Risk Assessment of Hydrocarbon Pipelines Facing Natural Hazards

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Vicente Amórtegui Gil
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Failure Process ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Soil Liquefaction ◽  
Pyroclastic Flows ◽  
General Function ◽  
Probability Of Occurrence ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
Potential Damage ◽  
Strength And Stiffness

Hydrocarbon pipelines are exposed to hazards from natural processes, which may affect their integrity and trigger processes that have consequences on the environment. Among the natural hazards are the effects of the earthquakes, the neotectonic activity, the volcanism, the weathering of soils and rocks, the landslides, the flows or avalanches of mud or debris, the processes related to sediment transport such as the erosion, the scour by streams, the floods and the sloughing due to rains. Those processes are sometimes related to each other, e.g. the earthquakes can produce slides, or movement of geological faults, or soil liquefaction; the rain can trigger landslides and can cause avalanches and mudslides or debris flow; the volcanic eruptions can originate landslides and avalanches, or pyroclastic flows. Human activities can also induce or accelerate “natural” processes that affect the integrity of the pipelines. The strength and stiffness of the pipelines allow them to tolerate the effects of natural hazards for some period of time. The amount of time depends on the strength and deformability, the stress state, the age, the conditions of installation and operation of the pipelines and their geometric arrangement with regard to the hazardous processes. In the programs for pipeline integrity management, the risk is defined as a function that relates the probability of the pipeline rupture and the consequences of the failure. However, some people define risk as the summation of the indicators of probability and consequences, such as a RAM matrix. Others define the risk as the product of the probability of failure times the cost of the consequences, while the overall function used to evaluate the rupture probability of a pipeline facing hazards considered in the ASME b31.8 S standard includes all the elements involved in the failure process. In that standard, for the specific analysis of natural hazards, it is proposed that the function is separated in the two following principal elements: the probability of occurrence of the threatening process (hazard) and the pipeline’s capacity to tolerate it. In this paper a general function is proposed, which is the product of the probability of occurrence of the threatening process, the vulnerability of the pipeline (expressed as the fraction of the potential damage the pipe can undergo), and the consequences of the pipeline failure (represented in the summation of the costs of the spilled product, its collection, the pipeline repair and the damages made by the rupture).

Natural Hazards and Risk

Geography ◽  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Tiefenbacher
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
Complex Processes ◽  
Geophysical Processes ◽  
Imminent Threat

Natural hazards are processes that occur in nature that threaten the safety, health, and economic interests of human beings. People have often regarded the natural processes as the causes of their losses or the sources of imminent threat. The most dramatic of these events are either geomorphologic processes (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and others) or meteorological processes (hurricanes, tornados, river floods, and others), and these attract widespread attention, but occasionally some derive from complex processes (wildfires, coastal inundation, and other climate change exacerbated processes) or are merely more subtle because they develop slowly or incur slowly appearing changes (such as in droughts, freeze events, infestations [by animals or plants], or disease outbreaks). The likelihood that a particular type of event will occur in a specific location is called risk, and this probability will influence the potential for human exposure in occupied landscapes. The populating of “risky” landscapes creates the hazard, which exists only when human interests are threatened. In this way, “hazard” reflects a measurement of the potential for loss. If humans and their valuables are not present (i.e., potentially exposed to a hazardous event), there is no hazard (statistically speaking). Geographers’ interest in hazard, beyond understanding geophysical processes, stems from the recognition of the importance of human processes (economic, political, sociological, psychological, and others) in the creation and response to hazardous circumstances. The adoption of the “human ecology” perspective (originating in the discipline of sociology) in the 1920s by Harlan Barrows and others established a tradition of analysis of the interaction of physical and human processes. Gilbert White’s scholarship, beginning in the 1940s, opened the policy realm to rational management of human processes and our relationships to the geographies of natural processes. Since then, the geographic perspective of hazards has diversified in a number of ways. Not only has the literature expanded in terms of the sources of hazard but also in terms of critical evaluation of the deeper causes behind the decisions that increase hazard. The past forty years of scholarship have employed increasingly sophisticated social, political, economic, and philosophical models to understand why people are driven to live in places and in ways that increase the likelihood that they will be impacted by detrimental conditions. In geography, in particular, geographic information science and geospatial technologies have enhanced efforts to understand and reduce hazard.

