Offshore Oil Extraction Essay: Risk Indicators, Prevention.

Risk Indicators in Offshore Oil Extraction

Discuss about the Causes And Consequences Of British Petroleum Oil.

Offshore extraction of oil is a dangerous operation because the drilling platforms and the workers aboard the rig get constantly exposed to the different types of hazardous conditions. The hazards arise due to the highly combustible substances, heavy machinery, harsh weather. The dangerous situation that prevails in the working condition lead to the several fatalities and injuries and it involves the workers and the other managers that reside on the oil rig. When accidents occur in the offshore oil extraction rigs, it happens without the prior warning and it occurs quickly. Injuries and the loss of life can be disastrous for the workers working on the oil rig. Threats can not only occur from the fires and the explosions but also from drowning in the ocean waters (Aryee2012). This study is based on the description of the different types of the risk indicators that are used in the major oil accident prevention, along with the examples. This study also includes the caparison of the Norsok Z-013 standard with the ISO 3100 standard.

Risk indicators are actively used in the offshore oil industry and are based on the injuries occurring to the individuals. This includes the trends in the depending upon which the accidents are occurring to the workers and the near-misses they are experiencing; Near-misses are designated based on the potential severity; injury causation statistics. Indicators are the effective way of monitoring the performance and the extent to which workplace injury affects the performance of the workers. The context of the usage of the risk indicators are as follows:

• Establishing the requirements, goals, and policies.
• Planning as well as implementation
• Organization and its inherent responsibilities
• Verification and control
• Corrective actions
• Experience transfer (Vinnem et al. 2006)

The effective management of the Health, Environment, and Safety (HES) can be described through a control loop. The usage of the risk indicators plays a major role in the control loop.This is done through the identification, verification, and control and taking the corrective actions within the time bound manner (figure 1). The usage of the risk indicators is one of the major monitoring objective of the effects.

Figure 1: HES management control loop [source: Vinnem et al. 2006]

There are different types of ways through which the risk indicators can be classified and this includes:

• Differentiation of the indicators based on how data collection procedure.
• Differentiation of the indicators which reflect the steps through which the accident chain has occurred.

The classification and differentiation of the indicators based on the different procedures employed in data collection.

• Indicators based on loss
• Indicators based on the process
• Casual factors based indicators (this also includes the indicators related to the safety climate) (Vinnem et al. 2006).

Based on the frequent occurrences of risk, indicators are framed on the recording of the losses, whereas, the risk indicators are based on the causal factors and process parameters. The other types of indicators are also based on the major types of hazards like:

• Activity indicator
• Incident indicator
• Barrier indicator
• Casual factor based indicators (this also includes the several factors in relation to the safety climate)

Classification of Risk Indicators

The relationship that exists between the different indicators are coupled along with the incidents of the accident sequences and the barriers (figure 2). The different types indicators are depicted in the picture and are in accordance with the several stages occurring in the accident chains.

Figure 2: Indicators of loss in relation to accident sequences [source: Vinnem et al. 2006]

The incident indicators are typically based on the occurrence of the near misses, incidents and the accidents and are considered to be reactive indicators. This is the major pros of the incident barrier and however, this indicator lacks the capability to assess the present condition.This sort of the indicator is entirely based on the vital information on what has already occurred in the past. In order to examine the status of the trend of the barriers, the barrier indicators are used. Some of the barriers are also called dormant because they are found to be dormant with respect to the other indicators and comes in to play when the other barriers have failed to perform. This is both attributed to the pros and cons of the barrier indicator (Vinnem 2010). The majority of the data accumulated in the form of experiences are data accumulated from the false alarms, inspections, tests. This sort of the indicators is designated to be party proactive and partly reactive. Activity indicators are however considered to be totally proactive indicators and these are used in large numbers in order to manage the planning activities actively on the different types of installations so that the hazards can be minimized. This is one of the pros of activity barrier.  Activity indicators are not that used till now and are not significant. This is one of the cons of activity barrier. The activity indicators are actively used to reveal the major hazards in the workplace that can be reduced through the active monitoring of the work performances. The indicators that are related to the causal factors belong to a separate category and it naturally involves the indicators in relation to the safety indicators (Vinnem et al. 2006).

