IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i7p1908-d526938.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Assessment and Management Workflow—An Example of the Southwest Regional Partnership

Author

Listed:
  • Si-Yong Lee

    (Schlumberger, Denver, CO 80202, USA)

  • Ken Hnottavange-Telleen

    (GHG Underground, Arrowsic, ME 04530, USA)

  • Wei Jia

    (Energy & Geoscience Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
    Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA)

  • Ting Xiao

    (Energy & Geoscience Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
    Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA)

  • Hari Viswanathan

    (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA)

  • Shaoping Chu

    (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA)

  • Zhenxue Dai

    (College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130026, China)

  • Feng Pan

    (Utah Division of Water Resources, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, USA)

  • Brian McPherson

    (Energy & Geoscience Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
    Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA)

  • Robert Balch

    (New Mexico Tech, Socorro, NM 87801, USA)

Abstract

This paper summarizes the risk assessment and management workflow developed and applied to the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) Phase III Demonstration Project. The risk assessment and management workflow consists of six primary tasks, including management planning, identification, qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis, response planning, and monitoring. Within the workflow, the SWP assembled and iteratively updated a risk registry that identifies risks for all major activities of the project. Risk elements were ranked with respect to the potential impact to the project and the likelihood of occurrence. Both qualitative and quantitative risk analyses were performed. To graphically depict the interactions among risk elements and help building risk scenarios, process influence diagrams were used to represent the interactions. The SWP employed quantitative methods of risk analysis including Response Surface Method (RSM), Polynomial Chaos Expansion (PCE), and the National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) toolset. The SWP also developed risk response planning and performed risk control and monitoring to prevent the risks from affecting the project and ensure the effectiveness of risk management. As part of risk control and monitoring, existing and new risks have been tracked and the response plan was subsequently evaluated. Findings and lessons learned from the SWP’s risk assessment and management efforts will provide valuable information for other commercial geological CO 2 storage projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Si-Yong Lee & Ken Hnottavange-Telleen & Wei Jia & Ting Xiao & Hari Viswanathan & Shaoping Chu & Zhenxue Dai & Feng Pan & Brian McPherson & Robert Balch, 2021. "Risk Assessment and Management Workflow—An Example of the Southwest Regional Partnership," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:7:p:1908-:d:526938
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/7/1908/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/7/1908/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niall Mac Dowell & Paul S. Fennell & Nilay Shah & Geoffrey C. Maitland, 2017. "The role of CO2 capture and utilization in mitigating climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(4), pages 243-249, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Si-Yong Lee & Farid Reza Mohamed & Kwang-Ho Lee & Brian McPherson & Robert Balch & Sangcheol Yoon, 2023. "Probabilistic Evaluation of Geomechanical Risks in CO 2 Storage: An Exploration of Caprock Integrity Metrics Using a Multilaminate Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-32, October.
    2. Xiao, Ting & Chen, Ting & Ma, Zhiwei & Tian, Hailong & Meguerdijian, Saro & Chen, Bailian & Pawar, Rajesh & Huang, Lianjie & Xu, Tianfu & Cather, Martha & McPherson, Brian, 2024. "A review of risk and uncertainty assessment for geologic carbon storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PB).
    3. William Ampomah & Brian McPherson & Robert Balch & Reid Grigg & Martha Cather, 2022. "Forecasting CO 2 Sequestration with Enhanced Oil Recovery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-7, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mauricio Marrone & Martina K Linnenluecke, 2020. "Interdisciplinary Research Maps: A new technique for visualizing research topics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Takeshi Tsuji & Masao Sorai & Masashige Shiga & Shigenori Fujikawa & Toyoki Kunitake, 2021. "Geological storage of CO2–N2–O2 mixtures produced by membrane‐based direct air capture (DAC)," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 11(4), pages 610-618, August.