Pipeline Vulnerability to Natural Hazards

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Vicente Amórtegui
Keyword(s):  
Stress State ◽  
Risk Analysis ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Monitoring Systems ◽  
System Vulnerability ◽  
Preventive Actions ◽  
Strength And Stiffness ◽  
External Forces

The strength and stiffness of the pipelines allow them to tolerate the effects of natural hazards for some period of time. The amount of time depends on the strength and deformability, the stress state, the age, the conditions of installation and operation of the pipeline and their geometric arrangement with regard to the hazardous process. Accordingly, some of the hazards due to weather conditions and external forces would not be time independent. In consequence the designing of monitoring systems to predict the behavior of the pipelines against natural hazards is required in order to carry out the preventive actions which are necessary to avoid failure of the pipes due to the exposition to those hazards. In this paper a method for assessing the transport system vulnerability is developed, a function for risk analysis is proposed (which is determined by the probability of the natural hazard, the pipeline’s vulnerability to the hazard and the consequences of the pipe rupture). The elements that are part of that evaluation are presented and illustrated by means of examples.

scholarly journals Soil-gas survey of liquefaction and collapsed caves during the Emilia seismic sequence

2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Sciarra ◽  
Barbara Cantucci ◽  
Mauro Buttinelli ◽  
Gianfranco Galli ◽  
Manuela Nazzari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soil Liquefaction ◽  
Early Pleistocene ◽  
Seismic Sequence ◽  
Alluvial Deposits ◽  
Epicentral Area ◽  
Emilia Romagna Region ◽  
External Part ◽  
Strength And Stiffness ◽  
Soil Measurements ◽  
Soil Gas Survey

<p>The epicentral area of the Emilia seismic sequence is located in the Emilia-Romagna Region (northern Italy), 45 km from the city of Modena (Figure 1). This area is sited within thrust-related folds of the Ferrara Arc, which represent the most external part of the northern Apennines. This sector is considered as having been active during late Pliocene to early Pleistocene times [Scrocca et al. 2007] and encompasses also the Mirandola and Ferrara seismogenic sources [e.g., Burrato et al. 2003, Boccaletti et al. 2004, Basili et al. 2008]. The main sedimentary infilling of the Po Plain is represented by Pliocene–Pleistocene alluvial deposits (alternating fluvial sands and clays) that overlie a foredeep clastic sequence, with a total average thickness of 2 km to 4 km [e.g., Carminati et al. 2010]. Soon after the mainshock, several liquefaction phenomena coupled to ground fractures were observed in the epicentral area (e.g., San Carlo, Ferrara). Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil is reduced by earthquake shaking or other rapid loading. […] Collapsed caves reported in the literature and/or local press [e.g., Febo 1999, Martelli 2002] in the epicentral area were previously investigated by our research group in 2008, with several soil measurements of CO2 and CH4 fluxes. Immediately after the May 20, 2012, mainshock and during the Emilia seismic sequence, the collapsed caves were sampled again to determine any variations in these CO2 and CH4 fluxes. In this survey, newly formed collapsed caves were also found and measured (especially in the northern part of investigated area). […]</p>

Natural Hazards: from Plinius’ time to the Anthropocene

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliano Di Baldassarre
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Social Power ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Temporal Distribution ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Distribution ◽  
Multiple Hazards ◽  
Societal Challenges ◽  
Behavioral Heuristics ◽  
Acts Of God

&lt;p&gt;Plinius (23-79 AD) is known worldwide as the author of the encyclopedic Naturalis Historia. He died in Stabiae while trying to rescue his family from the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, one of the deadliest volcanic eruptions in European history that also destroyed the cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii. At that time, natural hazards were mostly seen as &amp;#8220;acts of God(s)&amp;#8221;. Instead, in today&amp;#8217;s Anthropocene, extreme events coexist with two dichotomic (and rather simplistic) views: &amp;#8220;disasters are natural&amp;#8221; vs. &amp;#8220;humans are to blame since they live in risky areas&amp;#8221;. In this lecture, I present scientific and societal challenges associated with the increasing impact (from Plinius&amp;#8217; time to the Anthropocene) of humans on the spatial and temporal distribution of natural hazards. I also problematize and challenge myths, preconceptions and conventional wisdoms related with uncertainty, behavioral heuristics, expert vs. local knowledge, social power and inequalities. To this end, I review recent studies in various socioeconomic contexts, and across multiple hazards, with a focus on five events that have significantly influenced my research work: the 1963 Vajont Dam landslide, the 2004 flooding in Haiti and the Dominican Republic, the 2009 L&amp;#8217;Aquila earthquake, the water crisis (Day Zero) during the 2015-2017 drought in Cape Town and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.&lt;/p&gt;

Multiple-hazards and their interactions in urban low-to-middle income countries: a case study from Nairobi

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce D. Malamud ◽  
Emmah Mwangi ◽  
Joel Gill ◽  
Ekbal Hussain ◽  
Faith Taylor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Soil Subsidence ◽  
Ground Collapse

