Review of Risk Analysis Studies in the Maritime LNG Sector

Abstract

This research presents a review and classification of the published work related to applied risk analysis and risk management in the maritime liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector from 2000 to 2023. The papers are categorised under two primary contexts. The first is the risk analysis theory context which represents the classification with respect to (w. r. t.) the used risk analysis method, the used risk analysis tool, and the objective of risk analysis, whereas the second is the presented case in the risk analysis context which represents the classification w. r. t. the analysed LNG ship type, the analysed operation, and the inclusion level of human error in risk analysis. The above process has revealed that the interest in this domain of research has increased significantly during the past decade. In addition, the use of dynamic risk analysis (DRA) tools, and the inclusion of human error in the risk analysis model have been observed significantly in the past five years, in particular, for modelling the risk of external LNG transfer operations. It is concluded that the inclusion of the effect of human and organisational factors (HOFs) in risk analysis, and the use of DRA methods for modelling the risk of the daily routine operations of the complex maritime LNG systems can improve the management of the operational risk of these systems.

Keywords

Maritime LNG sector / LNG hazards / Risk analysis and management / Human and organisational factors

References

[1] Abdelmalek M, Guedes Soares C. A review of failure causes and critical factors of maritime LNG leaks. Trends in maritime technology and engineering, Volume 2, 2022, London: Taylor & Francis, 173-183

[2] Abdussamie N, Daboos M, Elferjani, Shuhong C, Alaktiwi A. Risk assessment of LNG and FLNG vessels during manoeuvring in Open Sea. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science, 2018, 3(1): 56-66

[3] ABS (2004) Consequence assessment methods for incidents involving releases from liquefied natural gas carriers

[4] ABS (2020) Ammonia as marine fuel

[5] Ahn SI, Kurt RE, Turan O. The hybrid method combined STPA and SLIM to assess the reliability of the human interaction system to the emergency shutdown system of LNG ship-to-ship bunkering. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 265: 112643

[6] Alaba OR, Nwaoha TC, Okwu MO. Enabling a viable technique for the optimization of LNG carrier cargo operations. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 2016, 15(3): 242-249

[7] Alderman JA. Introduction to LNG safety. Process Safety Progress, 2005, 24: 144-151

[8] Ampah JD, Yusuf AA, Afrane S, Jin C, Liu H (2021) Reviewing two decades of cleaner alternative marine fuels: towards IMO’s decarbonization of the maritime transport sector. Journal of Cleaner Production 320 (May): 128871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128871

[9] Aneziris O, Koromila I, Nivolianitou Z. A Systematic literature review on LNG safety at ports. Safety Science, 2020, 124: 104595

[10] Animah I, Shafiee M. Application of risk analysis in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector: an overview. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2020, 63: 103980

[11] Atkinson G, Cowpe E, Halliday J, Painter D. A review of very large vapour cloud explosions: cloud formation and explosion severity. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2017, 48: 367-375

[12] Aursand E, Hammer M. Predicting triggering and consequence of delayed LNG RPT. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2018, 55: 124-133

[13] Aursand E, Odsæter LH, Skarsvåg H, Reigstad G, Ustolin F, Paltrinieri N (2020) Risk and consequences of rapid phase transition for liquid hydrogen.” 30th European safety and reliability conference, ESREL and 15th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference, PSAM 2020, 1899–1906. https://doi.org/10.3850/978-981-14-8593-0

[14] Aymelek M, Boulougouris EK, Turan O, Konovessis D (2015) Challenges and opportunities for LNG as a ship fuel source and an application to bunkering network optimisation. Maritime Technology and Engineering-Proceedings of MARTECH 2014: 2nd International Conference on Maritime Technology and Engineering, 767–776. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17494-102

[15] Baalisampang T, Abbassi R, Garaniya V, Khan F, Dadashzadeh M. Fire impact assessment in FLNG processing facilities using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Fire Safety Journal, 2017, 92: 42-52

[16] Banae Costa CA, Beinat E (2005) Model-structuring in public decision-aiding. No. LSEOR 0579. Operational Research Group, Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science

[17] Baskoro DH, Artana KB, Dinariyana AAB (2021) Fire risk assessment on floating storage regasification unit (FSRU). In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. Vol. 649

[18] Bayley C, Sterjovski Z (2019) Metallurgical factors affecting the dynamic fracture of naval shipbuilding steels. Nova Scotia, Canada

[19] Energies, 2020, 13(12):

