclear power plant, energy distribution, marine transport of goods, marine transport of people, aviation, transport by road, transport by rail and natural disasters. Totally 25 accident cases were consulted and information was extracted for filling into the schematic representations with two to four cases pr. specific domain. The work described in this report is financially supported by EUREKA MEM- brain (Major Emergency Management) project running 1993-1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Explosion Kills Seven, Maryland- at 11:55 P.M
    NATURAL GAS AND PROPANE FIRES, EXPLOSIONS AND LEAKS ESTIMATES AND INCIDENT DESCRIPTIONS Marty Ahrens Ben Evarts October 2018 Acknowledgements The National Fire Protection Association thanks all the fire departments and state fire authorities who participate in the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and the annual NFPA fire experience survey. These firefighters are the original sources of the detailed data that make this analysis possible. Their contributions allow us to estimate the size of the fire problem. We are also grateful to the U.S. Fire Administration for its work in developing, coordinating, and maintaining NFIRS. To learn more about research at NFPA visit www.nfpa.org/research. E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 617-984-7450 NFPA Index No. 2873 Copyright© 2018, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA This custom analysis is prepared by and copyright is held by the National Fire Protection Association. Notwithstanding the custom nature of this analysis, the NFPA retains all rights to utilize all or any part of this analysis, including any information, text, charts, tables or diagrams developed or produced as part hereof in any manner whatsoever as it deems appropriate, including but not limited to the further commercial dissemination hereof by any means or media to any party. Purchaser is hereby licensed to reproduce this material for his or her own use and benefit, and to display this in his/her printed material, publications, articles or website. Except as specifically set out in the initial request, purchaser may not assign, transfer or grant any rights to use this material to any third parties without permission of NFPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Propane Awareness and Safety
    Propane Awareness and Safety Recently the Payson Fire Department responded to a home explosion due to the collection of propane gas. This and other similar calls for service experienced by the department in the past several months have prompted my writing this article. While you may or may not use or have propane delivered to your home, you may still be susceptible to a gas explosion. WHAT IS PROPANE? Propane is the type of fuel that many of us here in Payson use to heat our homes, water, cook our food, or other type of uses. Propane is a hydrocarbon (C3H8) and is sometimes referred to as LP-gas or LPG, produced from both natural gas processing and crude oil refining, in roughly equal amounts. While propane is colorless and odorless, a foul-smelling odorant, ethyl mercaptan is added to make gas leaks easier to detect. Propane vapors are heavier than air. For this reason, propane may accumulate in low-lying areas such as basements, crawl spaces, along floors and ditches. However, air currents can sometimes carry propane vapors elsewhere within a building. The smell may be in a location (basement or attic) where it is not detected during normal daily activities. Propane is flammable when mixed with air (oxygen) and can be ignited by many sources, including open flames, smoking materials, electrical sparks, and static electricity. The problem we have experienced in the past home explosions is with leaks in the supply piping outside the home. This is especially true after heavy rains. While propane is heaver than air, it is lighter than water.
