天然气管道失效个人生命风险评价技术研究

为研究天然气长输管道失效个人生命风险,提出一种以人员伤亡概率为指标的天然气管道失效后果风险评价方法。基于天然气管道的失效概率和失效致死长度参数,建立天然气长输管道生命风险评价模型。用该模型,对国内某城市住宅小区内带腐蚀缺陷的天然气管线进行定量风险分析。借鉴英国天然气输送公司数据,确定天然气管线个人生命风险值。案例证明,用所建立的天然气管道失效个人生命风险评价模型能够有效地分析带缺陷天然气管道失效后果,实现天然气管道的个人安全生命风险全定量评价。     

基于变权综合理论的天然气管道动态风险评价

为对天然气管道进行有效的风险评估,提出基于变权综合理论的天然气管道动态风险评价法。利用故障树分析法(FTA)确定天然气管道不同时间空间下的主要风险因素,实时更新风险指标体系;同时引入变权综合原理,建立权重跟随指标值动态变化的变权赋值模型;然后对天然气管道进行综合评定,确定管道当前状态的风险程度。以陕京3线中某管段为例进行分析,得出该管段当前风险等级为中等,在后期运行中应被重点监控。变权赋值与动态指标体系的结合使该方法能实时反映管道风险状况,并适用于天然气管线各段。     

含硫天然气净化厂硫化氢泄漏分析及对策

以川东北某含硫天然气净化厂为对象,通过分析该净化厂的处理工艺及可能造成泄漏的各种原因,确定了硫化氢泄漏危险较高的生产单元。通过工艺压力、流量、物料组分的比对,选取了脱硫单元原料气和硫磺回收单元酸性气作为模拟泄漏物料。对该厂所在地的气象条件和厂区的地形地貌进行了调查,净化厂当地近5年风速、云量统计表明低风速和多云为主导天气,将D1.5m/s作为模拟硫化氢泄漏扩散的典型气象条件。采用了美国石油学会(API)推荐地面粗糙度长度。运用PHAST软件计算了在典型气象条件下通过3种不同孔径泄漏1 min,5min和30min,形成的立即危及生命或健康(IDLH)范围。在典型气象条件下IDLH的下风向边界距离在41m至1190m范围内,以硫磺回收单元的大孔径泄漏为最远。以小孔泄漏为例模拟并讨论了风速、大气稳定度对硫化氢扩散的影响。为降低H2S泄漏风险提出了在线监测及联锁系统设置的要求,对避免和减少硫化氢中毒伤亡事故具有指导意义。     

天然气管道完整性管理探析

通过对国内外天然气管道事故的统计和分析,指出了对天然气管道进行完整性管理的重要性;在此基础上,简要介绍了管道完整性管理方法,着重探讨了天然气管道完整性管理的流程和环节,包括管道潜在危害辨识、管道数据信息搜集与分析、管道风险评价、管道完整性评价、完整性评价响应和减缓措施,并进一步说明了天然气管道完整性管理的实施方法;最后,给出了在我国开展天然气管道完整性管理的必要性和建议.     

基于核密度估计的清代中国自然灾害时空分布特征

基于《清史·灾赈志》中的历史灾害信息,提取清代（1644-1911年）自然灾害共24 537县次,重建逐年灾害频次序列,以核密度估计法对5类主要灾害（水灾、旱灾、蝗灾、疫灾、冷害）的空间分布特征进行分析。结果表明:清代自然灾害频次序列没有明显的趋势性特征,而体现为阶段性波动,基于灾害频次30年滑动平均值可提取出4个峰值时段（1644-1673、1721-1750、1812-1841和1872-1901年）;相比于现代,清代灾害类型更加集中在农业灾害,最为多发的是水灾和旱灾,合计占总数的近80%,其次是蝗灾、疫灾和冷害;灾害最为多发的高风险区分布在黄淮海平原和长江三角洲,前者集中了水灾、旱灾、蝗灾的极端多发区,后者除了水旱多发,还是疫灾和冷害的极端多发区; 4个峰值时段的灾种类型组合和灾害多发区均有明显差异,时空变化受到致灾因子、暴露度和脆弱性因素的共同作用。上述工作有助于更好地认识历史灾害发生规律,对于当前及未来的防灾减灾工作具有重要参考价值。     

洪水泥石流等自然灾害对旅游景区的破坏作用研究

通过泥石流灾害模拟模型与灾害损失率计算方法了解旅游景区的损失状况,研究自然灾害对旅游景区的破坏作用。旅游景区洪灾模拟模型由分流模型与汇流模型构成,根据泥石流多相流成分中固液两相分离原则构建泥石流分流模型;引用DEM数据得到泥石流流域栅格的汇流方向,根据经验模型计算汇流用时,采用八方向方法获取河道信息,基于这些数据构建泥石流模拟的汇流模型,采用ArcGis软件实时呈现该模型的泥石流灾害模拟效果;结合ArcGis软件显示的灾情数据,采用洪灾损失率计算方法获取旅游景区自然灾害损失率。实验结果表明,该模型计算旅游景区建筑损失率误差均小于5%,在有效模拟泥石流灾害的同时,可准确描述自然灾害对旅游景区的破坏作用。     

Spatial cost–benefit analysis of blue restoration and factors driving net benefits globally