[20] Bernardin JD, Mudawar I. The Leidenfrost point: experimental study and assessment of existing models. Journal of Heat Transfer, 1999, 121(4): 894-903

[21] Betteridge S, Hoyes JR, Gant SE, Ivings MJ (2014) Consequence modelling of large LNG pool fires on water.” In Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 24:1–11. Edinburgh, UK

[22] Cabrillo Port (2007) Chronological list of LNG accidnts

[23] Cao Y, Jia QJ, Wang SM, Jiang Y, Bai Y. Safety design analysis of a vent mast on a LNG powered ship during a low-temperature combustible gas leakage accident. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science, 2022, 7(1): 75-83

[24] Clarivate (2020) Web of science core collection help. https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/contents.html. Accessed 03 Apr 2022

[25] Cracknell RF, Carsley AJ. Cloud fires-a methodology for hazard consequence modelling. Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 1997, 1997(141): 139-150

[26] Daryanto M, Maulana A, Kurniawan F. Operational risk assessment of ship to ship transfer in the FSRU Lampung using risk matrix method. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, 557(1): 012035

[27] Deng J, Wang X, Wei Z, Wang L, Wang C, Chen Z. A review of NOx and SOx emission reduction technologies for marine diesel engines and the potential evaluation of liquefied natural gas fuelled vessels. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 766: 144319

[28] DiMattia DG (2011) Predicting human error probabilities for muster actions during LNG tanker emergencies. In: International gas union research conference, Canada

[29] DNV (2019) Comparison of alternative marine fuels. Hovik, Norway

[30] DNV (2020) Maritime forecast to 2050-energy transition outlook 2020. Hovik, Norway

[31] DNV (2021) Maritime forecast to 2050-energy transition outlook 2021. Hovik, Norway

[32] Dogliani M (2002) Safety assessment of LNG offshore storage and regasification unit. In: Gastech conference proceedings Doha, Qatar

[33] Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 2021, 133: 285-296

[34] ECGEB (n. d.) ECG environmental briefs atmospheric particulate matter. Scheool of Geography, Earth and Environmental Science, University of Birmingham, UK

[35] Elgohary MM, Seddiek IS, Salem AM. Overview of alternative fuels with emphasis on the potential of liquefied natural gas as future marine fuel. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2015, 229(4): 365-375

[36] Elsayed T. Fuzzy inference system for the risk assessment of liquefied natural gas carriers during loading/offloading at terminals. Applied Ocean Research, 2009, 31(3): 179-185

[37] Elsayed T, Leheta H, Shehadeh M. Multi-attribute risk assessment of LNG carriers during loading/offloading at terminals. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2009, 4(2): 127-131

[38] Elsayed T, Marghany K, Abdulkader S. Risk assessment of liquefied natural gas carriers using fuzzy TOPSIS. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2014, 9(4): 355-364

[39] Embach C (2006) A tract about some qualities of common water. English ranslation of Johann Gottlob Leidenfrost, De quae communis nonnullis qualitatibus tractatus, Duisburg on Rhine, 1756. January 1964

[40] EPA (1999) Nitrogen oxides (NOx), why and how they are controlled. NC, USA

[41] ESS (2016) ESS guideline for oxygen deficiency hazard (ODH). Chess controlled core Ed:1.0

[42] European Commission (2016) Nitrous oxide could be removed from the atmosphere with simultaneous generation of renewable energy. Bristol, UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-6103-9

[43] European Commission (2017) Study on the completion of an EU framework on LNG-Fuelled ships and its relevant fuel provision infrastructure

[44] Fadhil M, Handani DW, Dinariyana AAB. Risk analysis on modified offloading system of LNG FSRU. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, 557(1): 012020

[45] Fan H, Zhang H, Xu J. Assessment of the hazard distance of pool fire for LNG bunkering pontoon. Ship Build. China, 2013, 54(4): 186-195

[46] Fan H, Tu H, Enshaei H, Xu X, Wei Y. Comparison of the economic performances of three sulphur oxides emissions abatement solutions for a very large crude carrier (VLCC). Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2021, 9(2): 1-21

[47] Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2022, 10(3):

[48] Fan H, Enshaei H, Jayasinghe SG (2022b) Dynamic quantitative risk assessment of LNG bunkering SIMOPs based on Bayesian network. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science in Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joes.2022.03.004

