An Industry Perception and Assessment of Oil and Gas Pipeline Third-Party Interference

Year 2023, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 17 - 32, 30.03.2023

Rowlad Adewumi , Okechukwu Agbasi , Sunday Etuk , Ubong Robert

Abstract

The world population is growing at an alarming rate and human needs for technology and easy life styles drive dependency on oil energy into excessive demand, resulting in more pipelines, pipelines that are often subjected to various form of abuse. The aim of this research is to investigate the perception of oil and gas pipeline third-party interference from government agencies, professional bodies, academia, pipeline service providers and private companies’ representatives. This paper attempts to identify types of third-party interference; the severity of interference; various preventive and detection tools; and examination of how the pipeline industry manage interference. The study population consisted of members of the pipeline industry, including health and safety engineers, pipeline engineers, pipeline service providers, and pipeline project engineers. The methodology for this study was formed by qualitative data, via open-ended questionnaire. The study shows that application of proper standard and procedures; greater awareness campaign to all stakeholders; and more Research and Development are the best procedures in preventing pipeline third-party interference. In organisational procedures to preventing third-party interference during and after pipeline installation, surveillance frequency as determined from risk assessment is the most effective. The study revealed that right-of-way encroachment is the most prevalent activities organisations presently monitor to avoid third-party pipeline damage. The result of the study also showed that communications with all stakeholders is more effective in preventing intentional pipeline interference, and government’s social responsibility to communities as the major factor influencing occurrence of intentional pipeline damage; and land use and human activities as the most ranked factor for consideration in mitigating intentional third-party damage. The study also outlined what governments and the industry can and should do to help better manage risk and effectively reduce the risk of pipeline third-party damage.

