A probabilistic model for accidental cargo oil outflow from product tankers in a ship-ship collision

Marine Pollution Bulletin

Volumn 79, Issue 1-2, 2014, Pages 130-144

  Goerlandt, Floris ^a   Montewka, Jakub ^a  

^a AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Bayesian network; Maritime transportation; Oil spill; Risk assessment; Ship ship collision

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN NETWORK; MARITIME TRANSPORTATION; OIL SPILL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHIP-SHIP COLLISION;

ACCIDENTS; ENVIRONMENT; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PETROLEUM; PETROLEUM POLLUTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHIPS; WATER POLLUTION, CHEMICAL;

EID: 84893822253     PISSN: 0025326X     EISSN: 18793363     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.12.026     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Aven T. Practical implications of the new risk perspectives. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2013, 115:136-145.
2. Aven T., Heide B. Reliability and validity of risk analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2009, 94:1862-1868.
3. Brown A.J. Collision scenarios and probabilistic collision damage. Mar. Struct. 2002, 15:335-364.
4. Brown A.J., Chen D. Probabilistic method for predicting ship collision damage. Ocean. Eng. Int. 2002, 6:54-65.
5. Buntine W. A guide to the literature on learning probabilistic networks from data. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1996, 8:195-210.
6. Chan H., Darwiche A. When do numbers really matter?. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 2002, 17:265-287.
7. Chen D. Simplified Ship Collision Model 2000, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
8. Cooper G., Herskovits E. A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data. Mach. Learn. 1992, 9:309-347.
9. Crotts J.C., Mazanec J.A. Diagnosing the impact of an event on hotel demand: the case of the BP oil spill. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2013, 8:60-67.
10. Dalton T., Jin D. Extent and frequency of vessel oil spills in US marine protected areas. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2010, 60:1939-1945.
11. Daly R., Shen Q., Aitken S. Learning Bayesian networks: approaches and issues. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 2011, 26:99-157.
12. Dash D., Cooper G. Model averaging for prediction with discrete Bayesian networks. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2004, 5:1177-1203.
13. Delpeche-Ellmann N.C., Soomere T. Investigating the marine protected areas most at risk of current-driven pollution in the Gulf of Finland, the Baltic Sea, using a Lagrangian transport model. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 67:121-129.
14. Det Norske Veritas, 2007. Rules for classification of ships. Det Norkse Veritas, Høvik.
15. Ehlers S., Tabri K. A combined numerical and semi-analytical collision damage assessment procedure. Mar. Struct. 2012, 28:101-119.
16. Evangelista, J. (Ed.), 2002. Scaling the Tanker Market.
17. Flage R., Aven T. Expressing and communicating uncertainty in relation to quantitative risk analysis (QRA). Reliab. Risk Anal. Theory Appl. 2009, 2:9-18.
18. Fowler T.G., Sørgård E. Modeling ship transportation risk. Risk Anal. 2000, 20:225-244.
19. Frazao Santos C., Michel J., Neves M., Janeiro J., Andrade F., Orbach M. Marine spatial planning and oil spill risk analysis: finding common grounds. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 74:73-81.
20. Friis-Hansen P., Simonsen B.C. GRACAT: software for grounding and collision risk analysis. Mar. Struct. 2002, 15:383-401.
21. Negro Garcia, M.C., Villasante, S., Penela Carballo, A., Rodriguez Rodriguez, R. Estimating the economic impact of the prestige oil spill on the Death Coast (NW Spain) fisheries. Mar. Policy 2009, 33:8-23.
22. Goerlandt F., Kujala P. On the reliability and validity of ship-ship collision risk analysis in light of different perspectives on risk. Saf. Sci. 2014, 62:348-365.
23. Goerlandt F., Ståhlberg K., Kujala P. Influence of impact scenario models on collision risk analysis. Ocean Eng. 2012, 47:74-87.
24. Grabowski M., Merrick J.R., Harrald J.R., Mazzuchi T.A., van Dorp J.R. Risk modeling in distributed, large-scale systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part Syst. Humans 2000, 30:651-660.
25. Gucma L., Przywarty M. The model of oil spills due to ship collisions in Southern Baltic Area. TransNav Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf. Sea Transp. 2008, 2:415-419.
26. Guedes Soares C., Teixeira A.P. Risk assessment in maritime transportation. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2001, 74:299-309.
27. Hogström, P., 2012. RoPax ship collision - a methodology for survivability analysis, Dissertations of the Chalmers University of Technology. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
28. IHS Maritime, 2013. Maritime Insight & Information.
29. IMO, 1995. Interim guidelines for the approval of alternative methods of design and construction of oil tankers under regulation 13f(5) of annex i of MARPOL73/68.
30. IMO, 2003. Revised interim guidelines for the approval of alternative methods of design and construction of oil tankers. Regulation 13F(5) of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 Resolution MEPC.110(49).
31. Juntunen, T., Rosqvist, T., Rytkönen, J., Kuikka, S., 2005. How to model the oil combating technologies and their impacts on ecosystems: a Bayesian networks application in the Baltic Sea, In: ICES CM 2005/S:02.
32. Kaplan S. The words of risk analysis. Risk Anal. 1997, 17:407-417.
33. Klanac, A., Duletić, T., Erceg, S., Ehlers, S., Goerlandt, F., Frank, D., 2010. Environmental risk of collisions in the enclosed European waters: Gulf of Finland, Northern Adriatic and the implications for tanker design, In: 5th International Conference on Collision and Grounding of Ships. Aalto University, Espoo, Finland, pp. 55-65.