[49] Ge J, Zhang R, Wu S, Xu N, Du Y. A Risk-Based Grey Relational Analysis for Identifying Key Performance Shaping Factors to Promote the Management for Human Reliability during Shipping LNG Offloading. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2022, 90: 709-714

[50] GIIGNL (2020) LNG demand in a post-covid and decarbonized world. Paris

[51] GIIGNL (2021) GIIGNL Annual Report 2021. Paris

[52] Goel P (2021) How to merge Scopus and WOS data. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzpGclDueZg&t=293s. Accessed 15 Apr 2022

[53] Gucma S, Przywarty M, Slaczka W, Gralak R (2019) Risk of grounding by a ship passing a fairway-simulation method of navigational risk estimation in emergency situations. European Navigation Conference, ENC 2019, 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/EURONAV.2019.8714146

[54] Han S, Lee J-Y, Park Y-I, Che J. Structural risk analysis of an NO96 membrane-type liquified natural gas carrier in Baltic ice operation. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2008, 222: 179-194

[55] Han S, Bae J, Lee K, Ha M, Joh K, Suh Y, Rhee S (2010) Safety assessment of inner hull structure affected by cryogenic temperature. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2010-37985

[56] Hansson J, Månsson S, Brynolf S, Grahn M. Alternative marine fuels: prospects based on multi-criteria decision analysis Involving Swedish stakeholders. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2019, 126: 159-73

[57] Hauge S, Øien K (2016) Guidance for barrier management in the petroleum industry. SINTEF Report A 27623

[58] X emssions and perfromance data for a hydrogen fuelled internal combusion engine at 1500 rpm using exhaust gas recirculation. Hydrogen Energy 28: 901–908

[59] Hollnagel E (2015) RAG-resilience analysis grid. introduction to the resilience analysis grid (RAG)

[60] Hollnagel E. Resilience engineering: a new understanding of safety. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 2016, 35(3): 185-191

[61] Hollnagel E (2022) Systemic potentials for resilient performance. In: Resilience in a Digital Age, 7–17. Springer

[62] Hu ZQ, Zhang DW, Zhao DY, Chen G. Structural safety assessment for FLNG-LNGC system during offloading operation scenario. China Ocean Engineering, 2017, 31(2): 192-201

[63] Hu S, Xuan S, Li Z, Hu Q, Xi Y (2019) Dynamics simulation for process risk evolution mode on fueling of LNG-fueled vessel. ICTIS 2019-5th International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety, 313–323. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTIS.2019.8883559

[64] Hu J, Khan F, Zhang L. Dynamic resilience assessment of the marine LNG offloading system. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2021, 208: 107368

[65] Hydrogen Council (2021) Hydrogen Insights: A perspective on Hydrogen investment, market development and cost competitiveness

[66] Iannaccone T, Landucci G, Cozzani V. Inherent safety assessment of LNG fuelled ships and bunkering operations: A consequence-based approach. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2018, 67: 121-126

[67] Iannaccone T, Landucci G, Scarponi GE, Bonvicini S, Cozzani V. Inherent safety assessment of alternative technologies for LNG ships bunkering. Ocean Engineering, 2019, 185: 100-114

[68] Ibrahim H, Patruni JR. Bayesian network-based failure analysis of fire safety barriers in floating LNG facility. SN Applied Sciences, 2019, 1(10): 1-17

[69] Ibrahim H A, Rao PJ. Fire risk analysis in Flng processing facility using bayesian network. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 2019, 14(3): 1497-1519

[70] ICCT Greenhouse gas emissions from global shipping, 2013–2015, 2017, Washigton DC: ICCT

[71] IGU (2010) World LNG report 2010

[72] IHSA (n.d.) Cold Stress

[73] ISO (2009) Risk management-risk assessment techniques IEC/FDIS 31010

[74] 2 emissions from ships. London

[75] IMO (2011) Amendment to the Annex of the protocol of 1997 to amend the international convention for the prevention of pollution fro ships, 1973, as modified by the protocol of 1978 relating thereto (Includion of regulations on energy efficiency for ships in MARPOL Annex VI) Resolution MEPC.203(62). London

[76] IMO (2016) International code of safety for ships using gases or other low-flashpoint fuels (IGF Code). London

[77] IMO (2018) Adoption of the initial IMO strategy of reduction of GHG emissions recalling article 38 (e) of the convention on the International Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the marine environment protection committee. London

[78] IMO (2019a) IMO work to cut GHG emissions from ships. https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Cutting-GHG-emissions.aspx. Accessed 31 May 2023.

