English Polski
Akademia Morska w Szczecinie

DSpace Home

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record

Author Vidmar, Peter
Affiliation University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Maritime Studies and Transport Pot Pomorščakov 4, 6320 Portorož, Slovenia
E-mail peter.vidmar@fpp.uni-lj.si
Author Perkovic, Marko
E-mail Marko.Perkovic@fpp.edu
ISSN printed 1733-8670
URI http://repository.am.szczecin.pl/handle/123456789/2480
Abstract The paper presents the overall risk management state for the crude oil tanker fleet, evidenced by EMSA and other international marine organisations. Based on historical statistical data related to fleet size, accident reports, amount of oil spilled on the sea and the economic value of the crude oil transport business, the risk acceptance criteria are evaluated. The Formal Safety Assessment is further used for a systematic assessment of risk, where potential hazards are analysed with structured methods (HAZID) and represented in event trees. The paper studies three risks: PLL (potential loss of lives), PLC (potential loss of containment) and PLP (potential loss of property). A general approach is presented and discussed with a particular focus on the evolution of risk acceptance in recent decades and evaluations of risk F-N curves for different tanker sizes.
Pages 44–53
Publisher Scientific Journals Maritime University of Szczecin, Zeszyty Naukowe Akademia Morska w Szczecinie
Keywords risk assessment
Keywords safety
Keywords maritime safety
Keywords oil pollution
Keywords oil tanker
Keywords risk criteria
Title Safety trends in the oil tanker industry
References
  1. Bichard, E.M. (1989) Health & Safety Executive, “Risk criteria for land-use planning in the vicinity of major industrial hazards” (Book Review) Town Planning Review 61(1), pp. 95. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.61.1.d2810470h5241061
  2. Bottelberghs, P.H. (2000) Risk analysis and safety policy developments in the Netherlands. Journal of Hazardous Materials 71, 1–3, pp. 59–84.
  3. Burgherr, P. (2007) In-depth analysis of accidental oil spills from tankers in the context of global spill trends from all sources. Journal of Hazardous Materials 140, pp. 245– 256.
  4. Cornwell, J.B. & Meyer, M.M. (1997) Risk Acceptance Criteria or “How Safe in Safe Enough”. Risk Control Seminar, Venezuela.
  5. Crénès, M., Hafner, M. & Criqui, P. (2017) Global Energy Scenarios to 2040, Understanding our Energy Future. [Online] Available from: https://www.enerdata.net/publications/ reports-presentations/world-energy-forecasting-scenarios- 2017-edition.html [Accessed: May 15, 2018]
  6. Eliopoulou, E. & Papanikolaou, A. (2007) Casualty analysis of large tankers. Journal of Marine Science and Technology 12, 4, pp. 240–250.
  7. EMSA (2016a) Annual Overview of Marine Casualities and Incidents. European Maritime Safety Agency
  8. EMSA (2016b) Maritime Accident Review (2007–2016). European Maritime Safety Agency
  9. EMSA (2016b) Maritime Accident Review (2007–2016). European Maritime Safety Agency
  10. Etkin, D. (2015) Low probability high consequence events and risk of oil spills. [Online] Available from: http: //vancouver.ca/images/web/pipeline/David-Etkin-estimating- oil-spill-risk.pdf [Accessed: May 16, 2018]
  11. Goerlandt, F. & Montewka, J. (2015) A framework for risk analysis of maritime transportation systems: A case study for oil spill from tankers in a ship–ship collision. Safety Science 76, pp. 42–66.
  12. Gucma, L. (2007) Evaluation of oil spills in the Baltic Sea by means of simulation model and statistical data. International Maritime Association of Mediterranean, Balkema.
  13. IMO (2000) MSC 72/16, Formal Safety Assessment – Decision Parameters Including Risk Acceptance Criteria –Submitted by Norway. International Maritime Organization
  14. IMO (2008) MEPC 58/INF.2, Formal Safety Assessment – Crude Oil Tankers. International Maritime Organization
  15. ISL (2016) Shipping Statistics and Market Review (SSMR) (2007–2016), World Tanker Market, Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics.
  16. ITOPF (2017) Oil Tanker Spill Statistics 2016. [Online] Available from: http://www.itopf.com/fileadmin/data/Photos/ Publications/Oil_Spill_Stats_2016_low.pdf [Accessed: May 15, 2018]
  17. Lohansen, I.L. (2009) Foundations and Fallacies of Risk Acceptance Criteria, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). Department of Production and Quality Engineering, Norway.
  18. Montewka, J., Weckström, M. & Kujala, P. (2013) A probabilistic model estimating oil spill clean-up costs – A case study for the Gulf of Finland. Marine Pollution Bulletin 76, pp. 61–71.
  19. OGP (2010) Water transport accident statistics. International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, Report No. 434-10, UK.
  20. Skjong, R., Vanem, E. & Endresen, Ø. (2005) SAFEDOR, Design, Operation and Regulation for Safety. Integrated Project Report, DNV
  21. Spoure, J. (2014) Harmonised Risk Acceptance Criteria for Transport of Dangerous Goods. DNV-GL Project Report, UK.
  22. Trbojevic, V.M. (2005) Risk criteria in EU. ESREL’05, Poland, pp. 27–30.
  23. Tsaini, P. & Merikas, A. (2012) International Shipping and World Trade. University of Piraeus [Online] Available from: http://dione.lib.unipi.gr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/unipi/4680/ Tsaini.pdf?sequence=2 [Accessed: May 15, 2018]
  24. Vidmar, P. & Perkovič, M. (2015) Methodological approach for safety assessment of cruise ship in port. Safety Science 80, pp. 189–200.
  25. Whelan, R. (2016) Ship Owners Cut Oil Tanker Orders. [Online] Available from: https://www.wsj.com/articles/shipowners- cut-oil-tanker-orders-1462815137 [Accessed: May 15, 2018]
ISSN on-line 2392-0378
Language English
Funding No data
Figures 6
Tables 3
DOI 10.17402/284
Published 2018-06-27
Accepted 2018-05-16
Recieved 2017-10-24


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search repository

Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

RSS Feeds