Marine coastal ecosystems, commonly referred to as blue ecosystems, provide valuable services to society but are under increasing threat worldwide due to a variety of drivers, including eutrophication, development, land-use change, land reclamation, and climate change. Ecological restoration is sometimes necessary to facilitate recovery in coastal ecosystems. Blue restoration (i.e., in marine coastal systems) is a developing field, and projects to date have been small scale and expensive, leading to the perception that restoration may not be economically viable. We conducted a global cost–benefit analysis to determine the net benefits of restoring coral reef, mangrove, saltmarsh, and seagrass ecosystems, where the benefit is defined as the monetary value of ecosystem services. We estimated costs from published restoration case studies and used an adjusted-value-transfer method to assign benefit values to these case studies. Benefit values were estimated as the monetary value provided by ecosystem services of the restored habitats. Benefits outweighed costs (i.e., there were positive net benefits) for restoration of all blue ecosystems. Mean benefit:cost ratios for ecosystem restoration were eight to 10 times higher than prior studies of coral reef and seagrass restoration, most likely due to the more recent lower cost estimates we used. Among ecosystems, saltmarsh had the greatest net benefits followed by mangrove; coral reef and seagrass ecosystems had lower net benefits. In general, restoration in nations with middle incomes had higher (eight times higher in coral reefs and 40 times higher in mangroves) net benefits than those with high incomes. Within an ecosystem type, net benefit varied with restoration technique (coral reef and saltmarsh), ecosystem service produced (mangrove and saltmarsh), and project duration (seagrass). These results challenge the perceptions of the low economic viability of blue restoration and should encourage further targeted investment in this field.     

Numerical simulation of small-scale pool fires of LNG

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) has been largely indicated as a promising alternative solution for the transportation and storage of natural gas. In the case of accidental release on the ground, a pool fire scenario may occur. Despite the relevance of this accident, due to its likelihood and potential to trigger domino effects, accurate analyses addressing the characterization of pool fires of LNG are still missing.In this work, the fire dynamic simulator (FDS) has been adopted for the evaluation of the effects of the released amount of fuel and its composition (methane, ethane, and propane), on the thermal and chemical properties of small-scale LNG pool fire. More specifically, the heat release rate, the burning rate, the flame height, and thermal radiation, at different initial conditions, have been evaluated for pool having diameter smaller than 10 m. Safety distances have been calculated for all the investigated conditions, as well.Results have also been compared with data and correlations retrieved from the current literature. The equation of Thomas seems to work properly for the definition of the height over diameter ratio of the LNG pool fire for all the mixture and the investigated diameters.The addition of ethane and propane significantly affects the obtained results, especially in terms of radiative thermal radiation peaks, thus indicating the inadequacy of the commonly adopted assumption of pure methane as single, surrogate species for the LNG mixture.     

The role of agri‐environment schemes in conservation and environmental management

Over half of the European landscape is under agricultural management and has been for millennia. Many species and ecosystems of conservation concern in Europe depend on agricultural management and are showing ongoing declines. Agri‐environment schemes (AES) are designed partly to address this. They are a major source of nature conservation funding within the European Union (EU) and the highest conservation expenditure in Europe. We reviewed the structure of current AES across Europe. Since a 2003 review questioned the overall effectiveness of AES for biodiversity, there has been a plethora of case studies and meta‐analyses examining their effectiveness. Most syntheses demonstrate general increases in farmland biodiversity in response to AES, with the size of the effect depending on the structure and management of the surrounding landscape. This is important in the light of successive EU enlargement and ongoing reforms of AES. We examined the change in effect size over time by merging the data sets of 3 recent meta‐analyses and found that schemes implemented after revision of the EU's agri‐environmental programs in 2007 were not more effective than schemes implemented before revision. Furthermore, schemes aimed at areas out of production (such as field margins and hedgerows) are more effective at enhancing species richness than those aimed at productive areas (such as arable crops or grasslands). Outstanding research questions include whether AES enhance ecosystem services, whether they are more effective in agriculturally marginal areas than in intensively farmed areas, whether they are more or less cost‐effective for farmland biodiversity than protected areas, and how much their effectiveness is influenced by farmer training and advice? The general lesson from the European experience is that AES can be effective for conserving wildlife on farmland, but they are expensive and need to be carefully designed and targeted.     

Emerging conservation challenges and prospects in an era of offshore hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation

Globally, extensive marine areas important for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem functioning are undergoing exploration and extraction of oil and natural gas resources. Such operations are expanding to previously inaccessible deep waters and other frontier regions, while conservation‐related legislation and planning is often lacking. Conservation challenges arising from offshore hydrocarbon development are wide‐ranging. These challenges include threats to ecosystems and marine species from oil spills, negative impacts on native biodiversity from invasive species colonizing drilling infrastructure, and increased political conflicts that can delay conservation actions. With mounting offshore operations, conservationists need to urgently consider some possible opportunities that could be leveraged for conservation. Leveraging options, as part of multi‐billion dollar marine hydrocarbon operations, include the use of facilities and costly equipment of the deep and ultra‐deep hydrocarbon industry for deep‐sea conservation research and monitoring and establishing new conservation research, practice, and monitoring funds and environmental offsetting schemes. The conservation community, including conservation scientists, should become more involved in the earliest planning and exploration phases and remain involved throughout the operations so as to influence decision making and promote continuous monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystems. A prompt response by conservation professionals to offshore oil and gas developments can mitigate impacts of future decisions and actions of the industry and governments. New environmental decision support tools can be used to explicitly incorporate the impacts of hydrocarbon operations on biodiversity into marine spatial and conservation plans and thus allow for optimum trade‐offs among multiple objectives, costs, and risks.