CO2 Hazard

11/6/2018 Guidance on conveying CO2 in pipelines
Guidance on conveying carbon dioxide in

pipelines in connection with carbon capture
and storage projects
Introduction
Legislation
Land Use Planning
As Low as is Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)
Conveying CO 2 in pipelines
Guidance and standards
Introduction
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects are likely to involve the conveyance of Carbon Dioxide
(CO 2) by pipeline, either through the use of existing pipelines or the construction of new pipeline
systems. Whilst some projects might involve conveying CO 2 as a gas, it is likely that it will also be
handled at high pressures as a dense or supercritical phase fluid.
Operators of CO 2 pipelines need to fully understand the hazards, mechanisms, consequences and
probabilities of pipeline failures in order to ensure their safety. Uncertainties remain around the
conveyance of dense or supercritical phase CO 2 in pipelines which are likely to be associated with
CCS projects. HSE and the CCS sector are continuing to work to improve understanding of the risks
from conveying CO 2 in pipelines.
Legislation
Sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA) require employers to ensure
the heath and safety of their employees and others so far as is reasonably practicable. This means
that CO 2 pipeline operators are required to take a proportionate approach to managing the risks from
conveying CO 2 at every stage of the pipeline’s lifetime. This should be demonstrated through a
comprehensive risk assessment which takes account of the range of risks that arise from the design,
commissioning, operation (including maintenance and inspection) and decommissioning of the CO 2
pipeline.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pipelines/co2conveying-full.htm 1/5
Part II of the Pipelines Safety Regulations 1996 (PSR) defines the legal standard for the design and
operation of pipelines. In particular, Regulation 5 of PSR requires that the design of a pipeline, or any
modification to it, takes account of:
the operating regime of the pipeline
the conditions under which the fluid is to be conveyed
the environment to which the pipeline will be subjected.
Land Use Planning

CO 2 is not currently defined as a dangerous fluid under PSR and, as such, CO 2 pipelines are not
classified as Major Accident Hazard Pipelines (MAHPs). Consequently developments around CO 2
pipelines will not be subject to controls under Land Use Planning. [1] However, HSE is committed to
keeping under review the risks from conveying CO 2 in pipelines and the classification of CO 2 under
major accident hazard legislation and will consider changes to existing legislation if it is justified by
the evidence.
As Low as is Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

Operators of CO 2 pipelines can demonstrate compliance with PSR and HSWA by making sure that
the risks from their pipelines are reduced as low as is reasonably practicable (ALARP) [2]. In
particular, the application of good practice at the design stage is an essential part of this
demonstration. Further information on ALARP and design can be found at Further guidance on
assessing compliance with the law in individual cases and the use of good practice [3] and Policy and
guidance on Reducing Risks as Low as Reasonably Practicable in Design [4]. However, to support
their ALARP justifications, and until detailed standards become available, operators of CO 2 pipelines
should use sound engineering and empirical evidence to support un-validated or partially validated
probabilistic modelling.
Conveying CO 2 in pipelines
Conveying CO 2 presents a number of hazards to the materials used to construct pipelines.
Designers and operators should carefully consider the following:
Corrosion
CO 2 is an acid gas which reacts with water to form carbonic acid. This means that water content of
CO 2 transported through carbon steel pipelines needs to be considered and pipeline materials
selected accordingly. Other impurities in the CO 2 stream should also be considered as sources of
corrosion (when in reaction with water) and in some cases may present a greater hazard than
carbonic acid.
Ductile and Brittle Fracture Propagation

Pipeline wall thickness and toughness should be specified to ensure that brittle fracture is avoided at
normal operating temperatures and at those expected during a loss of containment event. It is also
important so that ductile fracture is avoided or quickly arrested. These design considerations should
be extended to all components in the pipeline system including welds, fittings etc.
Saturation Pressure
Where a dense phase or supercritical CO 2 pipeline is ruptured, the concentration of impurities such
as Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Oxygen and Argon will affect the saturation pressure of the released fluids.
This is an important design issue because the time it takes the released CO 2 to change from dense
or supercritical phase to gaseous phase will have a marked effect on subsequent ductile crack
propagation.
CO2 Stream Composition and Flow Assurance

Any pipeline or system of pipelines intended to convey CO 2 should be designed and operated with
regard to the range of impurities likely to be present in the CO 2. Where CO 2 from multiple sources is
conveyed, each section of pipeline should be designed and operated to take account of the CO 2
stream composition within that section. Also, given the likely variability of CO 2 production, pipeline
designers and operators should take account of the likely intermittency in flows and the consequent
effects of repeated pressure cycling.
Modelling Loss of Containment

