Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Formal risk assessment for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Carriers in the Baltic Sea Area Bogumil Laczynski Gdynia Maritime University 27th Oct. 2011.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Formal risk assessment for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Carriers in the Baltic Sea Area Bogumil Laczynski Gdynia Maritime University 27th Oct. 2011."— Presentation transcript:

1 Formal risk assessment for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Carriers in the Baltic Sea Area Bogumil Laczynski Gdynia Maritime University 27th Oct. 2011




5 Time schedule of investment The breakwaterMarch 2013 The quayNovember 2012 The storage tanksMay 2014 The pipe lineOctober 2013 The first shipment expected June 2014 Initial capacity of the terminal –5,0billion cbm of gas Target capacity of the terminal –7,5 billion cbm of gas






11 LNG manoeuvring characteristics strongly affected by: Higher value of B/T ratio ( ) causing problems to a ships course stability Type of the power plant (steam turbine) and problems when stopping Larger area of a ships hull, of tanks and superstructures exposed to wind action

12 ShipModel L oa [m] B [m] T [m] Dprop [m] C b [-]0.79 A r /LT [%]1.81 Displacement [t]

13 Different types of propulsion: Model of a LNG carrier: Twin screw; Single screw;

14 Tracking system based on GPS: a powerful tool supporting training GPS receiver

15 the LNG carrier model: arrangement of the wheelhouse wheel Engine room telegraph Bow thruster Gyrocompass+ rate of turn indicator ECDIS Tug simulator

16 Mockup of the Ras Laffan Gas Terminal widely used during training in handling of LNG carriers

17 What has already been done : 1. Risk analysis of The Baltic Sea (safest location) 2. Risk analysis on The Baltic Sea Routes 3. Risk analysis of The Pomerania Way (incident A&S based analyses) 4. Risk analysis inside the port 5. Navigation instruction (LNG passage, approach, routes, reports etc) 6. Shiphandling instructions(mooring/unmooring, pilotage, procedures)

18 7. Emergency and safety procedures(capability with IMO, SIGGTO, ISGOTT, local regulations, etc.) 8. Crisis management procedures 9. Loading unloading procedures 10. Compability study of terminal and vessel 11. Tug service (3 instead of 2 tractors) 12. Pilotage (remote service, deep sea pilots) 13. Traffic service (no pass with passanger ferries)

19 European Union Strategy for Baltic Sea Region ACTION PLAN To Make The Baltic Sea Region An Environmentally Sustainable Place 1. To reduce nutrient inputs to the sea to acceptable levels 2. To preserve natural zones and biodiversity, including fisheries 3. To reduce the use and impact of hazardous substances 4. To become a model region for clean shipping 5. To mitigate and adapt to climate change To Make The Baltic Sea Region A Prosperous Place 6. To remove hindrances to the internal market in the Baltic Sea Region including to improve cooperation in the customs and tax area 7. To exploit the full potential of the region in research and innovation 8. Implementing the Small Business Act: to promote entrepreneurship, strengthen SMEs and increase the efficient use of human resources 9. To reinforce sustainability of agriculture, forestry and fisheries

20 To Make The Baltic Sea Region An Accessible And Attractive 10. To improve the access to, and the efficiency and security of the energy markets 11. To improve internal and external transport links 12. To maintain and reinforce attractiveness of the Baltic Sea Region in particular through education, tourism and health To Make The Baltic Sea Region A Safe And Secure Place 13. To become a leading region in maritime safety and security 14. To reinforce protection from major emergencies at sea and on land 15. To decrease the volume of, and harm done by, cross border crime Horizontal Actions

21 Strategic actions: Create a common maritime management system and monitoring, information and intelligence sharing environment for the Baltic Sea Improve the coordination of systems relating to ships' routing and monitoring of the vessel traffic and consider establishing new systems. Jointly apply surveillance tools Ensure that vessels, in particular those transporting energy products or other dangerous cargo, are up to the highest maritime safety standards

22 Flagship projects (as examples): Conduct a technical feasibility study on a Baltic Sea Coastal Patrol Network Become a pilot region for the integration of maritime surveillance systems Speed up re-surveying of major shipping routes and ports Become a pilot region for e-navigation Create a network of centres of excellence for maritime training Develop a plan to reduce the number of accidents in fisheries Formal risk assessment of LNG carriers in the Baltic Sea

23 Members of GMU research group : Prof. Bogumil Łaczynski, Master Mariner, LNG group coordinator/leader Prof. Adam Weintrit, Master Mariner, expert in ECDIS, Deaon of Nav. Dept. Of GMU Prof. Andrzej Królikowski – Master Mariner, expert in maritime safety Prof. Leszek Smolarek – mathematician, expert in using math. Theory in transport Prof. Henryk Sniegocki - Master Mariner, expert in simulation technics Dr. Przemysław Krata – navigator, expert in ship constructions and operations Dr Przemysław Dziula – nawigator, expert in ECDIS, voyage planning Dr Jacek Ferdynus – meteorologist and oceanographist Mr Andrzej Starosta – navigator, expert in LNG carriage and operations Mr Piotr Kopacz – navigator/mathematics, expert in FSA and ECDIS Mr Marek Czapczyk - Master Mariner, expert in voyage planning