The NORSOK standard illustrates the emergency preparedness assessments and the risks in relation to the onshore and the offshore oil facilities that produce oil and gas. This standard can also be used for the offshore drilling. NORSOK standard includes the processes of risk planning and consecutive execution of the emergency plans and it includes the establishment of the picture of the risk and the several risk reduction measures. The process which involves the identification of the risks and procedures of how to deal with the same can be termed as the risk treatment. The risk treatment also includes the risk reduction measures, implementation of the modification, and the acceptance. This standard encompasses the major accidents and the risks. The injuries and the occupational fatalities are not covered by the NORSOK standard, the contribution of the risks from the fatalities arising from the occupation is often included in the risk calculations. The NORSOK standard includes the requirements with respect to the qualitative risk analysis (figure 3). The standard does not include the difference in security, and it also does not include the analysis of the emergency preparedness (Standard.no 2018).

Comparative Study of NORSOK Z-013 and ISO 3100 Standards

Figure 3: risk assessment process [source: Standard.no 2018]

ISO31000 is a standard which provides a guideline for the people to protect and create value within an organization through the performance improvement, achieving the objectives, setting, decision making, managing risks. Risk management is based on the processes, frameworks, principles which are outlined and mentioned in the standards. The different components that exist within an organization, whereas these components, can be improved and adapted to the consistent, effective and efficient risk management (figure 4). The ISO standards provide the guidelines for the management of the risk that is faced by a specific organization. The standards can be applied to any organization and can be customized according to the ease. The guidelines mentioned in the management of the risks, is not dependent on a specific type of industry and is also not sector specific. The standards are applicable throughout the life of an organization and also can be related to any activity within an organization which includes the making of the decisions at all the different levels (Iso.org 2018).

Figure 4: the relationship between process, principles, and framework [source: Iso.org 2018]

NORSOK standards provide the informative and the normative references, whereas the ISO31000 lack both the informative and the normative references.

In the ISO31000 the risk assessment process involves the identification of the risk, analysis of the risk, risk evaluation and risk treatment (figure 4). Risk assessment is conducted collaboratively, iteratively, systematically by drawing on the views and the knowledge of the stakeholders. It should include the available information which will be supplemented by the inquiry depending on the necessity (Iso.org 2018). The risk assessment procedure according to the NORSOK standards includes the identification of the accidental events and the hazardous situations; potential causes of the initiating events; possible consequences of the accidental events; identification of the risk reduction measures; provide an overall picture of the risk (Standard.no 2018).

Figure 4: Risk assessment process [source: Iso.org 2018 ]

The vital contrasting picture here is that ISO31000 provides a provision of risk treatment through the: selection of the risk treatment options, implementation, and preparation of the risk treatment plans. Whereas, within the NORSOK guidelines there is no provision or mention of the risk treatment plans.

Conclusion

Thus, from the above study, it can be concluded that the risk indicators play a major role in the reduction of risk in the offshore oil rigs. The different types of the risk indicators help in identifying the risks before the occurrence and after the occurrence of the risk. There are different types of the risk indicators like the individual indicator, barrier indicator, activity indicator and the casual factor indicator. In order to assess the risk in an offshore oil rig, it is necessary to assess the risk through the international and national guidelines like the ISO31000 and NORSOK guidelines and standards.

Reference

Aryee, A., 2012. Risks of offshore oil drilling: Causes and consequences of British Petroleum oil rig explosion. Aquatic Science and Technology, 1(1), pp.101-118.

Iso.org, 2018. ISO 31000 Risk management. [online] Iso.org. Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-31000-risk-management.html [Accessed 17 Mar. 2018].

Standard.no, 2018. [online] Standard.no. Available at: https://www.standard.no/pagefiles/955/z-013.pdf [Accessed 17 Mar. 2018].

Vinnem, J.E., 2010. Risk indicators for major hazards on offshore installations. Safety Science, 48(6), pp.770-787.

Vinnem, J.E., Aven, T., Husebø, T., Seljelid, J. and Tveit, O.J., 2006. Major hazard risk indicators for monitoring of trends in the Norwegian offshore petroleum sector. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 91(7), pp.778-791.