[79] IMO (2019b) IMO 2020-Cutting Sulphur Oxide Emissions. https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Sulphur-2020. aspx#: ~: text=Known as “IMO 2020”%2C,were already stricter (0.10%25). Accesed 01 Nov 2021

[80] IMO (2019c) Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)-Regulation 13. 2019. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Nitrogen-oxides-(NOx)—egulation-13.aspx. Accesed 01 Nov 2021

[81] IMO Reduction of GHG emissions from ships. fourth IMO GHG study 2020. International Maritime Organization, 2020, 578(9): 1689-1699

[82] Materials, 2021, 14(7):

[83] IRENA (2021) Innovation outlook: renewable methanol. Abu Dhabi

[84] Ivanišević D, Gundić A, Mohović D (2017) Estimated risks of navigation of LNG vessels through the Ob river bay and Kara sea. Marine Navigation, pp 107–11

[85] Jaramillo P, Griffin WM, Matthews HS. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation. Environmental Science and Technology, 2007, 41(17): 6290-6296

[86] Jeong B, Lee BS, Zhou P. Quantitative risk assessment of fuel preparation room having high-pressure fuel gas supply system for LNG fuelled ship. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 137: 450-468

[87] Jeong B, Lee BS, Zhou P, Ha SM. Determination of safety exclusion zone for LNG bunkering at fuel-supplying point. Ocean Engineering, 2018, 152: 113-29

[88] Jeong B, Park S, Ha S, Lee JU. Safety evaluation on LNG bunkering: to enhance practical establishment of safety zone. Ocean Engineering, 2020, 216: 107804

[89] Ji C, Ahammad M, Mannan S. Facility layout optimization of LNG-FSRU system. Hazards, 2017, 27(162): 1-6

[90] Ji C, Yuan S, Jiao Z, Pettigrew J, El-Halwagi MM, Pasman HJ. Risk informed floating storage and re-gasification unit (FSRU) location selection for local natural gas supply. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 268: 113357

[91] Kang Z, Li Z, Kang J. Risk management framework of LNG offshore transfer and delivery system. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 266: 113043

[92] IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2015, 102(1):

[93] Kim JH, Oh HK, Kim DH. Safety assessment of cargo containment systems in LNG carriers under the impact of icebergship collision. Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering-OMAE, 2011, 1: 975-982. Rotterdam, NL

[94] Kim I, Kim H, Chang D, Jung DH, Sung HG, Park SK, Choi BC. Emergency evacuation simulation of a floating LNG bunkering terminal considering the interaction between evacuees and CFD data. Safety Science, 2021, 140: 105297

[95] Knott J (2015) Brittle fracture in structural steels: perspectives at different size-scales. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 373 (2038). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0126

[96] Kong X, Jiao W, Xiang W, Wang Q, Cao J, Han L. Quantitative Analysis of Leakage Consequences of LNG Ship-to-Ship Bunkering Based on CFD. Energies, 2023, 16(12): 4631

[97] KPMG (2014) Floating LNG: revolution. Zurich

[98] Kuzu C, Akyuz AE, Arslan O. Application of fuzzy fault tree analysis (FFTA) to maritime industry: a risk analysing of ship mooring operation. Ocean Engineering, 2019, 179: 128-134

[99] Lee S, Seo S, Chang D. Fire risk comparison of fuel gas supply systems for LNG fuelled ships. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2015, 27: 1788-1795

[100] Lee S. Quantitative risk assessment of fire & explosion for regasification process of an LNG-FSRU. Ocean Engineering, 2020, 197: 106825

[101] Leibensperger EM, Mickley LJ, Jacob DJ, Barrett SRH. Intercontinental influence of NOx and CO emissions on particulate matter air quality. Atmospheric Environment, 2011, 45(19): 3318-24

[102] Lexico (2022) Dimension. 2022. https://www.lexico.com/definition/dimension. Accessed 01 May 2022

[103] Li X, Tang W. Structural risk analysis model of damaged membrane LNG carriers after grounding based on bayesian belief networks. Ocean Engineering, 2019, 171: 332-44

[104] Li Z, Hu S, Gao G, Yao C, Fu S, Xi Y. Decision-making on process risk of arctic route for LNG carrier via dynamic bayesian network modeling. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2021, 71: 104473

[105] Ligteringen H, Dirkx R, de Boer FA, vd Tak C (2006) Lion gas LNG rerminal in Rotterdam a new approach to nautical risk analysis. Hydrocarbon Engineering Autumn. pp 73–76

