Reliable, Resilient Operations Today for Energy’s Future

Introduction: Building reliable and resilient operations for today and tomorrow. Managing reliability and mechanical integrity in today's asset-heavy organisations takes more than ticking off a checklist or merging spreadsheets. You have demands to produce more output but also keep costs down; demands to manage compliance and safety in an ever more complex environment; and ultimately, identify problems before they become failures, while ensuring your institutional expertise is captured and used as you welcome a new digital native workforce. It takes transformation, software that allows you to centralise data, prioritise by risk and criticality, automate processes, and complete maintenance inspections in the most efficient and effective way possible.

In this audio blog, Vipin Nair and Wayne Roodt discuss how Asset Performance Management suite of solutions supports operational excellence for energy. Hear how software development supports ways of working now and keep you future-ready.

Vipin Nair: Hello, everybody, my name is Vipin Nair. I am Director of Product Management for Asset Performance Management, which is within the PERS portfolio of GE Vernova. I've been with the organisation for the last 13 years, and I'm currently located in Roanoke, Virginia.

Wayne Roodt: My name is Wayne Roodt. I'm a Senior Solutions Architect with the GE Power and Electrification Software Resources team, focusing on carbon management, and I've been with GE since 2016.

Vipin Nair: Before we jump into our discussion today, which is really about reliable, resilient operations today so that you can be ready for energy's future, I think it'll be good for the audience to know a bit about ourselves. So, I wanted to kind of take the audience through your journey. So, you know, it'll be a good place for you to introduce yourself and what was your journey like to your current role, and how you landed as the evangelist for CERius, or the emissions software within GE Vernova?

Wayne Roodt: My journey with GE began back in 2016, when I joined GE Power as a solution architect, supporting our portfolio of digital solutions. I spent a number of years focused on gas power, helping customers manage some of the most complex thermal fleets in the world. Later, I had the opportunity to transition into GE Renewables, specifically focused on onshore wind. Through that experience, I saw firsthand how our customer base was diversifying, from thermal to wind, solar storage, and even nuclear, and it gave me a front-row seat, if you will, to the realities of the energy transition. That exposure naturally deepened my interest in sustainability. So, when I learned that GE was investing in a new carbon management solution, which was still in its early stages at the time, it really resonated with me. It felt like a natural evolution of my career, moving from asset optimisation into helping our industry tackle some of the greater challenges, or broader challenges, if you would, of emissions management. That's what ultimately brought me to my current role, where I serve as an advocate for CERius and our emissions management software. That's been my journey to date, but I'm equally interested in hearing yours.

Vipin Nair: Thanks, Wayne. It's always inspiring to see folks who kind of transition their career as per what they see around, based on their experiences and where they see they can contribute the best, not only for the organisation, but for a larger cause too. So, it's inspiring to see that. If you look at my background, I'm a mechanical engineer by profession. I worked for an oil and gas major in India and I started my career as a maintenance engineer, as a fun fact, and soon I transitioned into the Mechanical Integrity world, which is the world of compliance, regulations, ensuring that the pressure equipment assets are working as it is intended to. And then, in early 2011/12, when GE Vernova was spearheading the Asset Performance Management transformation, I got an opportunity to join their consulting wing. And I joined as a consultant for their Mechanical Integrity solutions and deployed that across our customer base in entire Asia-Pacific. And it was really interesting because, as I said, GE Vernova was always a step ahead of what the industry was doing, and it was a great opportunity for me to learn and also deploy it right with the customer base.

After a few years of consulting, I got an opportunity to build a module called Risk-Based Inspection RBI-581 within the product, and that gave me exposure to really build products, which is an enterprise level, not only for one customer, but for a larger customer base. So, since last eight years, I have been responsible for our product management for a various suite of solutions, ranging from Mechanical Integrity, but now also expanding to the reliability solution. I mean, just a fun fact, since we talk about sustainability there, Wayne, flaring was one of the fond memories back from my days as I was a maintenance engineer. We exactly knew if it is a plant flaring, we knew that, okay, the plant was shutting down as per our plan. But guess what, if you saw an unplanned flaring on a weekend, which I could see, because my township was few miles from the plant, I knew it was time to pack my bags and go and stay in the plant for maybe the next 10 to 15 days, which was not at all fun. So, for me, unplanned flaring is really not something which was pleasant, and it was directly related to how reliable your plant was.

Wayne Roodt: Would you mind giving me a bit of a history on Asset Performance Management, and what macro factors influenced the need for it?

