white rose oilfield development application - Husky Energy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Additional contingency plan materials will address:• oil spill response and monitoring strategies, equipment requirements and locations, and personnel;• collision avoidance procedures;• ice management; and• authority and chain of command responsibilities.7.2 Concept Safety AnalysisHusky Oil has conducted a concept safety analysis of the major personnel safety and environmentalhazards and risks associated with the two viable options being considered for developing the White Roseoilfield. The options are:• a steel FPSO facility (with integral storage); and• semi-submersible facility with a separate floating storage unit.The analysis assesses the preliminary basic design concepts, layout and intended operations with respectto safety and environmental hazards and risks. The results of this analysis have been incorporated intothe preliminary safety plan.The quantitative estimates of risk to personnel and the environment are based on event tree modelling ofmajor hazards associated with each option. Where quantitative assessment methods are not appropriate,qualitative methods are used. The quantitative estimates of risk are then compared to Husky Oil’s targetlevels of safety to determine if these targets are being met.The Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Installations Regulations requires target levels of safety to beidentified for offshore projects to ensure that the risks from major hazards are acceptable. Husky Oil’starget levels of safety are in keeping with other offshore operations and contain both risk-based andimpairment-based criteria. Risk-based criteria include individual, group and environmental risk.Impairment-based criteria outline criteria for the facility’s safety functions, including the facility’sprimary structure, temporary safe refuge, escape routes and evacuation systems. Husky Oil mustsubsequently demonstrate as part of the design process that the risks to personnel and the environmentare as low as reasonably practicable by implementing risk reduction measures, if required. Husky Oil iscommitted to following this process.Risk to individuals is a primary criterion that must be met in the final design of the facility. It ismeasured by the fatality rate per individual per year. The risk to the environment is expressed in termsof oil spillage associated with various accident scenarios and the likelihood of these scenarios occurring.Impairment-based criteria are used during the concept and design phase to provide guidance duringdesign, as well as to identify the potential for major accidents.White Rose DA Project Summary • January 2001 Page 106
7.2.1 Major Hazard IdentificationThe major hazards considered in the analysis are:• process and non-process loss of hydrocarbon containment (fire and explosion);• subsea process loss of hydrocarbon containment (fire and explosion);• blowout;• ship impact;• iceberg impact;• dropped objects;• helicopter operations;• fishing gear impact;• structural failure;• mooring failure; and• seismic event.The main fire and explosion hazards on the White Rose facility are associated with pressurizedhydrocarbons within the process train and riser system. However, lesser fire hazards exist in the form ofnon-process hydrocarbons (such as diesel oil used to fuel various utilities) and non-hydrocarbon fires(such as fires in electrical equipment or the accommodation module).7.2.2 Safety Analysis ResultsFinal demonstration that risks to personnel and the environment on the selected production option are aslow as reasonably practicable and meet the target levels of safety can only be done at the detailed designphase, at which point various risk reduction options should be considered and studies performed todetermine which reduction options are required. Cost-effective risk reduction options should only beimplemented in the final design provided that risks to personnel and the environment are shown to meetthe target levels of safety and to be as low as reasonably practicable. Many of the assumptions used inthe concept safety analysis will be reviewed and refined during the detailed design phase.7.2.2.1 Individual RiskBoth the FPSO and semi-submersible options have an average individual risk that falls well below thetarget safety levels specified for the White Rose project.7.2.2.2 Group RiskSpecific group risk has not been quantified at this stage due to the number of unknowns associated withthe design. However, based on the low level of individual risk being predicted for the development, it ishighly likely that the group risk criteria will be met at the detailed design stage.White Rose DA Project Summary • January 2001 Page 107
Page 1 and 2:
WHITE ROSE OILFIELDDEVELOPMENT APPL
Page 3:
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage No.1 INTRODUC
Page 6 and 7:
7.1.5 Command Structure............
Page 8 and 9:
Figure 1.1-1White Rose LocationWhit
Page 10 and 11:
There will be three to four drill c
Page 12 and 13:
1.2.1 Exploration HistoryThe first
Page 14 and 15:
Figure 1.2-2Depletion Schedule for
Page 16 and 17:
Figure 1.2-3United States Import Re
Page 18 and 19:
Figure 1.2-4Selected Natural Gas Pr
Page 20 and 21:
Figure 1.2-6Gas Infrastructure Inve
Page 22 and 23:
Figure 1.2-7Model for Gas Developme
Page 24 and 25:
These remaining five options (steel
Page 26 and 27:
Figure 1.3-2Relative Technical Risk
Page 28 and 29:
In addition, the steel FPSO will:
Page 30 and 31:
This system was evaluated as fourth
Page 32 and 33:
Figure 1.4-1Project Development Sch
Page 34 and 35:
2.1 Regulatory RequirementsThe star
Page 36 and 37:
• project summary booklet, which
Page 38 and 39:
The first series of open houses fea
Page 40 and 41:
2.6 Media BriefingsHusky Oil repres
Page 42 and 43:
3 CANADA-NEWFOUNDLAND BENEFITS PLAN
Page 44 and 45:
3.1.2 Canada-Newfoundland Benefit C
Page 46 and 47:
The subsea contract package will co
Page 48 and 49:
3.1.3.6 Monitoring and ReportingHus
Page 50 and 51:
• The operations/production phase
Page 52 and 53:
• Husky Oil’s preferred develop
Page 54 and 55:
4.1.2 White Rose Structural Geology
Page 56 and 57:
4.2.1.3 West Avalon PoolOnly one we
Page 58 and 59:
Reducing oil handling capacities ha
Page 60 and 61:
4.2.2.7 Reservoir ManagementReservo
Page 62 and 63: Side scan sonar images of the White
Page 64 and 65: Generators will be sized to meet th
Page 66 and 67: 4.5.3 Marine Support VesselsHusky O
Page 68 and 69: The offshore organization will cons
Page 70 and 71: Husky Oil promotes safe operations
Page 72 and 73: Table 4.8-3Capital and Operating Co
Page 74 and 75: 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTThe
Page 76 and 77: The principal origins of the iceber
Page 78 and 79: white hake and winter flounder. The
Page 80 and 81: Produced water, although treated pr
Page 82 and 83: opportunity for interaction with bi
Page 84 and 85: The effects of project development,
Page 86 and 87: Additional mitigation measures for
Page 88 and 89: In summary, after mitigation measur
Page 90 and 91: 6 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENTTh
Page 92 and 93: 6.1.2.1 EducationIn recent years, t
Page 94 and 95: 6.1.3.1 HousingThe number of dwelli
Page 96 and 97: Figure 6.1-1NAFO Divisions on the G
Page 98: During the development phase of the
Page 101 and 102: 6.2.3 Community Physical Infrastruc
Page 103 and 104: damage or foul gear. Any damage to
Page 105 and 106: have medical programs for their ope
Page 107 and 108: 7 SAFETY PLAN AND CONCEPT SAFETY AN
Page 109 and 110: Hazard prevention, detection and mi
Page 111: 7.1.5 Command StructureThe command
Page 115 and 116: 8 REFERENCESJWEL (Jacques Whitford
Page 117 and 118: Adams Pearson Associates Limited. 1
Page 119 and 120: Hycal Energy Research Laboratories
Page 121: Schlumberger. 2000. Husky Oil et al
show all

white rose oilfield development application - Husky Energy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?