Bridging IMO e-Navigation Policy and Offshore Oil and Gas Operations through Geospatial Standards

• Autorzy: Modesto F. , Bazilio C. , Weitzel L. , Carballini J. , Peyton D.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12716/1001.10.01.05

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In offshore industry activities, the suitable onboard provision of assets location and geospatial marine information during operations is essential. Currently, most companies use its own data structures, resulting in incompatibility between processes. In order to promote the data exchange, oil and gas industry associations have pursued initiatives to standardize spatial information. In turn, the IMO - International Maritime Organization - started the implementation of e-Navigation policy, which is the standardization of technologies and protocols applied to maritime information and navigation. This paper shows relationship and integration points between maritime activities of oil and gas industry and e-Navigation technologies and processes, highlighting geospatial information. This paper also preludes out an initiative for a suitable product specification for the offshore oil and gas industry, compliant with e-Navigation and IHO S-100 international standards.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

e-Navigation; e-Navigation Policy; Offshore; Offshore Oil and Gas Operations; Geospatial Standards; Oil and Gas; e-Navigation Concept; IHO S-100

• Wydawca: Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University
• Czasopismo: TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: Vol. 10, no. 1
• Strony: 49--55
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 37 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Modesto F.

• Fluminense Federal University, Rio das Ostras, Brazil & PETROBRAS, Macae, Brazil

autor

Bazilio C.

• Fluminense Federal University, Rio das Ostras, Brazil

autor

Weitzel L.

• Fluminense Federal University, Rio das Ostras, Brazil

autor

Carballini J.

• CARIS, Fredericton, Canada

autor

Peyton D.

