Risks fire risk reduction

The Chemical Process Industry (CPI) uses various quantitative and qualitative techniques to assess the reliability and risk of process equipment, process systems, and chemical manufacturing operations. These techniques identify the interactions of equipment, systems, and persons that have potentially undesirable consequences. In the case of reliability analyses, the undesirable consequences (e.g., plant shutdown, excessive downtime, or production of off-specification product) are those incidents which reduce system profitability through loss of production and increased maintenance costs. In the case of risk analyses, the primary concerns are human injuries, environmental impacts, and system damage caused by occurrence of fires, explosions, toxic material releases, and related hazards. Quantification of risk in terms of the severity of the consequences and the likelihood of occurrence provides the manager of the system with an important decisionmaking tool. By using the results of a quantitative risk analysis, we are better able to answer such questions as, Which of several candidate systems poses the least risk Are risk reduction modifications necessary and What modifications would be most effective in reducing risk ... 

Even, limited PSAs use and contain much information. This information may come as memos and process reports and flow sheets, equipment layout, system descriptions, toxic inventory, hazardous chemical reactions, test, maintenance and operating descriptions. From this, data and analyses are prepared regarding release quantities, doses, equipment reliability, probability of exposure, and the risk to workers, public, and environment. An executive summary analysis is detailed, and recommendations made for risk reduction. Thus the information will be text, calculations of envelope fracture stresses, temperatures, fire propagation, air dispersion, doses, and failure probabilities - primarily in tabular form. 

Risk Reduction Factors Coutrol/ rator responses. Alarms, Control system response. Manual anti automatic ESD, Fire/gas detection system Sa/ety System Responses Relief valves. Depressurization system. Isolation systems, High reliability trips. Back-up systems... 

This study investigated risks to the public from serious accidents which could occur at the industrial facilities in this part of Essex, U.K. Results are expressed as risk to an individual and societal risk from both existing and proposed installations. Risk indices were also determined for modified versions of the facilities to quantify the risk reduction from recommendations in the report. Nine industrial plants were analyzed along with hazardous material transport by water, road, rail and pipeline. The potential toxic, fire and explosion hazards were assessed for flammable liquids, ammonia, LPG, LNG, and hydrogen fluoride (HE). The 24 appendices to the report cover various aspects of the risk analysis. These include causes and effects of unconfined... 

Chapters 3, 4, and 5 describe various methods of evaluating hazard consequences and risk associated with buildings in process plants. Buildings for which there remains a concern following evaluation may be at significant risk from explosion or fire hazards. As discussed in Chapter 5, these buildings may be candidates for risk reduction. 

Understanding fire hazards is essential to risk reduction and fire protection decision-making. A fire hazard analysis (FHA) is a tool used to understand fire hazards. The process of quantifying the fire hazard is typically motivated by the need to determine the overall hazard of a process or facility or to have a decision-making tool for fire protection systems (Chapter 6). An FHA is an important element of a risk assessment and can also be used as a stand-alone hazard evaluation tool. 

One useful tool of risk assessment is to compare the risk before and after prevention or mitigation to determine the difference in risk. A cost benefit analysis can be completed that determines the cost of the mitigation versus the amount of risk reduction. All costs need to be calculated to determine a cost per year. These costs would include fire damage, injury or fatality, insurance cost increases, loss of profits, etc. The cost of the mitigation, including capital and maintenance costs, needs to be determined. 

Prioritizing Risk Reduction in a Fire Protection Strategy... 

In the fire risk assessment, it is important to reevaluate the risk once options for mitigation are determined. The amount of risk reduction should be calculated for each option or combination of options. Often, the results indicate that some options do not provide much, if any, risk reduction. The use of cost benefit analysis can help management in deciding which option to select. Facilities that depend exclusively on the local fire department for fire protection should complete a fire hazard analysis to determine the appropriate fire protection. 

Derivation By partial reduction of picric acid. Hazard May explode when shocked or heated, dangerous fire risk. 

The paper presents evidence to show that the urethane isocyanate industry is doing something to minimize fire risk associated with its materials. The framework of codes and standards now in place should lead to a future reduction of fire losses. Still, we are not sure we have fully resolved the question of "how to" assess fire risk. But, as an industry we are working on that and our route is in place. 

Replacement of carbon materials by silicon has yet another advantage. It was found that in certain cases, reduction of electrolyte on carbon electrodes occurs with significant heat evolution, which is one of the fire risk factors. In this respect, silicon electrodes are quite safe. 