Vipin Nair: It's a story which is worth telling, especially when it comes to the evolution of today's Mechanical Integrity and reliability programs, if you may. And I would say, in early 1970s, the whole point that OSHA, which is the Occupational and Safety Association, came into picture was really driven by some of the catastrophic accidents, especially worker fatalities, and some of the poor maintenance practices. And it was really making routine headlines. And that's why when OSHA came in, it was the first regulatory floor for workplace safety. That's where it all started. But back then, it was merely compliance checklist rules, avoiding fines and letting a plant run. That was really the intent of OSHA. But then again, the reliability of pressure equipment was still a problem. And that's where the first board, which is the National Board Inspection Code, NBIC, evolved from the '70s to '80s, to provide the industry a structured way to inspect, repair, and alter pressure equipment once it was in service. And I would say that is the first phase of evolution of Mechanical Integrity programs.

But by the late '80s and '90s, you saw a lot of events, and I would say the Bhopal gas tragedy in '84 is one of a prime example of the disasters, which forced companies to go deeper, right? And that's where the API standards, like 510 for pressure vessels, 570 for piping, and 653 for tanks, became the cornerstones of Mechanical Integrity. And they were not just codes by then, they were living programs where the owner-operator had to embed into their day-to-day inspections and repairs and documentation. So, that's the second phase, which really had the wake-up calls because of all the events that were happening. And then came in the '90s and 2000s, where the focus shifted from inspect everything on a calendar to really a risk-based approach. And that's where the API 510 and the 581, which is Risk-Based Inspection, gave the owner-operators the tool to prioritise assets by consequence and probability of failure.

So, I mean if you look at then the history, then now Mechanical Integrity was no longer just a compliance, but it became an operational reliability program, right, which connected multiple functions, including inspection, maintenance, and risk management, and tying it to business outcomes. So, what started as just a checklist, evolved as a wake-up call, more of a regulatory requirement, evolved as a risk-based or a reliability-based program eventually today. And I think the brilliance of us at GE Vernova, you know, as an organisation, if you look back, we initiated the first Asset Performance Management back in the '90s, when it was slowly transitioning from the time-based to the risk-based approach. So, I think those are some of the macro trends, if you ask me, really started with safety, compliance, but then it came really fast to reliability, which is really connected to the return on capital employed, which is the cost also.

That's how I would keep it, Wayne, right? It's really one of evolution, what began as a regulatory compliance, matured into a proactive and Risk-Based Reliability programs by 2000. So, owner-operators who just checked the box, now is using data and RBI to extend asset life, reduce unplanned downtime, and really focus on protecting the people, environment, and profits, the way I like to put it. So, I hope this, and I'm really curious now, Wayne, now that you really know about the APM history too, but now with what I mentioned about the history of Asset Performance Management and some of the macro trends and factors which influenced Asset Performance Management over time, do you see any parallel in CERius? And are there any other macro factors that are driving the need for an emissions software?

Wayne Roodt: Yeah, that's a great question, Vipin. If you look back at Asset Performance Management, which was born out of the need to drive reliability, efficiency, and cost savings at scale, today we're seeing a similar set of macro forces, creating the same kind of urgency around emissions management. In my mind, first there's the regulatory landscape. Across many regions, companies are facing growing pressure to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions with accuracy and consistency. Second, there's investor and stakeholder expectation. Capital markets and customers alike are looking for transparency and accountability in how organisations are progressing towards decarbonisation. And third, there's the operational reality, if you will. You can't manage what you can't measure. And without accurate real-time emissions data, operators risk inefficiencies, unexpected penalties, and even reputational damage.

Finally, you know, I think there's also opportunity. Organisations that get ahead with robust emissions data and being able to visualise that are better positioned to optimise their fuel usage, extend their asset life, and unlock new revenue streams tied to clean energy and the carbon markets. So, much like APM transformed how we think about asset reliability, emissions software is emerging as a foundational tool for how companies will navigate and ultimately succeed in the energy transition.

I'd also like to add that in terms of your experience, certainly around petrochemical plants and dealing with flaring, important to note that the reliability of what I view as carbon-critical assets is important to reduce overall emissions. And as we look at a number of the major contributors to emissions, unexpected events or shutdowns really are a contributing factor to reducing emissions and ultimately improving one's reliability. So, looking at and understanding the number of events, the type of events, the related equipment, pipelines, compressors, etc, really essential. And so, being able to assess and understand the criticality of each of those assets or pieces of equipment within the plant is increasingly becoming a focus, and certainly helps drive us towards improving not only reliability of the plant, but also in terms of overall reduction of emissions and indeed cost savings.

So, Vipin, maybe I'd like to run this back with you too. So, how does APM help define risk, on that note of criticality analysis and wanting to prioritise your equipment, how does APM define risk and how can we work on integration with the APM platform in your future vision?

