A Framework for Integrating Life-Safety and Environmental Consequences into Conventional Arctic Shipping Risk Models
Source abstract
Abstract
The International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code) was adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and entered into force on 1 January 2017. It provides a comprehensive treatment of topics relevant to ships operating in Polar regions. From a design perspective, in scenarios where ice exposure and the consequences of ice-induced damage are the same, it is rational to require the same ice class and structural performance for such vessels. Design requirements for different ice class vessels are provided in the Polar Code. The Polar Operational Limit Assessment Risk Indexing System (POLARIS) methodology provided in the Polar Code offers valuable guidance regarding operational limits for ice class vessels in different ice conditions. POLARIS has been shown to well reflect structural risk, and serves as a valuable decision support tool for operations and route planning. At the same time, the current POLARIS methodology does not directly account for the potential consequences resulting from a vessel incurring ice-induced damage. While two vessels of the same ice class operating in the same ice conditions would have similar structural risk profiles, the overall risk profile of each vessel will depend on the magnitude of consequences, should an incident or accident occur. In this paper, a new framework is presented that augments the current POLARIS methodology to model consequences. It has been developed on the premise that vessels of a given class with higher potential life-safety, environmental, or socio-economic consequences should be operated more conservatively. The framework supports voyage planning and real-time operational decision making through assignment of operational criteria based on the likelihood of ice-induced damage and the potential consequences. The objective of this framework is to enhance the safety of passengers and crews and the protection of the Arctic environment and its stakeholders. The challenges associated with establishing risk perspectives and evaluating consequences for Arctic ship operations are discussed. This methodology proposes a pragmatic pathway to link ongoing scientific research with risk-based methods to help inform recommended practices and decision support tools. Example scenarios are considered to illustrate the flexibility of the methodology in accounting for varied risk profiles for different vessel types, as well as incorporating input from local communities and risk and environmental impact assessments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Maritime Navigation and Safety · Arctic and Russian Policy Studies · Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL A1B 3X5, Canada
Ocean, Coastal and River Engineering Research Centre, National Research Council of Canada, St. John’s, NL A1B 3T5, Canada
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finland
Funding
Lloyd's Register Foundation
References (40)
Show source-provided references
1. Review of risk-based design for ice-class ships10.1016/j.marstruc.2018.09.008 ↗
2. Using the FRAM to understand Arctic ship navigation: assessing work processes during the Exxon Valdez grounding
3. Bergström, M., Hirdaris, S., Valdez Banda, O.A., Kujala, P., Thomas, G., Choy, K.L., Stefenson, P., Nordby, K., Li, Z., and Ringsberg, J.W. (2018, January 10–14). Towards holistic performance-based conceptual design of Arctic cargo ships. Proceedings of the 13th Intern. Marine Design Conference, Helsinki, Finland.
4. Implications of novel risk perspectives for ice management operations10.1016/j.coldregions.2016.10.004 ↗
5. IMO (2019, June 03). International code for ships operating in polar waters (Polar Code). MSC 94/21/Add. 1 Annex 6. International Maritime Organization. Available online: https://edocs.imo.org/FinalDocuments/English/MEPC68-21-ADD.1(E).doc.
6. IMO (2016). Guidance on Methodologies for Assessing Operational Capabilities and Limitations in Ice, International Maritime Organization (IMO). Available online: https://edocs.imo.org/FinalDocuments/English/MSC.1-CIRC.1519(E).docx.
7. The future of Arctic navigation: cooperation between the International Maritime Organization and Arctic Council
8. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report, Arctic Council’s Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME). [2nd ed.].
9. Vulnerability of Arctic marine mammals to vessel traffic in the increasingly ice-free Northwest Passage and Northern Sea Route10.1073/pnas.1803543115 ↗
10. Quantitative assessment of the differential coastal vulnerability associated to oil spills10.1007/s11852-012-0215-2 ↗
11. (2010). Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Arctic Offshore Structures, ISO/FDIS 19906:2010(E); International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
12. Kujala, P., Kämäräinen, J., and Suominen, M. (2019, January 9–13). Validation of the new risk based design approaches (POLARIS) for Arctic and Antarctic operations. Proceedings of the International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic Conditions, Delft, The Netherlands.
13. A Probabilistic High-Pressure Zone Model for Local and Global Loads During Ice-Structure Interactions10.1115/1.4042386 ↗
14. Freeman, R.E. (2016). Design of ships and offshore structures: A probabilistic approach for multi-year ice and iceberg impact loads for decision-making with uncertainty. [Ph.D. Thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland]. Available online: http://research.library.mun.ca/id/eprint/12411.
