 |
 |
 |
| Start
here, you'll be able to search products by Title, Publication
Date, Keywords, or browse by Category. |
|
|
 |
| Keep
items in your cart, continue shopping |
|
|
 |
| Click
here when you're done buying. |
 |
| An
account is required to use ssl's secure commerce engine |
|
|
 |
| Once created,
you may proceed to either modify your account or continue to purchase
items. |
 |
| Check
the items you've put in your cart for purchase. |
|
|
 |
| Find
out where your order is. |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
Displaying records 11 through 11 of 2161
|
|
|
Special! Free shipping on this item!
|
Title:
|
“We’re still hitting things”: the effectiveness of third-party processes for pipeline strike prevention
|
| Category: |
|
| Downloadable: |
Yes  |
| Catalog No.: |
2399s |
| Date
of Publication: |
2017-03-01 |
| Price: |
$25.00
|
| Authors: |
Dr Vanessa McDermott and Prof. Jan Hayes |
| Abstract: |
infrastructure, such as roads, water
pipelines, and electricity or
telecommunications cabling. Unlike other
countries, there has never been a death
or serious injury from a high-pressure
gas pipeline strike in Australia and yet
external interference continues to be the
most common cause of pipeline damage
despite a range of technical and
legislative measures in place. This
research project aims to enhance the
safety strategies regarding third-party
pipeline strikes by giving the pipeline
sector a greater understanding of the
motivations and priorities of those who
work around pipeline assets and so how to
work with them to achieve better
outcomes.
Using data gathered from more than 70 in-
depth interviews, we explore empirically
alternate understandings of risk amongst
a range of stakeholders and individuals
that are responsible in some way for work
near or around high-pressure gas
transmission pipelines in Australia.
Outside the pipeline sector, much of the
work around pipelines is conducted by
those at the bottom of long chains of
contractors and sub-contractors. We
discuss perceptions of risk held by a
range of third-party actors whose
activities have the potential to threaten
gas-pipeline integrity. We compare these
views with gas-pipeline industry
perceptions of risk, couched in terms of
asset management, public safety, legal
and insurance obligations, and reputation
management.
This paper focuses on how financial risk
– and so also management of the potential
for pipeline strikes – is shifted down
the third-party contractor chain. Added
to this, incentives for timely project
completion can unintentionally lead to
situations where the potential for third-
party contractors to strike pipelines
increases. The data show that third-party
contractors feel the time and cost impact
of design or project changes most
immediately. Consequently, strikes or
near misses may result as sub-contractors
seek to avoid perceived ‘unnecessary’
time delays along with the associated
financial impact. We argue that efforts
to reduce the potential for pipeline
strikes need to be targeted at structural
changes, rather than simply aimed at
worker risk perception and enforcement of
safety-compliance strategies.
|
|