&lt;p&gt;Global policy frameworks, such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, increasingly advocate for multi-hazard approaches across different spatial scales. However, management approaches on the ground are still informed by siloed approaches based on one single natural hazard (e.g. flood, earthquake, snowstorm). However, locations are rarely subjected to a single natural hazard but rather prone to more than one. These different hazards and their interactions (e.g. one natural hazard triggering or increasing the probability of one or more natural hazards), together with exposure and vulnerability, shape the disaster landscape of a given region and associated disaster impact. &amp;#160;Here, as part of the UK GCRF funded research grant &amp;#8220;Tomorrow&amp;#8217;s Cities&amp;#8221; we first map out the single natural hazardscape for Nairobi using evidence collected through peer-reviewed literature, grey literature, social media and newspapers. We find the following hazard groups and hazard types present in Nairobi: (i) geophysical (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides), (ii) hydrological (floods and droughts), (iii) shallow earth processes (regional subsidence, ground collapse, soil subsidence, ground heave), (iv) atmospheric hazards (storm, hail, lightning, extreme heat, extreme cold), (v) biophysical (urban fires), and vi) space hazards (geomatic storms, and impact events). The breadth of single natural hazards that can potentially impact Nairobi is much larger than normally considered by individual hazard managers that work in Nairobi. We then use a global hazard matrix to identify possible hazard interactions, focusing on the following interaction mechanisms: (i) hazard triggering secondary hazard, (ii) hazards amplifying the possibility of the secondary hazard occurring.&amp;#160; We identify 67 possible interactions, as well as some of the interaction cascade typologies that are typical for Nairobi (e.g. a storm triggers and increases the probability of a flood which in turn increases the probability of a flood). Our results indicate a breadth of natural hazards and their interactions in Nairobi, and emphasise a need for a multi-hazard approach to disaster risk reduction.&lt;/p&gt;

Natural Hazards Governance Practices and Key Natural Hazards in Latin America and the Caribbean

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivis García
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Governance Practices ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Caribbean

Along with sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean is among the geographic regions most exposed and vulnerable to the occurrence of disasters. The vulnerability is explained by geography and climate, but also by prevailing poverty and inequality. Year after year, multiple disasters such as landslides, hurricanes, floods, rains, droughts, storms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tsunamis, among others, threaten the region. Natural disasters reveal the deficiencies of infrastructure and essential services. In particular, they highlight the lack of an institutional framework for effective governance with clearly defined goals of how to prevent, respond to, and reconstruct after a natural catastrophe. One of the priorities of governments in the region is to achieve resilience—that is, to strengthen the capacity to resist, adapt, and recover from the effects of natural disasters. To be able to accomplish this, governments need to prepare before a natural disaster strikes. Therefore, disaster risk management is critical. A fundamental element in the strategy of increasing resilience is good planning in general—that is, to reduce inequality, manage urbanization, and invest in necessary infrastructure such as energy, sewage, and water management. Because climate change increases the risk of disasters, it is generally understood that good governance practices can prevent further global warming. Governments might achieve this, for example, by investing in renewable energy and financing other environmentally friendly initiatives. Unfortunately, most current governance models in Latin America and the Caribbean are characterized by bureaucratic structures that are fragmented into different sectors and whose actors do not have much interaction between them. With technical assistance from organizations, such as the World Bank and the United Nations, stakeholders in Latin America and the Caribbean are learning how to develop plans that encourage the collaboration of multiple sectors (e.g., transportation, housing) and improve the working relationships between various institutions (e.g. local associations, NGOs, private and public organizations). To be adequately prepared for a disaster, it is necessary to establish a network of actors that can engage quickly in decision-making and coordinate effectively between local, regional, and national levels.

scholarly journals Simulation of soil liquefaction due to earthquake loading

2019 ◽  
Vol 97 ◽  
pp. 03025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armen Ter-Martirosyan ◽  
Ahmad Othman
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Soil Mass ◽  
Soil Liquefaction ◽  
Elastic Behavior ◽  
Main Step ◽  
Soil Behavior ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Strength And Stiffness ◽  
Seismic Impact

Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil are reduced as a result of seismic or other dynamic effects. Liquefaction was the main reason of the huge damages caused by many earthquakes around the world. The modeling of soil behavior is the main step in the process of predicting the soil liquefaction. Currently, a large number of soil models are presented. However, only some of them can simulate this process. One of these models which can be used is model UBC3D-PLM. In this paper, the possibilities of this model are considered by modeling the seismic impact on a building with its different heights on the PLAXIS software package. The real data of Upland earthquake 1990 near Los Angeles city was used. Results of the simulation showed the difference in the behavior of the soil mass under the influence of an earthquake compared with the elastic behavior, as well as the need to use the UBC3D-PLM model to estimate the seismic impact.

