Incidents occur every year in Norway’s petroleum industry which could have developed into a major accident under only slightly different circumstances. A clarification of the risk concept in the regulations could help to reduce these events.
The Petroleum Safety Authority Norway (PSA) and the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority have jointly audited Point Resources’ routines for handling notifications of censurable conditions (whistleblowing) at work.
What is the status of the oil industry today? How have we overcome the crisis, what has it cost, and where does the sector stand now? What about its reputation and – above all – safety work?
We have carried out an audit of Equinor Energy’s (Equinor) follow-up of materials handling, use and maintenance of lifting equipment, scaffolding/access techniques and management of the working environment for the M&M and SIP professions at Kristin.
We have carried out an audit of Equinor focused on the management of operational risk for Hammerfest LNG.
We have carried out an audit of OSM Offshore and the Haven mobile quarters facility. The audit was focused on emergency preparedness and the helideck.
We have given Faroe Petroleum consent to drill exploration well 31/7-3 S.
We have given Aker BP consent to use the Maersk Reacher mobile facility as a quarters facility on the Valhall field.
We have carried out an audit of MOL Norge in respect of the company’s first drilling operation on the Norwegian Continental Shelf.
We have given Equinor Energy AS (Equinor) consent to use Snorre B beyond its original operating life.
We have carried out an audit of Equinor focused on drilling and emergency preparedness on the Statfjord C facility.
Two questions concern us above all others:
Identifying risk, with an associated understanding of possible accident scenarios and consequences, represents the basis for all safety work.
Understanding risk is necessary in order to
Risk is not a static and innate characteristic of a given activity, which cannot be influenced. It develops over time in step with such aspects as
As a decision support tool, risk analyses form part of the basis for managing risk. Risk analyses and studies seek to obtain the greatest possible insight into the enterprise, including the identification of knowledge gaps.
The aim is to understand how hazards can arise and develop in order to implement the most appropriate measures where they can be most effective in
Risk analyses must necessarily build on some assumptions and assessments, which are based to a varying degree on experience, knowledge, scientific methods and expectations of the future.
An understanding of the basis on which such analyses build and the limitations they incorporate is accordingly crucial.
The analyst must accordingly clarify what they know and do not know, what is history and what assessments of the future, and what opportunities are available for influencing operations so that they can be conducted in an acceptable manner.
Nor must the results or figures generated by risk analyses overshadow the point of conducting them: to obtain the knowledge need to control risk in each activity.
A risk analysis process enhances risk understanding in order to implement risk-reduction measures.
What is risk?
The traditional way of describing risk in an analytic context is as probability times consequences, calculated through various risk values or categories.
In certain contexts, moreover, it can be appropriate to compare risks in order to acquire a perspective on their comparative importance in an activity.
But this approach to defining risk is too narrow and limiting for the ability to understand, administer and manage activities and enterprises.
On that basis, risk can be defined as the consequences of an activity with the associated uncertainty.
Quantitative or qualitative analyses, assessments or comments retailed to this uncertainty, and thereby the risk, must always be viewed in relation to who is conducting the analysis. Uncertainty is somebody’s uncertainty about what the consequences will be.