15. Taylor, R.S., and Richard, M. (2014, January 8–13). Development of a probabilistic ice load model based on empirical descriptions of high pressure zone attributes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE), San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1115/OMAE2014-24353 ↗
16. Mechanics of ice–structure interaction10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00032-7 ↗
17. (1998). SOLAS: International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974: Resolutions of the 1997 SOLAS Conference Relating to Bulk Carrier Safety, IMO.
18. (2011). MARPOL Consolidated Edition 2011: Articles, Protocols, Annexes and Unified Interpretations of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as Modified by the 1978 and 1997 Protocols, IMO. [5th ed.].
19. (2018). Revised Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for Use in the IMO Rule-Making Process, IMO. Available online: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/SafetyTopics/Documents/MSC-MEPC%202-Circ%2012-Rev%202.pdf.
20. Arctic navigation: stakes, benefits and limits of the POLARIS system
21. Bond, J., Hindley, R., Kendrick, A., Kämäräinen, J., and Kuulila, L. (2018, January 5–7). Evaluating risk and determining operational limitations for ships in ice. Proceedings of the Arctic Technology Conference, Houston, TX, USA.10.4043/29143-MS ↗
22. Arctic shipping and risks: emergency categories and response capacities
23. Species and habitats in danger: estimating the relative risk posed by oil spills in the northern Baltic Sea10.1002/ecs2.1344 ↗
24. (2019, September 26). Identification of Arctic marine areas of heightened ecological and cultural significance: Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) IIc. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), AMAP/CAFF/SDWG, Oslo, Norway. Available online: https://www.amap.no/documents/doc/identification-of-arctic-marine-areas-of-heightened-ecological-and-cultural-significance-arctic-marine-shipping-assessment-amsa-iic/869.
25. Preparing for the unprecedented – towards quantitative oil risk assessment in the Arctic marine areas10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.08.064 ↗
26. Governance of Arctic expedition cruise ships in a time of rapid environmental and economic change10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.12.005 ↗
27. Simões Ré, A., and Veitch, B. (2008, January 6–11). Simões Ré; A.; Veitch, B. Escape-evacuation-rescue response in ice-covered regions. Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2008), Vancouver, BC, Canada.
28. Aven, T., Anderson, H.B., Cox, T., Droguett, E.L., Greenberg, M., Guikema, S., and Zio, E. (2019, May 22). Risk analysis foundations. Society for Risk Analysis 2015. Available online: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b643/dbc0c69946ce67c74172b14ad1b6a054440a.pdf.
29. Maritime transportation risk analysis: review and analysis in light of some foundational issues10.1016/j.ress.2015.01.025 ↗
30. Risk frames and multiple ways of knowing: coping with ambiguity in oil spill risk governance in the Norwegian Barents Sea10.1016/j.envsci.2019.04.009 ↗
31. Naseri, M., and Barabadi, A. (2018, January 16–19). On context, issues, and pitfalls of expert judgement process in risk assessment of Arctic offshore installations and operations. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Bangkok, Thailand.10.1109/IEEM.2018.8607350 ↗
32. Practical implications of the new risk perspectives10.1016/j.ress.2013.02.020 ↗
33. Towards probabilistic models for the prediction of a ship performance in dynamic ice10.1016/j.coldregions.2014.12.009 ↗
34. Towards a probabilistic model for predicting ship besetting in ice in Arctic waters10.1016/j.ress.2016.06.010 ↗
35. Assessment of the applicability of goal- and risk-based design on Arctic sea transport systems10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.10.040 ↗
36. (1990). Marine Accident Report: Grounding of the US Tankship EXXON VALDEZ on Bligh Reef, Prince William Sound, near Valdez, Alaska, March 24, 1989, National Transportation Safety Board. Available online: https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/B/22590091.pdf.
37. (2009). Report of Investigation in the Matter of Sinking of Passenger Vessel EXPLORER (O.N. 8495) 23 November 2007 in the Bransfield Strait Near the South Shetland Islands, Bureau of Maritime Affairs.
38. (2005). MANICE Manual of Standard Procedures for Observing and Reporting Ice Conditions, Environment. [9th ed.].
39. (2019). Greenland Ice Chart, Danish Meteorological Institute.
40. Navigating in polar waters with CASRAS