Vipin Nair: Sure. Yeah, great question. I think the backbone of Asset Performance Management, or I would say a core pillar of Asset Performance Management, is helping our customer give a view of risk, right? It's not just, "Okay, you need to do the work". That's okay, because a lot of softwares out there can flag anomalies and alerts. But to give the perspective of risk from a safety perspective, from a health perspective, from an emission perspective, or even from a pure production loss perspective is so important to prioritise work, right? So, what we do with the help of risk is work prioritisation and resource prioritisation. Historically, we have been focusing on safety risk and also the production loss risk, which is the financial risk. But now, as emissions have got the new seat in the table, we really have to go back and understand what that risk matrix looks like, right? What is that new category that we add from an emission perspective? And how do we quantify it, to understand what is good, bad, or okay to be with, because everything is relative?

So, I would say that we need to go back and review our risk matrix that we have, provide a place for emissions and understand that. That's one place for sure. The second is, you know, we also have something called 'monitoring actions'. Our monitoring actions are really focused on reliability from a function perspective, functional failures perspective, and failure modes. I would be also curious on, okay, what are specific monitoring actions that you're doing to understand the emissions of it, right? So, it has to be connected. One is the actual reporting of emissions, but what are those actions where you can connect back within as a performance management, to ensure that you are collecting the data and you understand that this is the health index? Again, it becomes a component of overall health index for that asset, if you may. And once you get that, and you combine with the criticality of the asset from emissions, now all of a sudden you get a list of assets with bad actors, if you may, so you understand who are the bad actors from an emission perspective, and you can make the decisions on what is the right strategy, how to prioritise work. All those then are possible.

So, for me, it's just the natural extension of what we do from an emission perspective. And then, it will help you kind of eliminate those bad actors or potential drivers for emissions overall, if you may. So, that's how I look at it, both from a risk perspective, but also monitoring and identifying the bad actors from an emission perspective.

Wayne Roodt: Great, really great insights, Vipin. I'll also tee off on your comment about pulling the data off the equipment and off the assets, right? And just as a side note, when we're talking about emissions specifically, the volume of data coming off large fleets in today's modern world is significant and oftentimes overwhelming in terms of managing. And one of the challenges, or many of the challenges, relate to not only ingesting that data, but also ensuring it's been validated, and that one has a quality data set to do one's analysis on. And that's really one of the goals that we've had investing in the CERius software and our platform, is to help better streamline that process and automate it, and then ultimately use that data set foundationally to assist with improved planning and investment, as one looks at their long-term sustainability plan and how one goes about decarbonising their organisation.

Vipin Nair: Energy transition, it'll not be a sudden process, it's not going to happen tomorrow, it's not going to happen next year. It's a phase-wise manner. Where we talk about where we'll have to operate with diverse energy sources, we still have to have the fossil fuels. And the intent is there'll not be new assets, if you may, but the same energy source as we kind of go into alternative cleaner energy. But it's very important, and that's why reliability becomes so critical for the existing asset fleet, right, as we transition towards a cleaner energy, as we transition towards the renewables. The fossil fuel is going to stay here for some time, and it's the responsibility from a reliability perspective to make sure, how do you kind of increase the reliability? How do you reduce any failures or any leakages from that, so that you can still stay with those energy sources or those asset types as we slowly transition to the renewables? But I think that's an important point, that it's not going to be a one-day process or in a few weeks. It's going to be a long run.

What can support it is a very strong Asset Performance Management suite of solutions today, and then which can be supplemented slowly with the series of the emissions software, which is slowly starting with collecting data, reporting data. But eventually, it'll also be a hub for defining the strategy or helping the customers with the strategy on how they can transition this energy, the challenge ahead of them, so that they can be a net zero by so many years, whatever the target is. So, I just want to kind of make sure that is resonating, is that how you're looking into it, Wayne, too.

Wayne Roodt: Absolutely, couldn't agree with you more. A reliable, dispatchable power is going to be with us for many, many decades to come. To that end, one of the approaches we've had with our carbon management solution has been to take into account those thermal fossil assets, and many customers are looking at what options are available to them, right, to look at reducing the emissions profile. And there are a number of efficiency upgrades and technologies that can be applied with today's assets, and so on. And that's where we're looking to help drive that and better understand which of these efficiency improvements make more sense, both economically as well as achieving the actual reduction in emissions and the outcomes that our customers are looking for.

Vipin Nair: That's great. I think it's been a great conversation, Wayne, and really insightful. I think we'll be working, collaborating a lot in the coming days, months, weeks, and interacting with our customer. But I think this was a fun conversation for me. Thank you.

Wayne Roodt: No, thank you too, Vipin. I appreciated the time and certainly gained a number of insights from you. Thank you.