[106] Lindstad E, Eskeland GS, Rialland A, Valland A. Decarbonizing maritime transport: the importance of engine technology and regulations for LNG to serve as a transition fuel. Sustainability, 2020, 12(21): 8793

[107] Linkov I, Trump BD, Fox-Lent C (2016) Resilience: approaches to risk analysis and governance. an edited collection of authored pieces comparing, contrasting, and integrating risk and resilience with an emphasis on ways to measure Resilience 6

[108] LSE (2019) Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: Which is best for me? https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/12/03/google-scholar-web-of-science-and-scopus-which-is-best-for-me/. Accessed 05 Apr 2022

[109] Lu TJ, Fleck NA. The thermal shock resistance of solids. Acta Materialia, 1998, 46(13): 4755-68

[110] Luketa-Hanlin A. A Review of Large-Scale LNG Spills: Experiments and modeling. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2006, 132(2–3): 119-40

[111] Lv P, Zhuang Y, Deng J, Su W. Study on lockage Safety of LNG-Fueled Ships based on FSA. PLoS ONE, 2017, 12(4): 1-12

[112] Margolin S (2013) Flash fire (duration and heat flux). https://es.westex.com/webfoo/wp-content/uploads/Flash_Firepart11.pdf. Accessed 01 Jan 2022

[113] Martins MR, Schleder AM, Droguett EL. A methodology for risk analysis based on hybrid bayesian networks: application to the regasification system of liquefied natural gas onboard a floating storage and regasification unit. Risk Analysis, 2014, 34: 2098-2120

[114] Martins MR, Pestana MA, Primon RB, Natacci FB (2015) Risk analysis of undesirable events during transport, loading and unloading of liquefied natural gas (LNG) on ships. Maritime Technology and Engineering-Proceedings of MARTECH 2014: 2nd International Conference on Maritime Technology and Engineering, 1: 655–62. London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17494-87

[115] Martins MR, Pestana MA, Souza GFM, Schleder AM. Quantitative risk analysis of loading and offloading liquefied natural gas (LNG) on a floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU). Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 43: 629-53

[116] Mayo Clinic (2020) Hypothermia. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hypothermia/symptoms-causes/syc-20352682. Accessed 01 Nov 2021

[117] Mayo Clinic (2022) Frostbite. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/frostbite/symptoms-causes/syc-20372656. Accessed 01 Nov 2021

[118] Melhem GA, Ozog H, Saraf S (2006) Understand LNG rapid phase transitions (RPT)

[119] Methanol Institute (2018) Renewable methanol report. Vol. 103. Madrid, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j

[120] Milioulis K, Bolbot V, Theotokatos G. Model-based safety analysis and design enhancement of a marine LNG fuel feeding system. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2021, 9(1): 1-25

[121] Milioulis K, Bolbot V, Theotokatos G, Boulougouris E, Sayan P, Chio KWY, Lim WS (2022) Safety analysis of a high-pressure fuel gas supply system for LNG fuelled vessels. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/14750902221078426

[122] Mohajan HK. Dangerous effects of methane gas in atmosphere. International Journal of Economic and Political Integration, 2012, 1(2): 3-10

[123] MOL (2021) Current status and future prospects of LNG Fuel for Ships

[124] Montewka J, Ehlers S, Tabri K (2010) Elements of risk analysis for LNG tanker maneuvering with tug assistance in a harbor. In 11th International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures COPPE/UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

[125] NASA (2006) Human reliability analysis methods: selection guidance for NASA. Washington, DC

[126] Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2021, 9(743):

[127] Nubli H, Sohn JM. Procedure for determining design accidental loads in liquified-natural-gas-fuelled ships under explosion using a computational-fluid-dynamics-based simulation approach. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2021, 17(10): 2254-2271

[128] Nubli H, Sohn JM, Jung D. Consequence Analysis of Accidental LNG Release on the Collided Structure of 500 cbm LNG Bunkering Ship. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2022, 10(10): 1378

[129] Nwaoha TC. Inclusion of hybrid algorithm in optimal operations of liquefied natural gas transfer arm under uncertainty. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2014, 9(5): 514-24

[130] Nwaoha TC, Adumene S. Risk-based analysis of pressurized vessel on LNG carriers in harbor. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 2020, 8(4): 242-51

[131] OEKO (2021) Ammonia as a marine fuel, risks and perspectives. Berlin, Germany