24 Maritime traffic is increasing constantly, in terms of number and size of ships. This, on the one hand, meets the growing demands of society, but, on the other, poses certain risks, both to the environment and to the aforementioned society. Therefore, a holistic approach is required in order to estimate these dynamic risks and to keep them under control. As the risk is perceived as a combination of the probability of an accident and its consequences, a proper estimation of these two is of high importance. Therefore, a novel approach for estimating the consequences of an accident involving an LNG carrier (e.g. damage to an LNG carrier either as a result of grounding, allision or an open sea collision between two ships) is put forward (with the attention on the LNG carrier being considered the damaged ship). Background of the project

25 Meeting of Local Commitee A concept of a holistic risk assessment of LNG carriers in the Baltic Sea The maritime traffic is increasing constantly, in terms of number and size of ships. This, on one hand meets the growing demands of the society but on another pose certain risks, both on the environment and the aforementioned society. Therefore a holistic approach is required in order to estimate these dynamic risks and keep them under control. As the risk is perceived as a combination of an accident probability and its consequences a proper estimation of these two is of high importance. Therefore a novel approach for estimating the consequences of an open sea collision between two ships is put forward, with the attention on LNG tanker being considered a struck ship. Presented approach comprises of three major factors affecting the risk of LNG transportation by sea, namely: a navigator behavior, a ship response to a collision and consequences of the collision. These are modeled by means of Bayesian Network, experiments and simulations. Furthermore, the presented approach allows the process of risk optimization with the use of the state-of-the-art methods and tolls, given the chosen objective functions and constraints. The latter can be defined based on feasible and wanted solutions eg.: crew training, pilot assistance, accident response or novel ships structure.

26 At the end, the optimization process yields the set of feasible solutions, which are called Pareto frontier. These can be delivered to appropriate rule making bodies in form of recommendations. The method proposed allows dynamic and interactive reasoning seeking for the optimal solution. Using the new algorithm is combined with an in-house build model estimating the probability of ship-ship collision and the risk expressed in the number of fatalities is obtained, which is then compared with the current risk acceptance criteria. The whole task is fund as a system consisting of human – technical object – environment (antropotechnical system in its environment).

27 Information from a shore Hydro-meteorological Navigational (temporary restricted areas, failures to navigational aids, other extraordinary issues) Special (SAR actions, military trainings, oil spill combat actions etc.) Baltic as a PSSA region Formal requirements Icing conditions ice navigation advices Traffic characteristics (including time window for LNG carrier passage when law density traffic is expected) On the spot conditions (on-board) Bathymetry Ships routes Navigational requirements TSS Anti-collision Sea-keeping Ship operators recommendations and requirements Recommended routes Pilotage Places of refuge Anchorages Environment

28 Exchange of information Ship-shore reporting of voyage plan, ship data. Monitoring of LNG carriers voyages Unification of data interchange format

29 Failures, near misses and accidents statistics Estimation of events consequences Analysis of events scenarios Recommendations for data collecting and analysis Technical requirements and recommendations for assisting tugs and other shore-based technical objects Requirements and recommendations related to ship-based equipment (including communication equipment etc.) Other requirements and recommendations resulting from any needs identified in the course of antropotechnical system analysis Technical approach

30 Ship crew training (theoretical and practical, including maneuvering on- board models) behavior in the course of a voyage (on-board) Pilots training (theoretical and practical, including maneuvering on-board models) behavior in the course of pilotage Monitoring system operators training with the use of monitoring system and its simulators behavior on duty Human related issues

31 Formal Safety Assessment is a structured, systematic five-step methodology, aimed at enhancing maritime safety including the protection of life, health, the marine environment and property using risk analysis, cost benefit analysis and regulatory influence diagrams to facilitate decision making. What Are The Benefits of FSA? 1. It buys as much safety as possible Chooses options for risk control that overall give: - good reduction of risk and, - good value for money Therefore needs to know not only that a particular measure will: - improve safety or environmental protection but also: - by how much, and - at what cost ? 2. Ensures the safety measures are equitable Makes sure that securing benefit(s) for some is not unreasonably at the expense or detriment of others Therefore needs to know for any particular safety or environmental protection measure: who carries the risk who benefits from the risk reduction and who bears the cost Formal Safety Assessment

