A Common Risk Classification Concept for Safety Related Gas Leaks and Fugitive Emissions?

Gas leaks in the oil and gas industry represent a safety risk as they, if ignited, may result in severe fires and/or explosions. Unignited, they have environmental impacts. This is particularly the case for methane leaks due to a significant Global Warming Potential (GWP). Since gas leak rates may span several orders of magnitude, that is, from leaks associated with potential major accidents to fugitive emissions on the order of 10−6 kg/s, it has been difficult to organize the leaks in an all-inclusive leak categorization model. The motivation for the present study was to develop a simple logarithmic table based on an existing consequence matrix for safety related incidents extended to include non-safety related fugitive emissions. An evaluation sheet was also developed as a guide for immediate risk evaluations when new leaks are identified. The leak rate table and evaluation guide were tested in the field at five land-based oil and gas facilities during Optical Gas Inspection (OGI) campaigns. It is demonstrated how the suggested concept can be used for presenting and analysing detected leaks to assist in Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) programs. The novel categorization table was proven valuable in prioritizing repair of “super-emitter” components rather than the numerous minor fugitive emissions detected by OGI cameras, which contribute little to the accumulated emissions. The study was limited to five land based oil and gas facilities in Norway. However, as the results regarding leak rate distribution and “super-emitter” contributions mirror studies from other regions, the methodology should be generally applicable. To emphasize environmental impact, it is suggested to include leaking gas GWP in future research on the categorization model, that is, not base prioritization solely on leak rates. Research on OGI campaign frequency is recommended since frequent coarse campaigns may give an improved cost benefit ratio.

[1]  Maria-Monika Metallinou,et al.  Liquefied Natural Gas as a New Hazard; Learning Processes in Norwegian Fire Brigades , 2019, Safety.

[2]  Clay S. Bell,et al.  "Good versus Good Enough?" Empirical Tests of Methane Leak Detection Sensitivity of a Commercial Infrared Camera. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Stephan F. J. De Wekker,et al.  Potential of a low-cost gas sensor for atmospheric methane monitoring , 2017 .

[5]  E. Kort,et al.  Methane Leaks from North American Natural Gas Systems , 2014, Science.

[6]  Adam Hawkes,et al.  The Natural Gas Supply Chain: The Importance of Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emissions , 2017 .

[7]  Eliza Dyakowska,et al.  Porównanie dokładności dwóch metod pomiaru emisji lotnych – według normy EN 15446 oraz z zastosowaniem urządzenia Hi Flow Sampler – wyniki projektu GERG (The European Gas Research Group) , 2016 .

[8]  Daniel Cooley,et al.  Methane Leaks from Natural Gas Systems Follow Extreme Distributions. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.

[9]  Adam Hawkes,et al.  The impact of shale gas on the cost and feasibility of meeting climate targets - a global energy system model analysis and an exploration of uncertainties , 2017 .

[10]  George W. Kling,et al.  Performance of a low-cost methane sensor for ambient concentration measurements in preliminary studies , 2012 .

[11]  T. Log,et al.  Ethanol and Methanol Burn Risks in the Home Environment , 2018, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[12]  Jingfan Wang,et al.  Are Optical Gas Imaging Technologies Effective For Methane Leak Detection? , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  A. Hawkes,et al.  Assessing the impact of future greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas production. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.

[14]  Jarosław Brodny,et al.  Analysis of the Impact of Auxiliary Ventilation Equipment on the Distribution and Concentration of Methane in the Tailgate , 2018, Energies.

[15]  F. Worrall,et al.  Assessing fugitive emissions of CH4 from high-pressure gas pipelines in the UK. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[16]  Fabrizio Innocenti,et al.  Infrared differential absorption Lidar (DIAL) measurements of hydrocarbon emissions. , 2011, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[17]  Ernesto Santibanez Borda,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Life Cycle GHG Emissions from European Natural Gas Supply Chains , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[18]  Scot M. Miller,et al.  Constraining sector-specific CO 2 and CH 4 emissions in the US , 2017 .

[19]  M. Chamberland,et al.  Remote Sensing Technologies for Detecting, Visualizing and Quantifying Gas Leaks , 2018 .

[20]  Torgrim Log,et al.  Optical Gas Imaging (OGI) as a Moderator for Interdisciplinary Cooperation, Reduced Emissions and Increased Safety , 2019 .

[21]  Sergio Petrozzi,et al.  Fundamentals of Statistics , 2013 .

[22]  M. Omara,et al.  Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain , 2018, Science.

[23]  Tom Gardiner,et al.  Differential Absorption Lidar (DIAL) Measurements of Landfill Methane Emissions , 2017, Remote. Sens..

[24]  Evanthia A. Nanaki,et al.  New Aspects to Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies for Low Carbon Cities , 2016 .

[25]  Y. Chao,et al.  An Experimental and Numerical Study on Supported Ultra-Lean Methane Combustion , 2019, Energies.

[26]  Graham M. Gibson,et al.  Imaging of methane gas using a scanning, open-path laser system , 2006 .

[27]  Daniel Zavala-Araiza,et al.  Using Multi-Scale Measurements to Improve Methane Emission Estimates from Oil and Gas Operations in the Barnett Shale Region, Texas. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  Hong Sun Ryou,et al.  Experimental Study on the Fire-Spreading Characteristics and Heat Release Rates of Burning Vehicles Using a Large-Scale Calorimeter , 2019, Energies.

[29]  A. Hawkes,et al.  Methane emissions: choosing the right climate metric and time horizon. , 2018, Environmental science. Processes & impacts.