34. Koller D., Friedman N. Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques, Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning 2009, The MIT Press. first ed.
35. Kujala P., Hänninen M., Arola T., Ylitalo J. Analysis of the marine traffic safety in the Gulf of Finland. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2009, 94:1349-1357.
36. Lecklin T., Ryömä R., Kuikka S. A Bayesian network for analyzing biological acute and long-term impacts of an oil spill in the Gulf of Finland. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62:2822-2835.
37. Lee M., Jung J.-Y. Risk assessment and national measure plan for oil and HNS spill accidents near Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 73:339-344.
38. Lehikoinen A., Luoma E., Mäntyniemi S., Kuikka S. Optimizing the recovery capacity of Finnish oil combating vessels in the Gulf of Finland using Bayesian networks. Environmental Science & Technology 2013, 47:1792-1799.
39. Miraglia R.A. The cultural and behavioral impact of the exxon valdez oil spill on the native peoples of prince william sound. Alaska. Spill Sci. Technol. Bull. 2002, 7:75-87.
40. Montewka J., Ståhlberg K., Seppala T., Kujala P. Elements of risk analysis for collision of oil tankers. Risk, Reliability and Safety 2010, 1005-1013. Taylor & Francis Group, London.
41. Montewka J., Goerlandt F., Ehlers S., Kujala P., Erceg S., Polic D., Klanac A., Hinz T., Tabri K. A model for consequence evaluation of ship-ship collision based on Bayesian Belief Network. Sustainable Maritime Transportation and Exploitation of Sea Resources 2012, Taylor & Francis Group, London.
42. Montewka J., Goerlandt F., Kujala P. Determination of collision criteria and causation factors appropriate to a model for estimating the probability of maritime accidents. Ocean Eng. 2012, 40:50-61.
43. Montewka, J., Ehlers, S., Goerlandt, F., Hinz, T., Tabri, K., Kujala, P., 2013a. A framework for risk assessment for maritime transportation systems - a case study for open sea collisions involving RoPax vessels. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.11.014.
44. Montewka J., Goerlandt F., Kujala P. On a risk perspective for maritime domain. J. Pol. Saf. Reliab. Assoc. 2013, 4:101-108.
45. Montewka J., Weckström M., Kujala P. A probabilistic model estimating oil spill clean-up costs - a case study for the Gulf of Finland. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 76:61-71.
46. National Research Council, 2001. Environmental performance of tanker designs in collision and grounding, Special report 259.
47. Oreskes N. Evaluation (not validation) of quantitative models. Environ. Health Perspect. 1998, 106:1453-1460.
48. Özbaş B. Safety risk analysis of maritime transportation: review of the literature. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2013, 2326:32-38.
49. Pearl J. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference 1988, Morgan Kaufmann. first ed.
50. Pedersen P.T. Review and application of ship collision and grounding analysis procedures. Mar. Struct. 2010, 23:241-262.
51. Pitchforth J., Mengersen K. A proposed validation framework for expert elicited Bayesian Networks. Expert Syst. Appl. 2013, 40:162-167.
52. Przywarty, M., 2008. Probabilistic model of ships navigational safety assessment on large sea areas, In: Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Electronics in Transport. Ljubljana, Slovenia.
53. Rosqvist T. On the validation of risk analysis-A commentary. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2010, 95:1261-1265.
54. Rosqvist T., Tuominen R. Qualification of formal safety assessment: an exploratory study. Saf. Sci. 2004, 42:99-120.
55. Sergejeva M., Laarnearu J., Tabri K. Hydraulic modelling of submerged oil spill including tanker hydrostatic overpressure. Analysis and Design of Marine Structures 2013, 209-217. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. C. Guedes Soares, J. Romanoff (Eds.).
56. Singkran N. Classifying risk zones by the impacts of oil spills in the coastal waters of Thailand. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2013, 70:34-43.
57. Smailys V., Česnauskis M. Estimation of expected cargo oil outflow from tanker involved in casualty. Transport 2006, 21:293-300.
58. Ståhlberg, K., 2010. Estimating deformation energy in ship-ship collisions with stochastic modeling, MSc Thesis, Department of Applied Mechanics. Aalto University, Espoo.
59. Ståhlberg K., Goerlandt F., Ehlers S., Kujala P. Impact scenario models for probabilistic risk-based design for ship-ship collision. Mar. Struct. 2013, 33:238-264.
60. Stelzenmüller V., Lee J., Garnacho E., Rogers S.I. Assessment of a Bayesian belief network-GIS framework as a practical tool to support marine planning. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2010, 60:1743-1754.
61. Tavakoli, M.T., Amdahl, J., Leira, B., 2010. Analytical and numerical modelling of oil spill from a side damaged tank, In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Collision and Grounding, ICCGS. Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.
62. Terndrup Pedersen P., Zhang S. On Impact mechanics in ship collisions. Mar. Struct. 1998, 11:429-449.
63. Trochim W., Donnely J.P. The Research Methods Knowledge Base 2008, Atomic Dog Publishing. third ed.
64. Van de Wiel G., van Dorp J.R. An oil outflow model for tanker collisions and groundings. Ann. Oper. Res. 2011, 187:279-304.
65. Van Dokkum K. Ship Knowledge: Covering Design, Construction and Operation 2006, DOKMAR, Enkhuizen, The Netherlands. third ed.
66. Van Dorp J.R., Merrick J.R. On a risk management analysis of oil spill risk using maritime transportation system simulation. Ann. Oper. Res. 2011, 249-277.
67. Watson S.R. The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 1994, 45:261-269.
68. Wiśniewski K., Kołakowski P. The effect of selected parameters on ship collision results by dynamic FE simulations. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 2003, 39:985-1006.