32 Step 1 identifies the hazards that might cause accidents takes full account of the human element develops accident scenarios and outcomes arising from the identified hazards ranks and screens the accident scenarios and hazards Step 2 focuses on the important scenarios from step 1 quantifies the risk of each scenario analyses where these risks arise from, to focus attention on principal underlying causes identifies the significant factors which influence the level of risk Step 3 focuses attention on factors contributing to high risk identifies measures to control risk evaluates the anticipated reduction in risk by implementing these measures Step 4 determine the costs and benefits for each risk control option identified in step 3 compare the cost effectiveness of these risk control options Step 5 considers the affected stakeholders and the effects of proposed options on them, based on the information about hazards, risks, options, costs and benefits assists in the selection of regulatory option(s) makes recommendations to the decision-makers The Five Step Process

33 The following Flowchart demonstrates the 5 step FSA methodology.

34 Using the information provided by the FSA process the decision-makers decide! The FSA process does not supplant or undermine the decision-making role but provides reliable information. For the latest version of GUIDELINES FOR FORMAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT (FSA) FOR USE IN THE IMO RULE-MAKING PROCESS, please go the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) website at

35 We provide a service that covers both internal and external customers. Internal customers want access to reliable casualty information or information management and technical risk assessment assistance leading to effectively targeted regulation development. External customers such as the Polish maritime industry, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and European Union (EU) Technical Committees also benefit from our advice. What we should do Highlight the high risk areas to inform decisions about deployment of maritime administartion resources Provide safety and environmental risk assessment and cost/benefit analysis resources to IMO and the maritime industry Support the development of the FSA methodology through work with international bodies. Provide support to IMO and EU technical committees in relation to maritime safety and pollution prevention within maritime industry. Provide internal consultancy on FSA and risk assessment matters Promote and disseminate the FSA technique throughout maritime administartion Manage maritime casualty information. Support the provision of accessible information that is complete and reliable to aid the decision making process. Promote the rational, effective and equitable development of maritime safety measures and regulation. Customer Base

36 A full Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) is performed to estimate the risk level and to identify and evaluate possible risk control options (RCOs) for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) carriers. The following RCOs are providing considerable risk reduction in a cost-effective manner: Risk-based maintenance of navigational systems ECDIS AIS (Automatic Identification System) integrated with radar Track control system Improved bridge design. These five cost-effective RCOs with significant potential to reduce loss of lives are strongly recommended as IMO requirements. Some of these RCOs are already implemented on most LNG carriers. The measures are not, however, required by IMO. The cost benefit assessment is based on the introduction of one RCO at a time, but the conclusions are believed to be robust in any case.

37 Developing guidance concerning geometric parameters of fairways, anchorages, taking into account local hydro-meteorological characteristics of a port/terminal, guaranteeing an acceptable safety level. Developing procedures concerning entry to a port, depending on the risk level (e.g. green, yellow, orange, red, etc.), hydro-meteorological factors such as currents, waves, winds, and fairway geometry such as depth and width of a fairway, underwater clearance, the minimum number of tugs needed, etc., allowing to maintain the assumed safety level. Risk assessment verification is carried out during the first passage of a LNG carrier and then periodically. Some issues remain to be determined, such as responsibility for particular actions influencing the LNG safety level. Developing of a proper reporting system (what, how and to whom is yet to be determined depending on the safety level). The project will make it possible to do a real evaluation of risks resulting from the use of LNG ships and will make wider public aware of the real risk of exploitation of LNG carriers in the Baltic. The results should allow us to compare a risk generated by an LNG carriers to the risk generated by other kinds of ships such as oil tankers, LPG or chemical tankers. Expected results of the Project

38 Collecting, monitoring and sharing information related to a risk level are crucial elements influencing decisions regarding LNG carriers traffic control (including procedures for port entry, indication of places of refuge, procedures when waiting for an acceptable risk level is necessary). Using FSA methodology will provide actual, continuous and permanent improvement of sea traffic of LNG carriers in the Baltic. It will improve safety of transportation, port infrastructure and waterside towns. Unification of risk level standards for determining risk levels, taking into account the effects of potential damage to property, environment and human life, will lead to a coherent coaction of all stakeholders. The assessed risk contains elements which determine both the probability of any kind of damage and the foreseen results of such events. It facilitates current evaluation of the safety level, as well as steering the LNG transportation process in regard of an element of risk management, and gives a reason for the implementation of new legal regulations If new guidelines, recommendations and procedures ensuring dynamic evaluation of safety of LNG carriers are established, it will lead to determining the acceptable level of safety, together with proper methodology. It should enhance the safety level in the Baltic Sea region. Summary

39 All above subjects are to be submitted for consideration to the participants of the forthcoming EUSBSR Project 13.7 kick-off meeting in Gdynia Maritime University on 27th October Next step

40 International LNG Team : Poland : 1. Gdynia Maritime University 2. Maritime University of Szczecin 3. PRS 4. DNV (Poland) Germany : Sweden : Danmark : Norway : Finland : ======= Estonia Latvia Russia



43 Thank You for Your attention

Download ppt "Formal risk assessment for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Carriers in the Baltic Sea Area Bogumil Laczynski Gdynia Maritime University 27th Oct. 2011."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google