Risk Reduction In Offshore Production
Authors: Brandie E.F. 
Published: October 2008

A "hazard" is something with potential to cause harm and "risk" is the likelihood of that potential being realized.

The risk assessment process, What can go wrong? (Hazard Identification); How often does it go wrong? (Event Frequency); What happens if it goes wrong? (Consequence Analysis); What does it all mean? (Combining probability with consequence to evaluate the risk); and, What can we do about it? (Assessment),, is by no means new.

This paper reviews the approach taken by a UK based operator to risk assessment and summarizes the philosophy on setting of target levels of risk and associated acceptance criteria.

First generation offshore facility risks are presented the reduced levels of risk associated with more recent designs are identified, and the changing pattern of risk brought about by developing offshore technology reduced manning, increased legislation and other pertinent factors is reviewed.

THE PAST

History is littered with examples of major risk-based judgments, many of which with the wisdom of hindsight allied with increased levels of knowledgeappear rather inappropriate now.

The once black art of formal or quantified risk assessment (estimating risk from hazardous activities and making rational evaluation of possible risk reduction measures) is finding its place in the decision-making process over a wide spectrum of the industrial sector. Over a period of time increased levels of confidence have developed in the techniques and practice has been gained in the interpretation and use of results.

The recognition process has not been straightforward however and there remains a distinct level of skepticism on QRA, especially in areas of the upstream oil and gas producing industry. At a fairly recent event, one oil company representative stated, "I see QRA as very much along the lines of what used to happen in the medieval church - at that time many learned people devoted themselves to projecting how many angels could stand on the head of a pin"!.

Although this may be regarded as somewhat of a parochial and indeed sartorial viewpoint, the process of risk assessment is still viewed in some quarters as being a rather academic approach and this is understandable to a degree.

THE PRESENT

The majority of companies have established a policy on safety and the environment which generally states that risk assessment will be undertaken as needed to identify, characterize, and safely manage present and future potential hazards of products and operations.

Under this mandate to manage risk, lies the implication that this will involve a degree of assessment and quantification.

In the UK, the aspect of risk quantification is further strengthened within context of Lord Cullen's report on he Piper Alpha disaster1and the subsequently enacted Offshore Safety Case legislation2

The term "risk" in this respect is taken to mean the risk of loss of life, normally stated as either the fractional number of fatalities per year, or as the number of years between fatalities - in other contexts, risk may relate to the risk to capital investment, risk of lost production, risk to the environment and subsequent liability, or indeed a range of other parameters.