IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i12p4240-d834742.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Grey-System Theory Approach to Assess the Safety of Gas-Supply Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Dawid Szpak

    (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, Rzeszow University of Technology, Al. Powstancow Warszawy 6, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak

    (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, Rzeszow University of Technology, Al. Powstancow Warszawy 6, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik

    (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, Rzeszow University of Technology, Al. Powstancow Warszawy 6, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Mohamed Eid

    (National Institute of Applied Sciences of Rouen-LMN, INSA-Rouen, 685 Avenue de l’Université-BP 08, 76801 St. Etienne du Rouvray, France)

Abstract

The continuity of gas-supply service is a major concern for all gas-supply operators. A safety review of a gas-supply system could help to mitigate the potential repercussions of supply disruptions. Disruptions occur at random due to systemic failures in gas distribution networks. Assessing the operational safety of gas distribution networks is challenging and complex, especially when operational data are limited or associated with high uncertainty. This paper focuses on gas leak incidents. Natural gas leaks disrupt the production process and endanger the ecosystem. Mechanically originated damage in pipelines is found to be the major cause of leaks, according to our investigations. This paper proposes a three-parameter risk matrix to be used in the safety analysis of gas-supply systems. This paper then raises the possibility of using grey-system theory. Grey-system theory has been used to overcome the limitations of the conventional matrix method. This choice is motivated by two facts: our data are heterogeneous with a high level of uncertainty, and some of the data are based on experts’ judgement and maintenance reports using qualitative metrics. It is underlined how GST provides insight for the decision-making process, even in the absence of complete information sets. The method developed here is advocated in the context of procedures ensuring the safety and the supply continuity of gas-supply systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Dawid Szpak & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Mohamed Eid, 2022. "A Grey-System Theory Approach to Assess the Safety of Gas-Supply Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:12:p:4240-:d:834742
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/12/4240/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/12/4240/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dawid Szpak & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak, 2019. "The Use of Grey Systems Theory to Analyze the Water Supply Systems Safety," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(12), pages 4141-4155, September.
    2. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    3. Marco Cinelli & Matteo Spada & Miłosz Kadziński & Grzegorz Miebs & Peter Burgherr, 2019. "Advancing Hazard Assessment of Energy Accidents in the Natural Gas Sector with Rough Set Theory and Decision Rules," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Mohamed Eid, 2020. "Water Network-Failure Data Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Dawid Szpak, 2020. "Method for Determining the Probability of a Lack of Water Supply to Consumers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-16, October.
    6. Marek Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik, 2019. "Analysis of the Safety of Functioning Gas Pipelines in Terms of the Occurrence of Failures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    7. Ruud van der Linden & Ryvo Octaviano & Huib Blokland & Tom Busking, 2021. "Security of Supply in Gas and Hybrid Energy Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Muhammad Rafiq & Ahsan Akbar & Saif Maqbool & Marcela Sokolová & Syed Arslan Haider & Shumaila Naz & Syed Muhammad Danish, 2022. "Corporate Risk Tolerance and Acceptability towards Sustainable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Mohamed Eid, 2021. "A Case Study in View of Developing Predictive Models for Water Supply System Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Jakub Żywiec & Krzysztof Boryczko & Dariusz Kowalski, 2021. "Analysis of the Negative Daily Temperatures Influence on the Failure Rate of the Water Supply Network," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Mohamed Eid, 2021. "Functional Safety Concept to Support Hazard Assessment and Risk Management in Water-Supply Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, February.
    4. Dawid Szpak & Krzysztof Boryczko & Jakub Żywiec & Izabela Piegdoń & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Janusz R. Rak, 2021. "Risk Assessment of Water Intakes in South-Eastern Poland in Relation to the WHO Requirements for Water Safety Plans," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik, 2023. "Water System Safety Analysis Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Gundula Glowka & Andreas Kallmünzer & Anita Zehrer, 2021. "Enterprise risk management in small and medium family enterprises: the role of family involvement and CEO tenure," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1213-1231, September.
    7. Benischke, Mirko H. & Guldiken, Orhun & Doh, Jonathan P. & Martin, Geoffrey & Zhang, Yanze, 2022. "Towards a behavioral theory of MNC response to political risk and uncertainty: The role of CEO wealth at risk," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(1).
    8. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    9. K. Karthikeyan & S. Bharath & K. Ranjith Kumar, 2012. "An Empirical Study on Investors’ Perception towards Mutual Fund Products through Banks with Reference to Tiruchirapalli City, Tamil Nadu," Vision, , vol. 16(2), pages 101-108, June.
    10. Nicola Paltrinieri & Nicolas Dechy & Ernesto Salzano & Mike Wardman & Valerio Cozzani, 2012. "Lessons Learned from Toulouse and Buncefield Disasters: From Risk Analysis Failures to the Identification of Atypical Scenarios Through a Better Knowledge Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1404-1419, August.
    11. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2012. "Community Resilience and Decision Theory Challenges for Catastrophic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1919-1934, November.
    12. Chen, Fuzhong & Hsu, Chien-Lung & Lin, Arthur J. & Li, Haifeng, 2020. "Holding risky financial assets and subjective wellbeing: Empirical evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    13. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    14. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    15. Johnson, Caroline A. & Flage, Roger & Guikema, Seth D., 2021. "Feasibility study of PRA for critical infrastructure risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    16. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.
    17. J. C. Helton & F. J. Davis, 2002. "Illustration of Sampling‐Based Methods for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 591-622, June.
    18. Michael Greenberg & Paul Lioy & Birnur Ozbas & Nancy Mantell & Sastry Isukapalli & Michael Lahr & Tayfur Altiok & Joseph Bober & Clifton Lacy & Karen Lowrie & Henry Mayer & Jennifer Rovito, 2013. "Passenger Rail Security, Planning, and Resilience: Application of Network, Plume, and Economic Simulation Models as Decision Support Tools," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 1969-1986, November.
    19. Andrés Ortega-Ballesteros & David Muñoz-Rodríguez & Alberto-Jesus Perea-Moreno, 2022. "Advances in Leakage Control and Energy Consumption Optimization in Drinking Water Distribution Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-5, July.
    20. Vadim Fetisov & Aleksey V. Shalygin & Svetlana A. Modestova & Vladimir K. Tyan & Changjin Shao, 2022. "Development of a Numerical Method for Calculating a Gas Supply System during a Period of Change in Thermal Loads," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-16, December.

    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:15:y:2022:i:12:p:4240-:d:834742. 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.