4.7 Review

Safety philosophy and risk analysis methodology for LNG bunkering simultaneous operations (SIMOPs): A literature review

期刊

SAFETY SCIENCE
卷 136, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105150

关键词

Literature review; LNG; Bunkering; Simultaneous operations; Safety; Risk analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Liquified natural gas (LNG) is seen as a leading alternative marine fuel for the maritime industry's move towards a green and sustainable direction. Safety and efficiency considerations suggest conducting LNG bunkering and associated operations simultaneously, known as SIMOPs. Research identifies areas for future investigations to accelerate the development of safe and efficient LNG bunkering SIMOPs.
Liquified natural gas (LNG) is widely considered to be a leading alternative marine fuel as the maritime industry has been going towards a green and sustainable direction. LNG bunkering availability is fundamental to the adoption of LNG as a fuel. The proliferation of LNG bunkering technology is dependent on safe and efficient operations. In order to maintain tight sailing schedules and optimise cost, it is suggested that LNG bunkering and the associated operations (such as people movements, cargo loading/unloading, crew transfer, crane operations, port activities, and oil bunkering) be conducted simultaneously, which is referred to as simultaneous operations (SIMOPs). Towards understanding the safety of LNG bunkering SIMOPs, this paper presents a systematic review and synthesis of the literature related to LNG bunkering and SIMOPs. Moreover, the paper sheds light on the safety philosophy and risk analysis methods emerging within the literature in these areas. The study identifies a series of research gaps that highlight the most fruitful areas for future investigations in this area, thereby helping to lay the groundwork for research that would potentially accelerate the development of safe and efficient LNG bunkering SIMOPs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据