[132] Oran ES, Chamberlain G, Pekalski A. Mechanisms and occurrence of detonations in vapor cloud explosions. PEC, 2020, 77: 100804

[133] OSHA. 2018. “Confined space facts. USA

[134] Ostvik I, Vanem E, Castello F (2005) HAZID for LNG tankers

[135] Ouddai R, Chabane H, Boughaba A, Frah M. The Skikda LNG accident: losses, lessons learned and safety climate assessment. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 2012, 35(6): 518-33

[136] Ovidi F, Landucci G, Picconi L, Chiavistelli T (2018) A Risk-based approach for the analysis of LNG carriers port operations. Safety and Reliability-Safe Societies in a Changing World-Proceedings of the 28th International European Safety and Reliability Conference, ESREL 2018, 1655–63. London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351174664-208

[137] Paltrinieri N, Tugnoli A, Bonvicini S, Cozzani V. Atypical scenarios identification by the DyPASI procedure: application to LNG. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2011, 24: 1171-76

[138] Parhizkar T, Utne IB, Vinnem JE, Mosleh A. Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of decision-making in emergencies for complex systems, case study: dynamic positioning drilling unit. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 237: 109653

[139] Park BC, Lim C, Oh SJ, Lee JE, Jung MJ, Shin SC. Development of Fire Consequence Prediction Model in Fuel Gas Supply System Room with Changes in Operating Conditions during Liquefied Natural Gas Bunkering. Applied Sciences, 2022, 12(16): 7996

[140] Patricio P, dos Santos Baptista J, Bateira C (2012) BLEVE of a road tanker LPG-A short review. 8th International Symposium on Occupational Safety and Hygiene (SHO), 433–37. Guimaraes, Potrugal

[141] Petti JP, Lopez C, Figueroa V, Kalan RJ, Wellman G, Dempsey J, Villa D, Hightower M (2013) LNG vessel cascading damage structural and thermal analyses. SNL. Vol. 2. Albuquerque

[142] Pil CK, Rausand M, Vatn J. Reliability assessment of reliquefaction systems on LNG carriers. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2008, 93(9): 1345-53

[143] Pitblado RM, Baik J, Hughes GJ, Ferro C, Shaw SJ. Consequences of LNG marine incidents. Process Safety Progress, 2005, 24(2): 108-114

[144] Pitblado R. Potential for BLEVE associated with marine LNG vessel fires. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2007, 140(3): 527-34

[145] Portmann RW, Daniel JS, Ravishankara AR. Stratospheric ozone depletion due to Nitrous Oxide: Influences of other gases. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2012, 367(1593): 1256-64

[146] Publications, 2021, 9(1):

[147] Radu LD. Qualitative, semi-quantitative and, quantitative methods for risk assessment: case of the financial audit. Analele Ştinţifice Ale Universitēţii» Alexandru Ioan Cuza «din Iaşi. Ştiinţe Economice, 2009, 56(1): 643-57

[148] Ramos MA, Droguett EL, Martins MR, Souza HP. Quantitative risk analysis and comparison for onshore and offshore LNG terminals: The port of Suape-Brazil case. Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering-OMAE, 2011, 2: 885-92

[149] Rausand M (2011) Risk assessment: Theory, methods, and applications. John Wiley & Sons

[150] Raveendran A, Rejith VR, Madhu G. A comprehensive review of dynamic risk analysis methodologies. Loss prevention in the process industry, 2022, 76: 104374

[151] Roberts T, Buckland I, Beckett H, Hare J, Royle M (2001) Consequences of jet-fire interaction with vessels containing pressurised, reactive chemicals. IChemE Symposium Series No.148, no. No.148: 147–66

[152] Rokseth B, Utne IB (2015) Dynamic risk assessment of marine systems. Proceedings of the 25th European Safety and Reliability Conference, ESREL, 725–33

[153] Royal Society (2008) Ground-level ozone in the 21st century: Future trends, impacts and policy implications. Edinburgh, UK

[154] Sanderson K (2008) How pollution can help to clean the air. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/news.2008.683

[155] SEA-LNG (2020) Global fleet:The number of vessels using LNG as a marine fuel is growing rapidly. https://sea-lng.org/why-lng/global-fleet/. Accessed 01 Sep 2022

[156] Sustainability (Switzerland), 2020, 12(8):

[157] Sever C, Kulahci Y, Acar A, Karabacak E. Unusual hand frostbite caused by refrigerant liquids and gases. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi=Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery: TJTES, 2010, 16(5): 433-38