Keywords

Pipeline, Third-party Interference, Content Analysis, Country comparison

References

• Andersen T, Misund A, (1983) 'Pipeline Reliability - an Investigation of Pipeline Failure Characteristics and Analysis of Pipeline Failure Rates for Submarine and Cross-Country Pipelines', Journal of Petroleum Technology, 35 (4), 709-717. DOI: 10.2118/10467-pa
• Bennett RR, (1991) Routine activities: A cross-national assessment of a criminological perspective', Social Forces, 70, 147. https://www.doi.org/10.1093/SF/70.1.147
• Blau JR, Blau PM, (1982) 'The cost of inequality: Metropolitan structure and violent crime', American Sociological Review, 47, 114-129. http://www.sciepub.com/reference/61469
• Brantingham PJ, Brantingham, P. L. (1981) Environmental Criminology. London: Sage: London. https://samples.jbpub.com/9780763755751/55751_ch03_097_148.pdf
• Coakes SJ, (2005) SPSS: Analysis without anguish: Version 12.0 for Windows. Wiley. https://www.wiley.com › en-cx
• CONCAWE. (2007) 'Performance of European crosscountry oil pipelines- Statistical summary of reported spillages in 2005 and since 1971', CONCAWE Oil Pipelines Management Group’s Special Task Force on oil pipeline spillages. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294716671_Performance_of_European_crosscountry_oil_pipelines_-_Statistical_summary_of_reported_spillages_in_2010_and_since_1971
• Daco I, Dezobry J, Laurens F, Torun S, Zara M, (2000) Pactole: Un outil d'aide a la conception de canalisations resistant aux agressions de tiers. Nice, https://rowlandadewumi.com/2021/06/an-industry-perception-and-assessment-of-oil-and-gas-pipeline-third-party-interferencetpi/
• Day NB (1998) 'Pipeline Route Selection for Rural and Cross-Country Pipelines. American Society of Civil Engineers', 46 https://doi.org/10.1604/9780784403457
• EIA. (2007) 'Energy in Brief'. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energy_in_brief/index.cfm Gallacher A, (1996) 'Aerial pipeline surveillance in the information age', Pipes and Pipelines International, 41(1), 22-24.
• Hayes J, McDermott V, (2018) 'Working in the crowded underground: One call services as a boundary object', Safety Science, 110, 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.019
• Hopkins P, (1993) 'Pipeline Monitoring and Inspection', IEA International Conference on Natural Gas Technologies. Kyoto, Japan, 3 November1993. Pipeline Monitoring and Inspection: IEA International Conference on Natural Gas Technologies.
• Hopkins P, Fletcher R, Palmer-Jones, R, (1999) 'A method for the monitoring and management of pipeline risk, – A Simple Pipeline Risk Audit ', 3rd Annual Conference on ‘Advances in Pipeline Technologies & Rehabilitation. Abu Dhabi, November 1999. A method for the monitoring and management of pipeline risk, – A Simple Pipeline Risk Audit.
• Hovey DJ, Farmer EJ, (1993) 'Pipeline accident, failure probability determined from historical data', Oil and Gas Journal, 91(2), pp. 104-107.
• Jaffrey D, Lubbers J, King B, Tapanes EE, (2002) 'An Effective and Proven Technique for Continuous Detection and Location of Third Party Interference Along Pipelines', 4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts a and B. https://doi.org/10.1115/ipc2002-27046
• Jager E, Kuik R, Stallenberg G, Zanting J, (2002) 'The Influence of Land Use and Depth of Cover on the Failure Rate of Gas Transmission Pipelines', 4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts a and B. https://doi.org/10.1115/ipc2002-27158
• Jing XF, Cai ZY, Liu KH, (2013) 'Numerical Simulation of Response of Explosion Ground Shock to Buried Gas Pipeline', Applied Mechanics and Materials, 448–453, 3970–3974. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.448-453.3970
• Kent RA, (2001) Data construction and data analysis for survey research. Palgrave MacMillan.
• Kraidi L, Shah R, Matipa W, Borthwick F, (2021) 'An investigation of mitigating the safety and security risks allied with oil and gas pipeline projects', Journal of Pipeline Science and Engineering, 1(3), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpse.2021.08.002
• Lu H, Li J, (2005) 'Cause and prevention of pipeline third-party interference', Cause and prevention of pipeline third-party interference, 25, (12), 118-120.
• Mather J, Blackmore C, Petrie A, Treves C (2001) An Assessment of Measures in Use for Gas Pipelines to Mitigate Against Damage Caused by Third Party Activity. HMSO (Report Number: CRR 372/2001).
• Muhlbauer WK (2004) Pipeline Risk Management Manual: Ideas, Techniques, and Resources. Gulf Professional Publishing. https://www.elsevier.com/books/pipeline-risk-management-manual/muhlbauer/978-0-7506-7579-6
• Nwankwo C, Ezeobi O, (2008) 'Nigeria lost N150bn to pipeline vandals in eight years', The Punch, Nigeria, Palmer-Jones R, Hopkins P, Fraser A, Dezobry J, Van Merrienboer H, (2004) Pipe Line and Gas Industry - Pipes and Pipelines International Pipeline Pigging Conference Proceedings. Houston, TX.,
• Papadakis GA, (2005) 'Overview of pipelines in Europe - advantages and disadvantages.' Workshop on the Prevention of Water Pollution due to Pipeline Accidents. Berlin, Germany, 8 and 9 June 2005 Overview of pipelines in Europe - advantages and disadvantages.: UN/ECE, pp.
• Parfomak PW, (2008) Pipeline Safety and Security: Federal Programs. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33347.pdf.
• Potter JC, (1985) 'Effects of vehicles on buried, high-pressure pipe', Journal of Transportation Engineering, 111, (3), pp. 224-236.
• Popescu C, Gabor MR, (2021). 'Quantitative Analysis Regarding the Incidents to the Pipelines of Petroleum Products for an Efficient Use of the Specific Transportation Infrastructure', Processes, 9(9), 1535. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9091535
• Re G, Colombo A, (2004) 'TPI Detection on pipeline route by using existing fibre optic cables', International Gas Research Conference Proceedings. Vancouver, BC, TPI Detection on pipeline route by using existing fibre optic cables.
• Riquetti PV, Fletcher JI, Minty CD, (1996) Proceedings of the International Pipeline Conference, IPC. Calgary, Can:ASME.
• Sljivic S, (1995) 'Pipeline safety management and the prevention of third-party interference', Pipes and Pipelines International, 40(6), 14-16.
• Taylor ME, Lawrence GJL, Carder DR, (1984) Behaviour of a shallow buried pipeline under impact and abnormal loads. (03051293 (ISSN)).
• Thomas SJ, (2004) Using web and paper questionnaires for data-based decision making: From design to interpretation of the results. Corwin Press.
• TRB. (2004) 'Transmission pipelines and land use: A risk-Informed approach', Transportation Research Board - Special Report, 281. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/11046/transmission-pipelines-and-land-use-a-risk-informed-approach-special
• UKOPA. (2002) Pipeline Product Loss Incidents: 2002 2nd report. UKOPA, United Kingdom On-shore Pipeline Operations Association
• UKOPA. (2008) Pipeline Product Loss Incidents (1962 - 2006). United Kingdom Onshore Pipelines Operators Association
• Williamson J, Daniels C, (2008) Third party Major Accident Hazard Pipeline (MAHP) infringement. . Health and Safety Laboratory for the Health and Safety Executive (Research Report RR640. ).
• Yao A, Xu T, Zeng X, Jiang H, (2015). 'Numerical Analyses of the Stress and Limiting Load for Buried Gas Pipelines under Excavation Machine Impact', Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ps.1949-1204.0000137.