Vegetation encroachment on O&G asset
|
|
Challenge ID |
OTM:041 |
||||
|
1 |
Title |
Vegetation encroachment on O&G assets |
||||
|
2 |
Theme ID |
ON 5.4: Logistics planning and operations - Monitoring of assets |
||||
|
3 |
Originator of Challenge |
Onshore: OTM |
||||
|
4 |
Challenge Reviewer / initiator |
Ramani |
||||
|
|
General description |
Overview of Challenge |
||||
|
5 |
What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?) |
Vegetation encroachment on assets can reduce access and/or damage the integrity of structures |
||||
|
6 |
Thematic information requirements |
3. Obtain detailed vegetation information, 4. Obtain detailed land-use information, |
||||
|
7 |
Nature of the challenge - What effect does this challenge have on operations? |
Remedial works can be required to regain access or operation of the asset. This can be time consuming and costly. One way of managing this could be to monitor our assets using aerial imagery and target the use of our ground staff to mitigate against thi |
||||
|
8 |
What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed? |
Updated mapping, if it is produced. We also rely on asset owners to keep records of changes around the assets themselves. However, for smaller assets this detail is often lost. |
||||
|
9 |
What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge? |
Very high to medium resolution EO data to map changes of the environment and ecosystem.
|
||||
|
10 |
What is your view on the capability of technology to meet this need? – are you currently using EO tech? If not, why not? |
EO could be a useful complimentary technology |
||||
|
|
Challenge classification |
|
||||
|
11 |
Lifecycle stage |
Pre license |
Exp. |
Dev. |
Prod. |
Decom. |
|
Score from impact quantification [1] |
0 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
|
|
12 |
Climate classification |
NOT CLIMATE SPECIFIC |
||||
|
13 |
Geographic context/restrictions |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
|
14 |
Topographic classification / Offshore classification |
Generic onshore (Unspecified) |
||||
|
15 |
Seasonal variations |
Any season |
||||
|
16 |
Impact Area |
operational cost reduction |
||||
|
17 |
Technology Urgency (How quickly does the user need the solution) |
Immediately (0-2 years) |
||||
|
|
Information requirements |
|
||||
|
18 |
Update frequency |
depending on sensor and application |
||||
|
19 |
Data Currently used |
|
||||
|
20 |
Spatial resolution |
|
||||
|
21 |
Thematic accuracy |
80-90% |
||||
|
22 |
Example formats |
Standardized geo-spatial formats (e.g. shapefile, geotiff or KML) |
||||
|
23 |
Timeliness |
within six months |
||||
|
24 |
Geographic Extent |
reservoir footprint |
||||
|
25 |
Existing standards |
|
||||
[1] Impact quantification scores: 4 – Critical/ enabling; 3 – Significant/ competitive advantage; 2 – Important but non-essential; 1 – Nice to have; 0 – No impact, need satisfied with existing technology
There is no content with the specified labels