Title
The influence of risk mitigation measures on the risks, costs and routing of CO 2pipelines
Author
Knoope, M.M.J.
Raben, I.M.E.
Ramírez, A.
Spruijt, M.P.N.
Faaij, A.P.C.
Publication year
2014
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze whether, and if so, in what way risks would influence the design,costs and routing of CO2pipelines. This article assesses locational and societal risks of CO2pipelinetransport and analyses whether rerouting or implementing additional risk mitigation measures is themost cost-effective option. The models EFFECTS and RISKCURVES are used to estimate the dispersion andrisk, respectively. The pipeline routes are optimized by using the least cost path function in ArcGIS.This article evaluates three case studies in the Netherlands. The results show that pipelines transportingdense phase CO2(8–17 MPa) with a minimal amount of risk mitigation measures already meet the 10−6locational risk required in the Netherlands. 10−6locational risks of 135 m are calculated for intermediatepumping stations, handling 450 kg CO2/s (about 14 Mt CO2/year). In all the cases, pumping stations couldbe located along the pipeline route without any problem.For the cases studied transporting gaseous CO2(1.5–3 MPa) leads to larger 10−6locational risk distancesthan transporting dense phase CO2. This is caused by the large momentum behind a dense phase CO2release, leading to smaller but higher jet and to a higher mixing rate with the surrounding air than for agaseous CO2release.Based on our analysis, it can be concluded that dense phase CO2transport is safe if it is well organized.The risks are manageable and widely accepted under current legislation. In addition, risk mitigationmeasures, like marker tape and increased surveillance, are available which reduce the risk significantlyand increase the costs only slightly. Pipeline routing for gaseous CO2transport appears more challengingin densely populated areas, because larger safety zones are attached to it.
Subject
Earth & Environment
UES - Urban Environment & Safety
ELSS - Earth, Life and Social Sciences
Geological Survey Netherlands
Energy
Energy / Geological Survey Netherlands
CO2 transport
Risk mitigation measures
Quantitative risk assessment
Carbon dioxide pipelines
Routing
To reference this document use:
http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:dee74167-01ae-4f25-a45d-2a5cfbed29d3
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2014.08.001
TNO identifier
515182
Source
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 29, 104-124
Document type
article