• IIC Technologies, North Vancouver, Canada

Bibliografia

• 1 ACLS & CHA 2006. Canada’s Offshore: Jurisdiction, Rights, and Management, 3rd Ed. Association of Canada Lands Surveyors.
• 2 Ahmed, I. & Al‐Marzooq, A. 2008. E&P GIS: Integrating E&P Data and Applications. Petroleum Engineering Applications Services Department. Dhahran: Saudi Aramco.
• 3 Alexander, L., Ryan, J.F. & Casey, M.J. 2004. Integrated Navigation System: Not a Sum of its Parts. Canadian Hydrograhic Conference. Ottawa: CHA.
• 4 APDM 2014. APDM 6.0 Physical Model / Data Dictionary. ArcGIS Pipeline Data Model Standing Committee, http://apdm.net/, accessed 18/01/2016.
• 5 Astle, H., & Schwarzberg, P. 2013. Towards a Universal Hydrographic Data Model. Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation Advances in Marine Navigation. 67– 72
• 6 Bai, Y., & Bai Q., 2010. Installation and Vessels. Subsea engineering handbook. Elsevier.
• 7 Cain, J. & Barnes, M. 2008. Geodesy and Cartography in E&P – A Caution to Skilled Professionals. EAGE Conference and Exhibition.
• 8 Chaves, L.A.O. 2004. Fatores que afetam os planos de emergência aplicados às atividades petrolíferas offshore: Estudo de caso. MSc Thesis Niteroi: UFF.
• 9 Chen, H., Moan, T. & Verhoeven, H. 2008. Safety of Dynamic Positioning operations on Mobile Offshore Drilling Units. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 93 (7): 1072–1090.
• 10 G‐OMO 2013a. Collision Risk Management. In Guidelines for Offshore Marine Operations.
• 11 G‐OMO 2013b. Anchor Handling & MOU Moving. In Guidelines for Offshore Marine Operations.
• 12 Hollingsworth, J.L. & James L. 2015. Digital Oilfield Standards Update. SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
• 13 IALA 2012. Recommendation A‐124 – On The AIS Service, Ed. 2.1. Saint‐Germain‐en‐Laye: IALA.
• 14 IHO 2000. IHO S‐57 – IHO Transfer Standard for Digital Hydrographic Data, Ed. 3.1. Monaco: International Hydrographic Bureau.
• 15 IHO 2015. S‐100 – Universal Hydrographic Data Model, Ed. 2.0.0. Monaco: International Hydrographic Bureau.
• 16 IMCA 2010. Guidance on Simultaneous Operations SIMOPS. London: International Marine Contractors Association.
• 17 IMO 2007. Development of an E‐Navigation strategy. In Report to the Maritime Safety Committee NAV52/18 London: IMO.
• 18 IMO 2008a. Strategy for the Development and Implementation of e‐Navigation. In Report of the Maritime Safety Committee 85/26/Add.1. London: IMO.
• 19 IMO 2008b. Adoption of the revised performance standards for Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) Resolution MSC.232(82). Maritime Safety Committee 82. London: IMO.
• 20 IMO 2009. Code for the Construction and Equipment of Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODU Code). London: IMO.
• 21 IMO 2010. Guidance on the use of AIS Application‐Specific Message, Circular ‐ SN.1/Circ.289. Safety of Navigation Sub‐committee 1. London: IMO.
• 22 IOGP 2013. Guidelines for the conduct of offshore drilling hazard site surveys. Geomatics Committee. London: IOGP.
• 23 IOGP 2014. Guideline for the delivery of the Seabed Survey Data Model. http://www.iogp.org/Geomatics, accessed 18/01/2016.
• 24 IPIECA & IOGP 2015. Recommended Practice for Common Operating Picture Architecture for Oil Spill Response, version 2.2. Oil Spill Response Joint Industry Project. http://oilspillresponseproject.org, accessed 18/01/2016.
• 25 Koppaetzky, N. 2013. Towards a model‐based approach for context‐aware assistance systems in offshore operations. International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops: 55‐60. San Diego: IEEE
• 26 Leal, D. 2005. ISO 15926 Life Cycle Data for Process Plant: An Overview. Oil & Gas Science and Technology 60 (4): 629‐637.
• 27 McLay, K. 2000. GIS in exploration and production. Hydro International 4 (5): 35‐37.
• 28 Modesto, F. 2014. Offshore Unit Dimensions. IALA Application Specific Messages collection. http://www.enavigation.nl/asm, accessed 23/12/2015.
• 29 Modesto, F. 2015. e‐NOffshore testbed – e‐Navigation making offshore Simultaneous Operations safer. International e‐Navigation Underway 2015. Copenhagen: IALA & DMA.
• 30 Modesto, F. & Bazilio, C. 2016. Oil and Gas Infrastructure S‐100 Project, http://www2.ic.uff.br/~bazilio/projetos/ S100‐oil‐and‐gas.
• 31 PODS 2013. PODS 6.0 Module Diagram. Pipeline Open Data Standard Association. http://www.pods.org/, accessed 18/01/2016.
• 32 Quick, L., Foster, G. & Hart, K. 2009. CARIS: Managing bathymetric metadata from Ping to Chart. OCEANS 2009, MTS/IEEE Biloxi ‐ Marine Technology for Our Future: Global and Local Challenges (1), 1‐9, 26‐29.
• 33 Shukla, A. & Karki, H. 2016. Application of robotics in onshore oil and gas industry — A review. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 75 (PB) 508‐524.
• 34 Sii, H., Wang, J. & Ruxton, T. 2003. A statistical review of the risk associated with offshore support vessel/platform encounters in UK waters. Journal of Risk Research 6.
• 35 Tisdale, J., Strahan, T. & Burden, R. 2015. PipelineML Prototype 1 Definition. Houston: Open Geospatial Consortium.
• 36 UKOOA 1994. UKOOA Data Exchange Format P5/94 ‐ Pipeline Position Data. UKOOA Council (6.2). London: UKOOA.
• 37 Westdijk, F.J. 2015. Towards risk based pipeline integrity management through integrated use of heterogeneous SDI data sources. GIMA. Delft: Delft University of Technology.

Uwagi

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.