Under an expanded definition of the term, this is the first ever open source platform for pipeline risk management.
The term open source refers to something people can modify and share because its design is publicly accessible.
The term originated in the context of software development to designate a specific approach to creating computer programs. Today, however, “open source” designates a broader set of values—what we call “the open source way.” Open source projects, products, or initiatives embrace and celebrate principles of open exchange, collaborative participation, rapid prototyping, transparency, meritocracy, and community-oriented development.
opensource.com
So, what does that mean in practical terms? read on pls
What is it?
As used here, open source is a sharing of solutions. This means that solutions–at least the simple solutions that are often sufficient–are widely available to all practitioners of risk management. So too is the technology, engineering, and science underlying those tools. The recognition of when the simple tools are insufficient also emerges as practitioners learn when more robust solutions are warranted.
This content includes much that is directed towards regulatory compliance for US pipeline operators but also much, much more. Remember that regs are minimum requirements, often falling short of prudent asset stewardship or even standard practice.
No matter how many smart people in your organization, there will always be someone smarter outside.
Why should I care?
This is noteworthy because it reinforces the notion that, at least to some extent, “we’re all in this together.” There is little competitive advantage to withhold safety technology from others in our industry. When one pipeline system operator suffers a failure (leak/rupture), all other operators come under increased scrutiny and often increased regulation.
Service providers of technical solutions should similarly be incentivized to share. The technology should be widely understood and agreed upon. The service provider’s competitive advantage comes from his expertise in that technology and his ability to efficiently execute or oversee the implementation.
Incentive for Sharing Safety Knowledge
As noted previously, there is often little competitive advantage for a pipeline owner to have better safety record than other pipeline owners.
Granted, a poor operator may suffer a bad reputation, discouraging use of his system when customers have alternatives. In extreme cases, the poor operator may drive himself out of business via accidents or by losing business to some competition offering alternative transport.
Pipelines often do not have significant competition for their services. If a neighboring pipeline is out of service, there is usually NOT a significant increase in business, at least not long-term.
On the other hand, when one operator has an incident, it usually harms the whole industry.
There is rarely any competitive advantage to be gained by hoarding safety intel from other pipeline operators. If a neighboring pipeline is competing for the same business (this would be rare) and suffers an outage, it does NOT normally create a significant increase in business.
Granted, a poor operator may drive himself out of business via accidents, or make himself a cheap takeover target for a better operator. But far more likely is that whenever an operator has an incident, it harms the whole industry via increased regulation, government oversight, and stakeholder mistrust.
Are there limitations on using this content?
Risk assessment software tools
