Research on safety sustainability of LNG tanks based on multi-attribute decision-making-FCEM coupled modeling
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Mathematical Analysis Advances in System Fault Analysis, Prediction and Control (Close))
Abstract
Against the backdrop of the “dual carbon goals”, China has been advancing its “coal-to-gas transition” strategy, during which LNG leakage incidents have occurred frequently. Addressing the challenge of assessing the interrelated risks of multiple factors, this study constructs an ANP-CRITIC-FCEM coupled model, establishing a micro-level risk identification system from five dimensions: “environment, equipment, process, personnel, and materials”. Considering the conflicts and mutual influences between different risk factors, the model integrates game theory to couple subjective and objective weights and combines fuzzy comprehensive evaluation to quantify safety and sustainable development capabilities. The study indicates that the safety and sustainable development capability level of a certain factory’s LNG storage tank area is Grade IV, with equipment factors dominating as the primary risk source, with a comprehensive weight of 0.5205. Among these, pipeline C22 and safety accessory C23 have a significant impact on the tank’s sustainable development capability; This model improves the accuracy of traditional AHP-FCEM identification, fully considers the influence and conflicts between various factors, visualizes the influence sensitivity between factors, and identifies process factors (25.36% weight) such as pressure regulation process (40.28% sub-weight), personnel “three violations” behavior (69.01% sub-weight), and methane concentration (64.35% sub-weight) constitute secondary key risks. Based on this, targeted improvement strategies are proposed, including equipment-level corrosion monitoring, process-level intelligent pressure regulation, and management-level behavioral analysis and early warning, providing a data-driven framework for the coordinated advancement of LNG storage tank safety management and dual carbon goals. Through comparative analysis, this model is found to be relatively accurate and effective.
Copyright (c) 2025 Dehong Zhou, Peihe Zhang, Jingyi Zang, Shiyu Peng

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
[1]Zhou SW, Zhu JL, Shan TW, et al. Current status and prospects of China’s natural gas and LNG industry. China Offshore Oil and Gas. 2022; 34(1): 1–8. (in Chinese)
[2]Ren Z, Wang DQ, Tong YZ, et al. Discussion on the development of the LNG industry under the dual carbon target. Shandong Chemical Industry. 2022; 51(9): 101–103. (in Chinese)
[3]Feng YJ. China’s energy security under the great changes of the international energy landscape. International Economic Review. 2023; 38–52.
[4]Kim H, Koh JS, Kim Y, et al. Risk assessment of membrane type LNG storage tanks in Korea—based on fault tree analysis. Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering. 2005; 22(1): 1–8.
[5]Oka H, Ota S. Evaluation of consequence assessment methods for pool fires on water involving large spills from liquefied natural gas carriers. Journal of Marine Science and Technology. 2008; 13(2): 178–188.
[6]Li WD, Zhou DH, Xiao ZH, et al. Risk analysis of LNG storage tanks based on bow-tie normal cloud model. Fire Science and Technology. 2021; 40(9): 1322–1327. (in Chinese)
[7]Wang WZ, Chen L, He HZ, et al. Quantitative analysis of LNG tank leakage based on triangular fuzzy fault tree. Safety, Health and Environment. 2021; 21(10): 38–44. (in Chinese)
[8]Liu P, Shen J, Zhang P. Multi-attribute group decision-making method using single-valued neutrosophic credibility numbers with the Dombi extended power aggregation operator and its application in intelligent transportation system data collection scheme selection. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence. 2024; 133(F): 108639. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2024.108639
[9]Liu P, Shen J, Zhang P, et al. Multi-attribute group decision-making method using single-valued neutrosophic credibility numbers with fairly variable extended power average operators and GRA-MARCOS. Expert Systems with Applications. 2025; 263: 125703. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125703
[10]Xu K, Chen XF. “Five-high” risk management and control system based on the prevention of major and extraordinary accidents. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Information and Management Engineering Edition). 2017; 39(6): 649–653. (in Chinese)
[11]Li W, Ye YC, Wang QH, et al. High-risk factor identification and assessment model for mine hoist cage drop events. Journal of Catastrophology. 2020; 35: 64–70. (in Chinese)
[12]Cui D, Wang CZ, Shen F. Research and application of multi-attribute decision-making model. Scientific Decision. 2010; 11: 90–94. (in Chinese)
[13]Razavi Toosi SL, Samani JMV. A new integrated MADM technique combined with ANP, FTOPSIS and fuzzy max-min set method for evaluating water transfer projects. Water Resources Management. 2014; 28(12): 4257–4272.
[14]Qin Y, Qi Q, Shi P, et al. Multi-attribute decision-making methods in additive manufacturing: the state of the art. Processes. 2023; 11(2): 497.
[15]Wudhikarn R. Improving the intellectual capital management approach using the hybrid decision method. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2018; 19(4): 670–691.