    3. Iva Ridjan Skov & Noémi Schneider & Gerald Schweiger & Josef-Peter Schöggl & Alfred Posch, 2021. "Power-to-X in Denmark: An Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    4. P. A. Turner & C. B. Field & D. B. Lobell & D. L. Sanchez & K. J. Mach, 2018. "Unprecedented rates of land-use transformation in modelled climate change mitigation pathways," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(5), pages 240-245, May.
    5. Zhang, Yanfang & Gao, Qi & Wei, Jinpeng & Shi, Xunpeng & Zhou, Dequn, 2023. "Can China's energy-consumption permit trading scheme achieve the “Porter” effect? Evidence from an estimated DSGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. Turaj S. Faran & Lennart Olsson, 2018. "Geoengineering: neither economical, nor ethical—a risk–reward nexus analysis of carbon dioxide removal," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 63-77, February.
    7. Wang, Peng-Tao & Wei, Yi-Ming & Yang, Bo & Li, Jia-Quan & Kang, Jia-Ning & Liu, Lan-Cui & Yu, Bi-Ying & Hou, Yun-Bing & Zhang, Xian, 2020. "Carbon capture and storage in China’s power sector: Optimal planning under the 2 °C constraint," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    8. Chang, Yuan & Gao, Siqi & Ma, Qian & Wei, Ying & Li, Guoping, 2024. "Techno-economic analysis of carbon capture and utilization technologies and implications for China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    9. Xinyi Sun & Xiaowei Mu & Wei Zheng & Lei Wang & Sixie Yang & Chuanchao Sheng & Hui Pan & Wei Li & Cheng-Hui Li & Ping He & Haoshen Zhou, 2023. "Binuclear Cu complex catalysis enabling Li–CO2 battery with a high discharge voltage above 3.0 V," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    10. Andrew William Ruttinger & Miyuru Kannangara & Jalil Shadbahr & Phil De Luna & Farid Bensebaa, 2021. "How CO 2 -to-Diesel Technology Could Help Reach Net-Zero Emissions Targets: A Canadian Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Chi Zhou & Chaochao Lv & Teng Miao & Xufa Ma & Chengxing Xia, 2023. "Interactive Effects of Rising Temperature, Elevated CO 2 and Herbivory on the Growth and Stoichiometry of a Submerged Macrophyte Vallisneria natans," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Koytsoumpa, E.I. & Magiri – Skouloudi, D. & Karellas, S. & Kakaras, E., 2021. "Bioenergy with carbon capture and utilization: A review on the potential deployment towards a European circular bioeconomy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    13. Cheng Cao & Hejuan Liu & Zhengmeng Hou & Faisal Mehmood & Jianxing Liao & Wentao Feng, 2020. "A Review of CO 2 Storage in View of Safety and Cost-Effectiveness," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-45, January.
    14. Quarton, Christopher J. & Samsatli, Sheila, 2020. "The value of hydrogen and carbon capture, storage and utilisation in decarbonising energy: Insights from integrated value chain optimisation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    15. Asadi, Javad & Kazempoor, Pejman, 2024. "Economic and operational assessment of solar-assisted hybrid carbon capture system for combined cycle power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    16. Zhang, Pan & Tian, XiangFeng & Fu, Dong, 2018. "CO2 removal in tray tower by using AAILs activated MDEA aqueous solution," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1122-1132.
    17. Layritz, Lucia S. & Dolganova, Iulia & Finkbeiner, Matthias & Luderer, Gunnar & Penteado, Alberto T. & Ueckerdt, Falko & Repke, Jens-Uwe, 2021. "The potential of direct steam cracker electrification and carbon capture & utilization via oxidative coupling of methane as decarbonization strategies for ethylene production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    18. Fan, Jing-Li & Li, Zezheng & Ding, Zixia & Li, Kai & Zhang, Xian, 2023. "Investment decisions on carbon capture utilization and storage retrofit of Chinese coal-fired power plants based on real option and source-sink matching models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. Lamberts-Van Assche, Hanne & Lavrutich, Maria & Compernolle, Tine & Thomassen, Gwenny & Thijssen, Jacco J.J. & Kort, Peter M., 2023. "CO2 storage or utilization? A real options analysis under market and technological uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Antenucci, Andrea & Sansavini, Giovanni, 2019. "Extensive CO2 recycling in power systems via Power-to-Gas and network storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 33-43.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:7:p:1908-:d:526938. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.