Economic Assessment of Improper Performance Indicators and Pipeline Spill Intensity for Repair and Substitution (Case Study)

Abstract

This study evaluates the economic implications of improper performance indicators and pipeline spill intensity for determining the most cost-effective solution between repair and substitution. Employing the Muhlbauer risk assessment technique, this research grades critical indicators such as human error, design flaws, and spill intensity. A uniform annual cost (UAC) method is used to compare the economic viability of repair versus substitution. Findings reveal that the improper performance index is significantly influenced by design-phase deficiencies, while higher spill intensity scores correlate with increased safety risks, particularly in high-population-density areas. Furthermore, corrosion and external factors in specific pipeline sections exacerbate risks, with substitution emerging as the safer, cost-effective alternative due to extended lifespan and minimized environmental hazards. Despite close cost proximity between repair and substitution, substitution is recommended for enhanced reliability. The study highlights the necessity of localizing the Muhlbauer model for Iranian pipeline conditions and extending its application to oil and petroleum pipelines. This approach can optimize resource allocation, minimize risk, and ensure operational efficiency.