[158] Shakirov A (2021) New trends on the global market of LNG carriers. Doha, Qatar

[159] Shao Y, Kang HK, Lee YH, Królczyk G, Gardoni P, Li ZX. A preliminary risk assessment on development the fuel gas supply system of a small LNG fueled fishing ship. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 258: 111645

[160] Sharma NR, Dimitrios D, Olcer AI, Nikitakos N. LNG a clean fuel-the underlying potential to improve thermal efficiency. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology, 2022, 21(2): 111-124

[161] SINTEF (2003) Handbook for fire calculations and fire risk assessment in the process industry. Trondheim

[162] SINTEF (2017) GHG and NOx emissions from gas fuelled engines. SINTEF Ocean Report OC2017 F-107. Trondhiem

[163] Skogdalen JE, Vinnem JE. Quantitative risk analysis offshore-Human and organizational factors. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2011, 96(4): 468-79

[164] Songhurst B (2019) Floating LNG update-Liquefaction and import terminals. Oxford. https://doi.org/10.26889/9781784671440

[165] Stahlschmidt S, Stephen D (2020) Comparison of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions databases. KB Forschungspoolprojekt: 1–37

[166] Sultana S, Andersen BS, Haugen S. Identifying safety indicators for safety performance measurement using a system engineering approach. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2019, 128: 107-20

[167] Sultana S, Okoh P, Haugen S, Vinnem JE. Hazard analysis: Application of STPA to ship-to-ship transfer of LNG. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2019, 60: 241-52

[168] Sultana S, Haugen S. An extended FRAM method to check the adequacy of safety barriers and to assess the safety of a socio-technical system. Safety science, 2023, 157: 105930

[169] Tadros M, Ventura M, Guedes Soares C. Review of the IMO initiatives for ship energy efficiency and their implications. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 2023

[170] Tadros M, Ventura M, Guedes Soares C. Review of current regulations, available technologies, and future trends in the green shipping industry. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 280: 114670

[171] TUN (2013) Cryogenic gases & solid carbon dioxide. Nottingham, UK

[172] Uflaz E, Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Arslan O, Kurt RE. A human reliability analysis for ship to ship LNG bunkering process under DS evidence fusion HEART approach. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2022, 80: 104887

[173] UNCTAD (2021) Review of maritime transport 2021. https://unctad.org/publication/review-maritime-transport-2021. Accessed 31 May 2023

[174] UNEP (2007) How to cut greenhouse gas emissions and minimize gloal warming: A simplified guide to IPCC’s “Climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change”. UN, Geneve

[175] Ustolin F, Odsæter LH, Reigstad G, Skarsvåg HL, Paltrinieri N. Theories and mechanism of rapid phase transition. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2020, 82: 253-58

[176] Ustolin F, Paltrinieri N, Landucci G. An innovative and comprehensive approach for the consequence analysis of liquid hydrogen vessel explosions. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2020, 68: 104323 September

[177] Vairo T, Gualeni P, Fabiano B, Benvenuto AC (2020) Resilience assessment of bunkering operations for a LNG fuelled ship. In Proceedings of the 30th European Safety and Reliability Conference and the 15th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference. https://doi.org/10.3850/981-973-0000-00-0 output

[178] Vairo T, Gualeni P, Reverberi AP, Fabiano B. Resilience dynamic assessment based on precursor events: Application to ship Lng bunkering operations. Sustainability, 2021, 13(6836): 1-17

[179] Vandebroek L, Berghmans J. Safety aspects of the use of LNG for marine propulsion. Procedia Engineering, 2012, 45: 21-26

[180] Vanem E, Antão P, Castillo F, Skjong R (2007). Formal safety assessment of LNG tankers. 10th International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures, PRADS 2007, 1:82–90. Houston, Texas.