    [Show full text]
  • Merrimack Valley Natural Gas Explosions After Action Report September 13 - December 16, 2018
    Merrimack Valley Natural Gas Explosions After Action Report September 13 - December 16, 2018 2018 Merrimack Valley Gas Explosions After Action Report Published January 2020 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overarching Themes ..................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Report Scope and Structure .......................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Incident Overview ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Community Geography and Demographics ................................................................................ 11 3.0 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Steering Committee .................................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Participating Agencies and Representatives ............................................................................... 14 4.0 Incident Timeline ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • About the Vapour Cloud Explosion of Lng
    Conference on Safety of LNG supply at ports areas National Center for Scientific Research “Demokritos” 15 October 2019, Athens, Greece ABOUT THE VAPOUR CLOUD EXPLOSION OF LNG Prof. Ernesto Salzano The question ABOUT THE VAPOUR CLOUD EXPLOSION OF LNG or CAN LNG EXPLODE? 2 Liquified Natural Gas Component Typical (% Mole) Range (% Mole) Hydrocarbons Methane (C1) 92.77 83.74 – 98.22 Ethane (C2) 3.36 0.52 – 7.64 Propane (C3) 1.51 0.18 – 4.74 Iso-Butane (i-C4) 0.41 0.05 – 1.10 Normal Butane (n-C4) 0.47 0.06 – 1.63 Iso-Pentane (i-C5) 0.19 0.03 – 0.50 Normal Pentane (n-C5) 0.13 0.00 – 0.42 Hexane (C6) 0.27 0.09 – 0.78 Inerts Nitrogen (N2) 0.30 0.12 – 0.91 Helium (He) Trace 0.00 - 0.02 Impurities Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 0.59 0.13 - 1.86 Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Trace 0.00 - 0.10 Oxygen (O2) Trace 0.00– 3.00 Water (H2O) Trace 0.00 - 0.01 3 Liquified Natural Gas ❑ Boiling point: -163°C to -160°C ❑ Liquid density: 458 to 463 Kg/m3 LNG IS : HEAVIER THAN AIR AT BOILING T LIGHTER THAN AIR AT AMBIENT T (MLNG ≈ 20.00( < )MAIR = 28.47) 4 Liquified Natural Gas If LNG is accidentally released: ❑ LNG will float on seawater or will form a pool on ground ❑ Vapours form a stratified layer (a cloud) over ground or water ❑ A low-lying visible cloud is formed if humidity > 55% ❑ The cloud is not completely visible for humidity << 55 % Liquified Natural Gas: Fire Scenarios If the LNG cloud (either on ground or seawater) is ignited: ❑ The liquid pool feeds a fire convectively (pool fire), which is limited by the evaporation rate and heat exchange ❑ If a large vapour cloud is formed BEFORE ignition (delayed ignition) a flame propagates throughout the cloud from the point of ignition to the entire gas volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Gas and Electric Company Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Rupture and Fire San Bruno, California September 9, 2010
    Pacific Gas and Electric Company Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Rupture and Fire San Bruno, California September 9, 2010 Accident Report NTSB/PAR-11/01 National PB2011-916501 Transportation Safety Board NTSB/PAR-11/01 PB2011-916501 Notation 8275C Adopted August 30, 2011 Pipeline Accident Report Pacific Gas and Electric Company Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Rupture and Fire San Bruno, California September 9, 2010 National Transportation Safety Board 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, DC 20594 National Transportation Safety Board. 2011. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Rupture and Fire, San Bruno, California, September 9, 2010. Pipeline Accident Report NTSB/PAR-11/01. Washington, DC. Abstract: On September 9, 2010, about 6:11 p.m. Pacific daylight time, a 30-inch-diameter segment of an intrastate natural gas transmission pipeline known as Line 132, owned and operated by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, ruptured in a residential area in San Bruno, California. The rupture occurred at mile point 39.28 of Line 132, at the intersection of Earl Avenue and Glenview Drive. The rupture produced a crater about 72 feet long by 26 feet wide. The section of pipe that ruptured, which was about 28 feet long and weighed about 3,000 pounds, was found 100 feet south of the crater. The Pacific Gas and Electric Company estimated that 47.6 million standard cubic feet of natural gas was released. The released natural gas ignited, resulting in a fire that destroyed 38 homes and damaged 70. Eight people were killed, many were injured, and many more were evacuated from the area.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.0 Detailed Results from Nine Incidents
    3.2.2 The Grounded Jet At the time that the work on PIPERS was taking place, HSL Buxton was carrying out computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculations on gas jets emerging from slots at the side of a pipeline and striking the edge of a crater. They were referred to as grounded jets because the calculations indicated that they would stay close to the ground. In PIPERS, the thermal radiation from them was modelled by four point emitters placed horizontally at right angles to the pipeline with similar proportions and power to those used for the vertical jet-fire model. The user could set the height above ground of the emitters. 3.2.3 The Crater Jet The crater jet was also a response to CFD simulations which suggested that a hole at the bottom of a pipeline would result in a jet emerging from the whole of the cross section of the crater. This implied a jet with reduced velocity that was affected to a larger extent by the wind. As for the vertical jet, the length of the flame is obtained using the Chamberlain correlation and by partitioning the heat amongst four emitters (see section 3.1.2). 3.2.4 The Pool Fire The two pool fire simulations added to PIPERS are only used for liquid releases and do not therefore apply to natural gas. 4.0 Detailed results from nine incidents The pipeline incidents that formed the greater part of this study were:- Bealeton - a 30 inch pipeline carrying natural gas at 5 1.5 bar.