During a loss of containment event a number of highly complex interactions between the pipeline, the
surrounding environment and the decompressing fluid will occur. With CO 2 this is further complicated
by the potential for phase changes of the fluid. This depends on the temperature and pressure as
well as the geometry of the orifice through which the gas is decompressing and the presence and
concentration of impurities. Given the complexity of modelling such a release, designers and
operators should use existing outflow models which have been experimentally validated for use with
CO 2. Additionally, the use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to model releases and help set
separation distances may be justified where a CO 2 pipeline passes through a workplace, an
occupied offshore installation or a populated area.
Non-Metallic Components
The presence of impurities in the CO 2 stream may cause deterioration in non-metallic components
such as elastomeric seals used in pipeline valves. As such, non-metallic components should be
selected for use in CO 2 pipelines only where their continued integrity in the presence of likely
impurities has been demonstrated.
Fluid Hazard Classification

During a loss of containment event significant quantities of CO 2 are likely to be released from a
pipeline associated with CCS. Research published by HSE (‘Comparison of risks from carbon dioxide
and natural gas pipelines [5]’) concluded that a loss of containment event from a dense or supercritical
phase CO 2 pipeline presents a similar level of risk to a release from a high pressure natural gas
pipeline. As such, designers of CO 2 pipelines should consider applying a similar fluid hazard
categorisation (chosen from an established pipeline design code) to that applied to high pressure
natural gas pipelines.
Guidance and Standards

Current UK experience of designing and operating CO 2 pipelines is limited and only some pipeline
design codes include it as a relevant fluid within their scope. With regard to the re-use of existing
pipelines, any proposal to change the fluid conveyed will require a re-assessment of the original
pipeline design to ensure that the pipeline is capable of conveying the fluid safely. Oil and gas
companies, particularly in the USA, do have some experience of using high pressure injection of CO 2
in oilfields for enhanced oil recovery. However, the extent of the reliability data available from these
activities is limited compared to that from hydrocarbon pipeline operation.
European Standards implemented in the UK as British Normative Standards (BS EN series) and
supported by published documents (such as the British Standards PD series) provide a sound basis
for the design of pipelines. Other national or international codes are likely to be acceptable in the UK
if the proposed standard, code of practice, technical specification or procedure provides equivalent
levels of safety.
UK and European standards relevant to the transport of CO 2 in pipelines include:
DNV RP-J202 – Design and Operation of CO 2 Pipelines (2010)
Energy Institute – 1301 CO 2 Good Plant Design
Energy Institute – 1302 CO 2 Hazard Analysis
DNV RP-J202 and the Energy Institute guidance provide recommended practice on CO 2 pipeline
and plant design and operation and are intended to supplement other relevant standards.
UK and European Standards relevant to the general transport of fluids in pipelines include:
BS PD 8010: 2004 Part 1 - Steel pipelines on land

BS PD 8010: 2004 Part 2 - Subsea pipelines
BS EN 14161: 2011 - Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries. Pipeline Transportation

Systems
Institute of Petroleum Pipeline Code IP6
DNV OS-F101 - Submarine Pipeline Systems (2012)
BS PD 8010: 2004 Parts 1 and 2 and European Standard BS EN 14161 are general pipeline design
codes of practice. HSE recommends that any pipelines designed to BS EN 14161 should be
supported by industry good practice as presented in BS PD 8010: 2004 Parts 1 and 2.
Codes IP6, BS EN 14161, BS PD 8010 and DNV OS-F101 are all applicable to pipelines used to
transport CO 2. However none of these standards address CO 2 transported in its dense or
supercritical phases. Although IP6 is still in existence and contains useful guidance on operational
issues, it is not widely used for new pipelines. DNV OS-F101 is specifically an offshore standard,
limited to submarine pipeline systems.
Link URLs in this page
1. Land Use Planning.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/landuseplanning/about.htm
2. as low as is reasonably practicable (ALARP)
http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarpglance.htm
3. Further guidance on assessing compliance with the law in individual cases and the use of good
practice
http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarp2.htm
4. Policy and guidance on Reducing Risks as Low as Reasonably Practicable in Design
http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarp3.htm
5. Comparison of risks from carbon dioxide and natural gas pipelines
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr749.htm

CO2 Hazard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CO2 Hazard

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CO2 Hazard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/6/2018 Guidance on conveying CO2 in pipelines

Guidance on conveying carbon dioxide in

Land Use Planning

As Low as is Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

Guidance and standards

the operating regime of the pipeline

the conditions under which the fluid is to be conveyed

the environment to which the pipeline will be subjected.

Land Use Planning

As Low as is Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

Ductile and Brittle Fracture Propagation

CO2 Stream Composition and Flow Assurance

Modelling Loss of Containment

Fluid Hazard Classification

Guidance and Standards

UK and European standards relevant to the transport of CO 2 in pipelines include:

DNV RP-J202 – Design and Operation of CO 2 Pipelines (2010)

Energy Institute – 1301 CO 2 Good Plant Design

Energy Institute – 1302 CO 2 Hazard Analysis

BS PD 8010: 2004 Part 1 - Steel pipelines on land

BS PD 8010: 2004 Part 2 - Subsea pipelines

BS EN 14161: 2011 - Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries. Pipeline Transportation

Institute of Petroleum Pipeline Code IP6

DNV OS-F101 - Submarine Pipeline Systems (2012)

Link URLs in this page

1. Land Use Planning.

You might also like