[181] Vanem E, Antão P, Østvik I, Castillo F. Analysing the risk of LNG carrier operations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2008, 93(9): 1328-44

[182] Varela JM, Guedes Soares C. Interactive 3D Desktop Ship Simulator for testing and training Offloading Manoeuvres. Applied Ocean Research, 2015, 51: 367-380

[183] Villa V, Paltrinieri N, Cozzani V (2015) Overview on dynamic approaches to risk management in process facilities. Chemical Engineering 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1543417

[184] Vinnem JE. Offshore risk assessment: Principles, modelling and applications of QRA studies, 2007, 2nd Edition, Stavanger: Springer

[185] Wan C, Yan X, Zhang D, Shi J, Fu S. Facilitating AHP-TOPSIS method for reliability analysis of a marine LNG-Diesel dual fuel engine. International Journal of Performability Engineering, 2014, 10(5): 453-66

[186] Wang Y, Wright L, Zhang P. Economic feasibility of LNG fuel for ocean-going ships: A case study of container vessels. Maritime Technology and Research, 2021, 3: 202-222

[187] Wang YT, Liu JJ, Hu JJ, Garbatov Y, Guedes Soares C (2021b) Fatigue strength of EH36 steel welded joints and base material at low-temperature. International Journal of Fatigue, 142105896

[188] WARTSILA (2017) LNG as a marine fuel boosts profitability while ensuring compliance market trends favour the greener choice. Wärtsilä Services Business White Paper

[189] WinDg (2020) Next-generation technologies to safeguard LNG-fuelled engine investments

[190] Winnes H, Styhre L, Fridell E. Reducing GHG emissions from ships in port areas. Research in Transportation Business and Management, 2015, 17: 73-82

[191] World Bank Group (1998a) Ground-Level Ozone

[192] World Bank Group (1998b) Nitrogen Oxides. Vol. 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(78)90338-4

[193] Wu W. Application of fault tree analysis in LNG fire risk assessment of LNG fueled ships. Vibroengineering Procedia, 2021, 36(46): 108-14

[194] Wu J, Bai Y, Zhao H, Hu X, Cozzani V. A quantitative LNG risk assessment model based on integrated Bayesian-catastrophe-EPE method. Safety Science, 2021, 137: 105184

[195] Wu B, Yip TL, Yan X, Guedes S. Review of techniques and challenges of human and organizational factors analysis in maritime transportation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2022, 209: 108249

[196] Xie C, Huang L, Wang R, Deng J, Shu Y, Jiang D. Research on quantitative risk assessment of fuel leak of LNG-fuelled ship during lock transition process. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2022, 221: 108368

[197] Xuan S, Hu S, Li Z, Li W, Li B. Dynamic simulation for process risk evolution on the bunker operation of an LNG-fueled vessel with catastrophe mathematical models. J. Mar, Sci. Eng., 2019, 7(9): 299

[198] Yang R, Khan F, Taleb-Berrouane M, Kong D. A time-dependent probabilistic model for fire accident analysis. Fire Safety Journal, 2020, 111: 102891

[199] Yeo CT, Bhandari J, Abbassi R, Garaniya V, Chai S, Shomali B. Dynamic risk analysis of offloading process in floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) platform using Bayesian network. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 41: 259-69

[200] You W, Park J, Jung S, Lim Y. Risk and efficiency analysis of dual mixed refrigerant liquefaction process configurations for floating liquefied natural gas at conceptual design stage. Process Safety Progress, 2019, 38(1): 87-98

[201] Zhang J, Kang XL, Shi XH, Guedes Soares C, Song M. Low temperature effect on the mechanical properties of EH36 with strain rates. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2023, 11(3): 678

[202] Zhang QX, Liang D, Wen J. Experimental study of flashing LNG jet fires following horizontal releases. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2019, 57: 245-53

[203] Zhang S, Li L, Li X. Risk evaluation for the navigation environment of the LNG ship based on the cloud model. 6th International Conference on Traffic and Logistic Engineering (ICTLE 2018), 2019, 259: 03002

[204] Zhao W, Feng G, Zhang M, Ren H, Sinsabvarodom C. (2020) Effect of low temperature on fatigue crack propagation rates of DH36 steel and its butt weld. Ocean Eng 196

[205] Zhou T, Wu C, Zhang J, Zhang D. Incorporating CREAM and MCS into fault tree analysis of LNG carrier spill accidents. Safety Science, 2017, 96: 183-91

[206] Zhu J, Liu W (2020) A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics 123 (1): 321–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8

[207] Zhu M, Huang L, Huang Z, Shi F, Xie C. Hazard analysis by leakage and diffusion in liquefied natural gas ships during emergency transfer operations on coastal waters. Ocean and Coastal Management, 2022, 220: 106100

[208] Zhuang W-X, Guo G-P. Research and countermeasures on LNG ship port area navigation risk assessment based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, 809(1): 012008

[209] Zia-Ebrahimi F (1985) Ductile-to-brittle transition in steel weldments for arctic structures. Colorado, USA