    [Show full text]
  • Science for Disaster Risk Management 2020
    CHAPTER 3 ASSETS AT RISK AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS Chapter 3 Assets at risk and potential impacts 3.4 Critical infrastructures Coordinating Lead Authors John Agius Georgios Marios Karagiannis Online Version Agius, J., Karagiannis, G.M., Pescaroli, G., Galbusera, L., Theocharidou, M., Krausmann, E., Chaudhari, K., ‘Critical Infrastructures’, in: Casajus Valles, A., Marin Ferrer, M., Poljanšek, K., Clark, I. (eds.), Science for Disaster Risk Management 2020: acting today, protecting tomorrow, EUR 30183 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-18182-8, doi:10.2760/571085, JRC114026. 327 3.4 Critical Infrastructures CONTENTS Introduction . 330 3.4.1 Emergency infrastructure facilities . 334 1 Introduction . 335 2 Role in the disaster cycle . 336 3 Challenges for operational continuity and organisational resilience . 337 3.1 Impacts on EMFIs of cascading effects. .337 3.2 Complex scenarios and compound and interacting drivers. .338 4 Examples and case studies . 339 4.1 Power outage in Auckland, February–March 1998 . .339 4.2 Flooding in Carlisle, January 2005. .340 4.3. Flooding in Parma, October 2014 . .342 5 A discussion of guidelines for operational continuity and resilience . 343 5.1 Operational standards and checklist . .345 5.2 Documentation in the European Union . .346 5.3. United Nations guidelines and checklists. .346 6 Conclusions and key messages . 347 3.4.2 Network infrastructures . 350 1 Introduction . 351 2 Case studies . 352 2.1. European power outages . 352 2.2 Transport-related failures . 354 3 Gaps and challenges . 356 4 Conclusions and key messsages . 359 4.1 Risk and resilience policies . 359 4.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Investigation of the Natural Gas Pipeline Accident at Canterbury Woods, Annandale, Virginia
    C0M731 1 285 illlilllllllllllllllillltl HAimHAl BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT 10 961 FIELD INVESTIGATION OF THE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE ACCIDENT AT CANTERBURY WOODS, ANNANDALE, VIRGINIA Report to National Transportation Safety Board Department of Transportation Washington, D, C. 20591 <nb|> U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPRODUCED BY. N l| U S. Department of Commerce i Service National Technical Information NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS The National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress March 3, 1901. The Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the Nation’s science and technology and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts research and provides: (1) a basis for the Nation’s physical measure- ment system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau consists of the Institute for Basic Standards, the Institute for Materials Research, the Institute for Applied Technology, the Center for Computer Sciences and Technology, and the Office for Information Programs. THE [INSTITUTE FOR BASIC STANDARDS provides the central basis within the United States of a complete and consistent system of physical measurement; coordinates that system with measurement systems of other nations; and furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform physical measurements throughout the Nation’s scien- tific community, industry, and commerce. The Institute consists of a Center for Radia- tion Research, an Office of Measurement Services and the following divisions: Applied Mathematics— Electricity— Heat—Mechanics—Optical Physics—Linac Radiation 5 —Nuclear Radiation 2 — Applied Radiation 2—Quantum Electronics 5 — Electromagnetics 2 —Time and Frequency 1 —Laboratory Astrophysics 1 —Cryo- 1 genics .
    [Show full text]