[16]Zhang Y, Wei HB. A combined weighting method for multi-attribute decision-making based on CRITIC. Statistics and Decision. 2012; 16: 75–77. (in Chinese)
[17]Zhao HS, Li JX, Mi ZQ. A grading evaluation method for power quality based on CRITIC and improved grey-TOPSIS. Protection and Control of Power Systems. 2022; 50: 1–8. (in Chinese)
[18]Cil I, Turkan YS. An ANP-based assessment model for lean enterprise transformation. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2013; 64: 1113–1130.
[19]Yucelgazi F, Yitmen İ. An ANP model for risk assessment in large-scale transport infrastructure projects. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. 2019; 44: 4257–4275.
[20]Li ZS, Yang YK, Zhang JC. Filter feature selection algorithm based on entropy weight method. Journal of Northeastern University (Natural Science). 2022; 43(7): 921–929.
[21]Lu L, Zhang B, Zheng D. Highway earth cutting slope risk assessment model based on AHP-CRITIC. People’s Yangtze River. 2023; 54: 133–139. (in Chinese)
[22]Saaty TL, Vargas LG. Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process: Economic, Political, Social and Technological Applications with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks, 1st ed. Springer Science, Business Media; 2006.
[23]Sun HC, Tian P. Analysis of the analytic network process (ANP). In: Western Development and Systems Engineering—Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Chinese Society for Systems Engineering. 2002; 454–459.
[24]Gan L, Hu Y, Zheng LZ. Comprehensive evaluation of power emergency rescue team capability based on improved ANP-TOPSIS. China Occupational Safety and Health Science. 2022; 12: 1–6.
[25]Fan ZP, Zhang JJ, Wen W, et al. Design and implementation of analytic network process (ANP) analysis tools. Computer and Digital Engineering. 2020; 48: 46–50. (in Chinese)
[26]Liu Y, Guan X. Multi-attribute decision-making based on comprehensive hesitant fuzzy entropy. Expert Systems with Applications. 2023; 237(3): 121459.
[27]Fan L, Zhang Y. Application of combination weighing and outranking relation method in evaluation of power quality. Journal of Information and Computational Science. 2013; 10(1): 1–7.
[28]Diakoulaki D, Mavrotas G, Papayannakis L. Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the CRITIC method. Computers and Operations Research. 1995; 22(7): 763–770.
[29]Wang SY, Huang F, Tan X. Application of entropy weight method in the safety evaluation of air environment in uranium mines. Journal of Safety and Environmental Engineering. 2021; 21: 538–545.doi:10.13637/j.issn.1009-6094.2019.0868
[30]Ge RT, Chen LW, Wang YX, et al. Evaluation of water yielding properties of loose confined aquifers based on the coupling weighting of improved AHP and CRITIC methods. Journal of Hefei University of Technology (Natural Science Edition). 2023; 46: 519–528. (in Chinese)
[31]Hou KP, Wang LD. Risk assessment model for open-pit mine slope hazard based on improved FAHP-CRITIC method and cloud theory. Journal of Safety and Environmental Engineering. 2021; 21: 2443–2451.
[32]Tu SW, Zhao ZH, Deng MX, et al. Comprehensive risk assessment of urban utility tunnel operation and maintenance based on combined weighting and regret theory. Safety and Environmental Engineering. 2020; 27: 160–167. (in Chinese)
[33]Pei HN, Wen ZQ, Huang XQ. Grey H-convex relation model based on Bayesian BWM and CRITIC weight combination. Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems. 2023; 1–22.
[34]Cai Q, Guan ZJ, Zhao RY. Evaluation of network defense operational effectiveness based on grey fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. Journal of China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology. 2022; 17: 991–996. (in Chinese)
[35]Li YF, Gong ZR. Research on buyback risk of infrastructure BT projects based on grey fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. Science and Technology Innovation. 2022; 35: 33–36.
[36]Zhang Q, Jiang X, Zhang O. et al. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on grey system theory for green construction of power grid engineering. Journal of Shenyang University of Technology. 2023; 46(1): 42–48.
[37]Guo YY, Luo FZ, Zhong XR. Urban safety resilience assessment based on entropy weight–normal cloud model. Journal of Catastrophology. 2021; 36: 168–174. (in Chinese)
[38]Jing MB, Li XH. Study on the construction of safety production risk grading control system for LNG terminal. China Petroleum and Chemical Standard and Quality. 2021; 41: 5–6. (in Chinese)
[39]Zhu GH, Sun XW. Safety risk assessment of naval training activities based on ANP-cloud model. Command Control and Simulation. 2022; 1–5.
[40]Panori D, Papaspyropoulos KG, Nikolaou IE. A forest companies typology regarding their contribution to circular economy: a sustainability reporting-based analysis. Discover Sustainability. 2024; 5: 120. doi: 10.1007/s43621-024-00304-4
[41]Charef R, Lu W. Factor dynamics to facilitate circular economy adoption in construction. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021; 319: 128639. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128639
[42]Yang WW, He SL. Coal mine safety management index system and environmental risk model based on sustainable operation. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments. 2022; 53(2): 102721.
[43]Suberu MY, Mustafa MW, Bashir N. Energy storage systems for renewable energy power sector integration and mitigation of intermittency. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014; 35: 499–514. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.009




