Evaluating risk management and

reliability for safe, continuous and

efficient LNG operations
LNG TECH Global Summit 2013
Harri Kytmaa, Ph.D., P.E. | Corporate Vice President | hkytomaa@exponent.com
Trey Morrison, Ph.D., P.E. | Principal Engineer | tmorrison@exponent.com

Who We Are
Exponent is a multi-disciplinary consulting firm
dedicated to addressing important science,
engineering and regulatory issues
for our clients

Derby and
Harrogate

Dsseldorf
Basel

20 US Offices
Shanghai,
Hong Kong

LNG Safety Fundamentals

LNG Hazards
Onsite personnel
Asphyxiation
Cryogenic contact
Fire & explosion

Adjacent populations
Vapor cloud ignition
Pressurized jets
Liquid spills
Pool evaporation
Pool fire

Refrigerant Hazards
Refrigerant Species

Hazards

Propane

Same as LNG, plus

Ethane

Vapor cloud explosion

Butane

Vapor cloud detonation

Ethylene

Isopentane
Mixtures

LNG Accident History

Approximately 200 peakshaving and LNG
storage facilities worldwide (113 in the U.S.)
13 serious accidents
Cleveland, Ohio, 1944
Storage tank failure caused leak. Subsequent fire killed 128
people. Tank material was inadequate for cryogenic storage

Skikda, Algeria, 2004

Ingestion of hydrocarbon spill by forced draft boiler fan
resulting in boiler explosion

Source: Univ. of Houston Institute for Energy, Law and Enterprise (IELE) (2003), LNG Safety and Security

East Ohio Gas Company

Cleveland, Ohio, USA

Cleveland Accident October 20, 1944

Source: Cleveland Press Collection, The Cleveland Memory Project

Skikda LNG Algeria

Town of Skikda

Power
Plant

Train
40

Train
30

Incident at Skikda LNG, 19 Jan 2004

Types of Releases
Liquid spill scenarios
Pipe ruptures where liquid spills onto
the ground.
The liquid conveyance in trenches
and troughs, and into
impoundments.

Pressurized jetting and

flashing release scenarios:
Little or no liquid from the fluid jet
reaches the ground.

US DOE LNG Spill Test

Jetting and Flashing Release

Source: Cleaver P, Johnson M, Ho B. A summary of Some Experimental Data on LNG Safety Journal of
Hazardous Materials, Volume 140, Issue 3, pgs. 429-438, 2007

Dense Cloud Spreading

Incident in Seward, Illinois, USA, 2007, anhydrous ammonia

Analyzing Risk

Objectives
Ensure adequate measures to protect:
People
Environment
Assets

from undesirable consequences of activities

undertaken at the facility
Avoid occurrences
Mitigate consequences
ALARP and tolerability

Risk Analysis

Risk Evaluation

Risk Treatment

Adapted from ISO 31000:2009, Risk Management Principles and Guidelines

Monitor and Review

Planning

Risk Assessment

Communication and Consultation

Technical Risk Management Model

Risk Analysis

Risk Evaluation

Risk Treatment

Adapted from ISO 31000:2009, Risk Management Principles and Guidelines

Monitor and Review

Planning

Risk Assessment

Communication and Consultation

Technical Risk
Model
Risk Management
Analysis

Risk Analysis
Frequency Analysis

Identify
Initiating
Events

Hazard
Identification

Estimate
Likelihoods

Consequence Analysis

Model the
Outcomes

Estimate
Impacts

Risk
Evaluation

Risk Evaluation
Authority having jurisdiction, regulatory criteria
Prescriptive versus performance-based
U.S. Prescriptive, 49CFR193, NFPA 59A
Prescribed scenarios, flammable vapor cloud must
remain within facility property boundary

International performance-based

EN-1473
ISO TC 67 Working Group
Hazard identification, risk assessment
Tolerable risk guidelines

Key Elements of Risk Analysis

Comprehensive identification of scenarios

Accurate modeling of releases
Evaluating consequences
Suitable criteria for risk tolerance

Case Study: Passive

Mitigation

Example LNG Facility

Passive Mitigation Systems

Examples:
Vapor barriers
Turbulence generators
Pipe in Pipe

Modeling Vapor Barriers

Analytically
challenging
Site/system
uniqueness
Computational
Fluid Dynamics
(CFD)

Pressurized Release
Vapor Cloud Without Barriers

Wind Direction

Vapor Cloud With Vapor Fences

Wind Direction

Effect of Turbulence Generators

Momentum Barrier

Turbulence Generators

Open Shrouds

Pipe-in-Pipe Technology
Carrier
Pipe

Vacuum /
Insulation
System
Fiber Optic
Leak
Detection
Inner
Pipe

Case Study: LNG Bunkering

& Fueling

LNG Bunkering
Onshore LNG terminal to ship
Truck tanker to ship
Ship to ship

Potential Risks Associated with

Bunkering
Production

Truck Logistics

Truck to Ship

Marine Loading

Ship to Ship

Storage

LNG Bunkering Ship to Ship

Areas of Concern:

Large T of tubing, components, couplings, etc.

Control of ignition sources
Containment of spilled liquids
Dense gas dispersion
Personnel

Spills on land
Spills on water
Between vessels
First LNG Ship-to-Ship Transfer, 2007
http://www.worldoil.com/April-2007-Breakingthe-offshore-LNG-stalemate.html

Hull protection
Spill mitigation
Personnel protection
Passengers/public?

Truck Logistics
Distributed small LNG facilities

Valley Metro/City of Tempe/City of Scottsdale LNG Fueling Station, installed in August 2007
Northstar, Inc. Project History, May 19, 2011

LNG Bunkering Transport Incident

LNG Road Tanker incident, 2012, USA
No injuries, 7 miles of major interstate shutdown
for several hours

Chinese Road Tanker Incident

Case Study: FLNG

Shell Prelude

How do the Risks Compare?

Risk analysis process is typical
No adjacent public populations
Allisions & collisions with LNG carrier and other
vessels
Onboard congestion and confinement
Weather vaning: difficulty in protecting personnel
Effects and needs for passive mitigation

HAZID - Personnel Operations

In Summary

New US LNG liquefaction capacity

FLNG
LNG as a fuel
New/Developing LNG Risk Profiles
Differing regulatory environments and
approaches to the management of risk
Alternative mitigation techniques

Thank You
Questions?
Harri Kytmaa, Ph.D., P.E. | +1 508-652-8519 | hkytomaa@exponent.com
Trey Morrison, Ph.D., P.E. | +1 630-658-7508 | tmorrison@exponent.com