Raman spectroscopy of volcanic lavas and inclusions of relevance to astrobiological exploration

2010 ◽  
Vol 368 (1922) ◽  
pp. 3127-3135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susana E. Jorge-Villar ◽  
Howell G. M. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Volcanic Rocks ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Active Volcano ◽  
Spectroscopic Studies ◽  
Lava Flows ◽  
Pyroclastic Flows ◽  
Raman Spectroscopic ◽  
Normal Expectation ◽  
Terrestrial Environments ◽  
Volcanic Lava

Volcanic eruptions and lava flows comprise one of the most highly stressed terrestrial environments for the survival of biological organisms; the destruction of botanical and biological colonies by molten lava, pyroclastic flows, lahars, poisonous gas emissions and the deposition of highly toxic materials from fumaroles is the normal expectation from such events. However, the role of lichens and cyanobacteria in the earlier colonization of volcanic lava outcrops has now been recognized. In this paper, we build upon earlier Raman spectroscopic studies on extremophilic colonies in old lava flows to assess the potential of finding evidence of biological colonization in more recent lava deposits that would inform, first, the new colonization of these rocks and also provide evidence for the relict presence of biological colonies that existed before the volcanism occurred and were engulfed by the lava. In this research, samples were collected from a recent expedition to the active volcano at Kilauea, Hawaii, which comprises very recent lava flows, active fumaroles and volcanic rocks that had broken through to the ocean and had engulfed a coral reef. The Raman spectra indicated that biological and geobiological signatures could be identified in the presence of geological matrices, which is encouraging for the planned exploration of Mars, where it is believed that there is evidence of an active volcanism that perhaps could have preserved traces of biological activity that once existed on the planet’s surface, especially in sites near the old Martian oceans.

Natural hazard impacts on infrastructure in Russian regions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Petrova
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Normal Operation ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Risk Levels ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
Adverse Impacts ◽  
Electrical Grids ◽  
Almost All

&lt;p&gt;Infrastructure is considered as the fundamental facilities and systems serving a country or other area to ensuring the functioning of its economy. The term infrastructure refers to public and private facilities and systems such as transport (including roads, railways, bridges, tunnels, ports, airports, etc.), water supply, sewers, electrical grids, and telecommunication lines. Throughout the area of Russia, almost all of the listed infrastructure facilities are exposed to the undesirable impacts of adverse natural processes and phenomena, as well as natural hazards of various origins such as geophysical, hydro-meteorological, and others. Adverse impacts of natural hazards may trigger accidents and failures; disrupt the normal operation of infrastructure facilities. In their turn, these negative consequences of natural hazard impacts on the infrastructure cause multiple social problems. Using the information collected by the author in the database of technological and natural-technological accidents, contributions of natural factors to accidents and failures in the infrastructure facilities are assessed. Database includes more than 21 thousand events from 1992 to 2019. Among all the identified types of natural hazards, the largest contributions to accidents and infrastructure disruptions have hydro-meteorological hazards such as heavy snowfalls and rains, floods, and ice phenomena. Electrical grids are the most vulnerable to adverse impacts of natural hazards. Regional differences in the risk of accidents and infrastructure disruptions between Russian federal regions were found. All the federal regions were grouped by their risk levels of accidents and infrastructure disruptions. The resulting maps were created and analyzed.&lt;/p&gt;

Special Issue on Multi-disciplinary Hazard Reduction from Earthquakes and Volcanoes in Indonesia

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenji Satake ◽  
Yujiro Ogawa
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Tsunami Simulation ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Disaster Education

Natural disasters and their mitigation are global issues, especially in Asian countries, which have suffered from such geohazards as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions and such hydrometeorological hazards as typhoons, cyclones, storm surges, and floods. Research on natural hazards and disasters is multidisciplinary. Scientists from a wide variety of disciplines study hazards, their causes, their mechanisms, and prediction. Engineers study infrastructures and measures to reduce vulnerability. Social and humanitarian scientists study cultural and societal aspects of disasters. Educators study effective ways to raise people’s awareness and action. In addition to such research activities, practitioners work to implement the results of scientific research into practical policymaking. This special issue of JDR contains 12 papers on multidisciplinary studies concerning geohazards in Indonesia taken from a Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development (SATREPS) project supported by the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). SATREPS projects focus on both the scientific aspect, namely, acquiring new knowledge, and the Official Development Aids (ODA) aspect, namely, implementing such knowledge in societal applications. Following the first review article, which is a project overview, the next four papers report findings on natural hazards – the slip rate on the Lembang fault in Java, tsunami simulation for Java’s Palabuhanratu, the Sinabung volcano eruption in Sumatra, and methods of predicting and evaluating eruptions. One paper reports engineering studies on tsunami disaster mitigation in Padang city and two social science papers present hazards in the contexts of communities and human mobility. Two papers on disaster education cover disaster education development since the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the use of tsunami simulation in disaster education. The last research paper and review article deal with policymaking related to the 2010 Mentawai and 2011 Japan tsunamis, respectively. All of these papers, including the review articles, have been peer-reviewed by two nonproject reviewers. We thank the authors for their timely contributions and revisions, and the reviewers for their invaluable and wide-ranging comments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document