Mitigation of Ice Risk to Subsea Infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A review of the current capability within the industry is given for assessing the iceberg environment and iceberg keel / seabed structure interaction, with emphasis on operations relevant to the east coast of Canada. Consideration of calculating contact frequency and ice loads for iceberg keel impact is discussed, for both freely floating and gouging icebergs. Available environmental data for the Labrador Shelf and Grand Banks of Newfoundland are summarized. An overview of the operational experience of placing subsea production facilities in glory holes to provide protection from iceberg keels is provided, along with a review of studies related to the development of alternative solutions. Studies have been performed to investigate the feasibility of design and construction of cased (or silo) glory holes, external protection structures such as rock berms and steel or concrete structures, and the effects of direct impact scenarios such as the use of caisson wellhead systems. Ongoing efforts to improve the knowledge base, analytical capability and engineering solutions to predict the effect of iceberg keel loading on subsea oil and gas facilities are described. Obstacles to safe and economic development are identified, along with a discussion of methods that can be used to overcome these and provide practical solutions for future development. Background Over 25% of the world's petroleum reserves are believed to be in arctic regions and other offshore, ice frequented environments. As world energy demand increases, development of oil and gas resources in harsh ice environments is being increasingly considered by industry. The advancement of safe, cost-effective and reliable engineering solutions for subsea infrastructure in ice environments is a key requirement for sanctioning stand alone and marginal field developments. Subsea infrastructure requiring protection from ice keel contact includes components such as wellheads, production trees, manifolds, umbilicals, flowlines and pipelines. This paper describes an ongoing joint industry project that was initiated to address uncertainties and develop approaches to mitigate the risks associated with oil and gas development in ice-prone regions. The project comprises two components that address differences in approach for issues related to pipelines in Arctic regions, and subsea production facilities in sub-Arctic regions. It is funded by a combination of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency through its Atlantic Innovation Fund and a number of large oil and gas operators. Project collaborators include private companies, government agencies and academic organizations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".