4.7 Article

A new method for managing multidimensional risks in Natural Gas Pipelines based on non-Expected Utility

Journal

RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY
Volume 214, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2021.107709

Keywords

Risk assessment; Multidimensional risks; Natural gas pipeline; Rank-dependent utility; Expected-utility

Funding

  1. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  2. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES) [001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study introduces a new multidimensional model for assessing natural gas pipeline risks, based on non-Expected Utility methods, which explores deviations of utilities and provides better support for recommendations to decision-makers.
Enhancing safety and maintaining profitable operations in various types of organizations, including in gas transmission and distribution companies, is a challenging task. Multidimensional risk analysis of Natural Gas Pipelines (NGP) has been carried out in decision-making in order to guide the decision-maker (DM) in managing resource allocation and prioritizing risks in pipeline sections. Although the Literature puts a spotlight on Expected Utility (EU) methods for assessing DM's preferences, the NGP problem is based on the probability of the occurrence of hazard scenarios being small, and yet there being high impacts when a failure occurs. That is why this paper proposes a new multidimensional model for assessing NGP risks: the MRDU model. To the best of our knowledge, there is an absence in the literature of studies on using non-Expected Utility (non-EU) methods. NonEU is a new approach which is based on Utility Theory. Deviations of utilities are explored and this incorporates contributions from the Rank-Dependent Utility (RDU)-based risk approach. Relevant results are compared and an extensive sensitivity analysis is conducted. Results show that the risk approach based on non-EU gives greater support to the recommendations made to the DM with regard to prioritizing NGP sections.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available