1

AssetmanagementGas & Electricity grids

Large impact incidents

Liander

Assetmanagement

May 26th, 2011

2

Liander

- Dutch DSO for gas and electricity networks

- Covering 1/3rd of the Netherlands

- 2.9 M customers E & 2.2 M customers G

- 80,000 km E-cable & 35,000 km G-pipelines

- 400 V, 3/6/10/20 kV, 50 kV and in-feeding transformers

- fully owned by some provinces and some municipalities

- independent from producers, traders, suppliers, costumers

- exclusive licence to operate networks in a region

3

Dutch DSO

•

4

AO-AM-SP model

- AO to optimize the stakeholders relationship

- AM to translate the stakeholder requirements into an activity plan, short term and long term

- AM to optimize performance and risk position within restrictions of limited resources

- AO to approve activity plans

- SP to optimize the execution of the plans

- AM to approve the execution of the plans

5

AM Priorization process

• Business values (from a stakeholder perspective): safety, sustainability, reliability, reputation, solvability, …• KPI for the selected business values• Risk appetite to incidents that embarrass business values• Prioritize risks to be mitigated• Balance between efforts to mitigate and the expected risk reduction• Select the activities to be performed

6

Business values, KPI, consequences

Risk for Reliability as log(customer-minutes) interrupted by an incident

Risk for Satisfaction as area of complaining customers at an incident

Risk for Reputation as width and duration of negative press attention

Risk for Reputation as level of problem with an authority

Risk for Financial consequences at an incident in log (Euro)

Risk for Safety as level of injury

Risk for Sustainability as log (Euro) for costs clean-up or compensation → size of ecological footprint

7

Risk consequences

Effects

Catastrophic

Severe

Heavy

Moderate

Small

8

Risk as f(consequence, probability)

Companies Risk perception expressed as Very High, High, Medium, Low and Negligible

Very High: immediate action, whatsoever, required

High: action according to normal procedures

Medium: action only when limited resources are required,

otherwise monitor/estimate risk evaluation

Low, negligible: no action

A calamity will be in the high effect/low probability area of the matrix

Log-Log scale for effects and for probability

9

Risk level (consequence, probability)Risk appetite

Catastrophic

Severe

Heavy

Moderate

Small

10

Non-linear matrix

11

Non-linear matrix

• Low probability incidents with a high effect get a higher weighting than high probability incidents with a low effect• Corresponding to the societal perception of incidents• Internally more difficult to deal with than a linear relationship• An alternative is to apply a linear matrix with a by-pass procedure for large effect incidents

• Calamities are weighted relatively heavier

12

QUESTION 1

In Liander Risk Matrix:

Risk = Effect * Frequency0.5 = Effect * √(Frequency)

Do you recognize such a perception of calamities?

Do you recognize such a weighting for calamities?

13

Emergency Plans

“Be prepared” is a mitigation that is acceptable in society for certain calamities, that are regarded as an external cause:• Terrorist attacks• Criminal activities• Plane crash• Floods• Bush fires• Pandemy• Explosion nearby• Restricted mobility

Emergency equipment, emergency plans, training, communication plans, learning curve, co-operation with other bodies, mutual assistance, …

14

Incident with chopper

In November 2007, low temperature, high water level, an Apache chopper cut all conductors of a 2-system 150 kV river crossing.

15

Calamity by external cause

• 40.000 consumers 48 hours without electricity, end of November• clearly an external cause• immediate actions, because of emergency equipment available, emergency trainings performed, communication plans in place• Seems to be acceptable to society

Haaksbergen, snowstorm, several conductors broken of 2-system 110 kV-line• 25.000 consumers 40 hours without electricity, end of November• external cause, but.. infrastructure has to cope with such conditions (highways and railways to a certain extent; electricity, gas, telecommunication fully)• communication not smoothly

16

Question 2

Floods regarded as a calamity with an external cause

Some experience in developed countries with evacuation Western Betuwe, recent floods in England, floods in Poland, Eastern Australia, Japan

What are the societal requirements for E- and G-grids in case of a flood? Needed for restoration of the polders? Repair in pace of re-use of land? Full reliability of supply also under wet conditions (to a certain level)?

17

How to deal with low probabilities?

• Be sure to cover common cause statistics• Be sure to apply correct statistics• Further develop stochastic techniques for low probability incidents• How to assess mathematically correct figure?• Compare with other low probability incidents, such as conditions of war, terroristic attacks, floods, nuclear disasters, plane crashes• Learn from low-probability incidents that occurred (for instance Fukushima Daiichi): mathematics and societal perception• Learn about communication between authorities and society, before and after an incident (Fukushima is now a nuclear-based catastrophe and not a tsunami-based catastrophe)

18

Question 3

What techniques are in place to estimate the frequency of low probability incidents?

What knowhow is in place to asses the societal perception of the risk involved?

What learning methods are used?

What about communication when such an incident may happen?