IEAGHG Risk Management Network Webinar December 2020

Publication Overview

This webinar heard from the operators at Shell’s Quest project about their experiences with risk management at the project, which was followed by a panel discussion between representatives from leading CCS developers, as well as experts in the area of risk management.

Publication Summary

The ninety minute webinar and virtual panel discussion covered a wide range of ideas and conversation points regarding risk management of CCS projects, particularly looking at the evolution of risk during CCS projects’ lifecycle.  The following conclusions and key messages were drawn from IEAGHG’s review of the panellists’ discussion:

• The bow-tie risk assessment framework is a trusted approach for containment management of CO₂ storage projects.
• As injection progresses, accumulated experience increases and uncertainties are reduced. Risk management is a process for evaluating uncertainties and developing mitigation plans.  This approach reduces exposure to risk as a project evolves.
• The geomechanical integrity testing programme is critical to allow proper understanding of uncertainty in a storage complex.
• As projects increase in size and number, there is also an increase in exposure to risk, but with more data risk assessment can be improved and uncertainties reduced.
• Perceived risk can be equated with adverse events. Perception problems can arise where people do not understand specific technologies or understand the complexity of risk management practices.
• Experience from live projects shows that it is critical that project developers are transparent with their public stakeholders and information is readily available.
• It’s important to educate not only the local and wider public, but the regulatory and environmental communities.
• The bow-tie approach is also a powerful communication tool.
• Collaboration and communication between the project and the regulator is an important concept that should be followed by all projects, from planning to implementation, operation and eventual closure.
• Discussion between different regulators is important to share experiences and learning. The Alberta regulators communicate with other regulatory authorities.
• MMV programmes can be adapted and evolve as projects progress.
• Better methods are needed for analysing the significant quantities of data generated from MMV programmes.
• Well integrity management is crucial.