Is this a safe/standard opening? what is it called?

It's definitely some line of the King's Indian Attack (a perfectly playable and versatile system), judging by the setup of the c-h pawns and the kingside fianchetto; I don't know how often the queenside fianchetto occurs in the KIA, however, there's a Smyslov Variation of the KIA - 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. b4 - which scores OK for White (~0.55 points per game on average), but White can be stopped from advancing the pawn to e4 there, so it's apparently not what you're looking for. I guess this exact setup arises as a response to the Sicilian Defense.

This setup makes not much sense...

What are your rooks doing on the e file? Where will you retreat your f3 knight to play f4, which is the main plan in the Kingsindian Attack. And why not put your rooks on the f file then? Also look at whites dark square weaknesses on d4, e5, b4... This structure is exspecially bad with a knight on c3, which belongs to d2, which the queen blockades... I would be happy to play against that with black.

I think this is a great and winning opening for White! White has a clear lead in development, even enough to win vs any defense.

I suppose if this were the starting point, it would be great. But I think getting your pieces into this position before black starts manuevers in your territory is very unlikely.

It looks more like a guideline than a specific opening or configuration.

Any time you try for a particular position this far along without considering what your opponent may do or has done--you are making a bad mistake.

The position is not a good guideline either.

I've seen plenty of teachers create positions like this to show the intentions of an opening. This particular position looks like many of those.

It has all the opening basics covered; All the pieces are developed to active positions or positions that can be made active. The king is in a safe position, the rooks are doubled on a column that, under normal circumstances, may well be open or semi-opened. It would not be a bad configuration to work for.

I would guess most teachers do not have a position with that many moves. There are many flaws in the position if it is something a player is trying to follow. 

 To learn to play chess such as the Kings Indian Reversed Opening which the position resembles, the game is just too complicated to plan ahead this far. The position is not a normal Kings Indian Reverse.

You do not see the flaws in the postion either because you teacher did not see the flaws or you just do not have enough chess knowledge.

It is ok to start with much fewer moves such as:

What I am trying to say is the position is not an opening at all--it is a position that most people will not see, ever.

It can work as a guideline but there are flaws such as playing b3 and Bb2 does not usually work in this kind of opening. Also you will rarely be able to double your rooks on the e file.

The guideline is not terrible if you realize it is not an opening but only a guideline with some flaws.

Rook position depends on where the pawn openings are (or will be). This really doesn't look like there's enough info on what Black is up to to make a good judgement on the general position/setup.

The double fianchetto position is fine.  But as others said, it is too hard to evaluate this position without seeing black's response.  I think the Queen on d2 and the Rook on e2 are likely misplaced.  Bring this position back a few moves and put the Knight on d2 and it is probably a good position for white to try to obtain with his development.

I agree with those who have said that what you have shown in your diagram is not an opening. Each move made must pay regard to the moves made by your opponent. A particulr sequence of moves, by both sides, acquires a name and comes to have characteristic ideas worked out over quite a number of moves because of the way the two sets of pieces begin to interlock.

So you cannot learn very much about openings, perhaps nothing at all, from a diagram showing only the position of one set of pieces.

Which does not make your diagram worthless. As has already been pointed out what the diagram does is to illustrate how the opening principles operate.

All the minor pieces have been developed, the king has castled into a snug corner, the rooks are connected and the rooks have been moved to squares where it can be hoped they will get open or half open files to operate in. All this with a minimum of pawn moves.

As one among countless illustrations of how the opening priciples can be followed the diagram has its merits.

Viewed in that light there is a third comment already made with which I also agree. The weakness of this particular diagram (for that purpose) is the placing of the two rooks on the e file. How to develop the rooks is often the hardest part of completing the opening. In this diagram they have been doubled on a particular file and have been brought into the centre. In the most general of ways those two features might be useful. Rooks often do come to the central files as it is those files which tend to get opened most quickly. And doubling rooks is also common and can indeed, sometimes be decisive. But it cannot be said as a matter of principle that these things are a necessary part of developing your pieces. In the diagram no file is yet open or half open and, without seeing black's pieces it is impossible to know whether it is the e file which is likely to get opened or other files altogether. So the rooks in this diagram would be better left on the back rank with a comment that they are going to complete white's development by moving to the files which can be expected to become open or half open.

What your question shows is that you have not yet understood what opening theory is about. What it is not about is finding squares where you can always place your pieces and you will be safe. In your diagram if black has his queen on h5, a knight on g4 and it is black to move you are as far from safe as you can get in chess.

To help you move away from this misconception I suggest you look at the Colle System. There is a U tube video by Susan Polgar and other materials on line. What might help you get an idea about what goes on in chess openings is to see how, in that opening, white strives first to control the e4 square and then to make use of that control.

And if you get hold of that idea see how a black player, recognising what white's idea is, can set about countering it. Perhaps this will start you thinking about openings differently.

You can get something like that pretty often - just an example (and not necessarily the best example)

As the general public has stated - openings are only openings if they work with the opponent's moves. Having played KIA setups quite a bit, I can tell you that the idea of getting your rooks doubled on the e file is not very realistic. It will definitely happen, but you naturally gravitate toward the c file in these positions because your c pawn is used early to keep your fair share of the center.

I see these double fianchetto systems all the time....and they're not 'bad', but, as black, I know I will be able to equalize against the double fianchetto because it takes a lot of tempi to set up - allowing me to grab the center and develop. Keep this in mind when you're playing in a highly hypermodern style. 

I've just thought that there are also chances to achieve the setup from the OP via the (closely related) Nimzo-Larsen Variation (1. Nf3 Nf6 2. b3) of the Zukertort Opening (well, of course the move order doesn't really matter in the modern chess opening theory), though it's unusual there too - it looks absolutely weird to me that White has played Nc3 before c4 in the OP, blocking the c-pawn that's usually helpful in this kind of setups.

Doubling the rook on the e-file makes sense if Black has passively put a pawn on d6, it prepares the e5 pawn break in this scenario.