Although some consider fire and gas systems to be outside the scope of a safety instrumented system, many others classify these functions as safety instrumented functions. The criteria is based on needed risk reduction. When consequence or likelihood reduction is achieved by these functions and the risk reduction needed is greater than 10, ANSl/lSA-84.00.01 (lEC 61511 Mod) (Ref. 9) requires the hmction be classified as a SIR... 

There are branches and application fields where flammability regulations have not reached even an initial level. Protracted and persistent efforts are needed in order to develop internationally accepted regulations for all sectors of life and industry that would contribute effectively to a reduction in fire risks of plastics applications. 

Some coimtries have taken precautionary measures to avoid the fired BLEVE introducing specific rules of transport regulation. Canada and the USA allow the transport of flammable liquefied gases only in tank wagons with a thermal insulation and a pressure relief valve (PRV) (CGSB 2005, CFR 49). However, such protective measures are not compulsory in Europe, where no passive fire protection of LPG tankers is presently required by ADR and RID regulations (Directive 2006/89/EC, Directive 2006/90/EC) that define the standards required respectively for the road and rail LPG tankers. Moreover, the extent of risk reduction due to passive fire protections is rather imcertain, and a cost-benefit analysis is still lacking. 

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of passive protections of tankers in the reduction of the overall risk due to LPG road and rail transportation. In the first part of the study (Section 2) the effect of the thermal protection on the time to BLEVE was analyzed. In the second part of the study (Section 3), the results obtained were used to investigate the potential effect on risk due to the reduction of the probability of the fired BLEVE, following the adoption of the road tanker coating. A case-study derived from actual LPG road transportation scenario in Europe was analyzed, and a Transport Risk Analysis (TRA) was performed. Thus, TRA results allowed to widen the economic aspect of this issue (Section 3). Costs were identified and assessed considering also the amortization and taxes, while benefits were assessed taking into account the risk reduction as a number for life loss reduction. Finally, the comparison between costs and benefits provided an evaluation of the economic impact connected with the adoption of passive fire protections of tankers. 

Paltrinieri, N., Landucci, G., Molag, M., Bonvicini, S., Spadoni, G., Cozzani, V, Risk reduction in road and rail LPG transportation by passive fire protection, J. Hazard Mat, in press, 2009... 

For risk informed regulation and applications (RIR A), importance measures (IMs) (Borst et al. 2001, Kim et al. 2003, Vesely et al.l983, Wall et al. 1996), such as Fussell-Vesely (FV), Risk Reduction Worth (RRW) or Risk Achievement Worth (RAW), play a very important role. Especially, IMs in fire probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) as well as internal events PRA are important for the risk informed structures, systems and components (SSCs) categorizations (NRC 2002, NEI 2004). 

The provision of redundant hardware and diverse software theoretically gains significant risk reduction (5% x 5% =. 05. 05 = 0.0025 failure probability (99.75% success)) However, care must be taken to identify common mode failures such as power supplies, fire etc. Generally, a good SIL 2 system claim can be defended using two SIL 1 systems. 

The use of organic pol)nner systems, such as PP, which are flammable, leads to greater fire risks and thus to the growing importance of flame retardancy. Recent events have shown the need to improve fire resistance. One can notice as an example, the PP fire at the BASF plant (March 1995 in Teeside, UK) which has been described as one of the largest fires ever seen in the UK during peacetime (more than 10 000 tonnes of PP were consumed) [1]. This clearly indicates the need for a comprehensive appraisal of all aspects of the combustion of polymers and the ways to prevent it. Reductions in the propensity of organic materials to ignite or emit dense and/or toxic fumes are equally important. 

The second stage of the development towards risk reduction is achieved by bringing together all areas where losses arise from accidents - whether fire, security, pollution, product liability, business interruption etc. - and co-ordinating action with the aim of reducing the loss. This risk reduction strategy is synonymous with loss control. 

Reduction of fire risk by design of structures and choice of materials effect of fire on structures, buildings, finishes and furnishings. 

Alarms for which an operator or facility worker is required to evacuate an area (e.g., fire and gas alarms) and are not intended to direct the operator to take action on the process are generally not considered safety instrumented functions. These alarms should not be allocated to the BPCS but may be allocated to the SIS or to another independent protection layer. Refer to Annex F, Figure F.1, for an overview of protection layers. These alarms are generally classified as safety-related and are designed and managed in a manner that supports the allocated risk reduction. 

All of these can also be seen from the examples of fire (e.g., detection parts are proactive whereas protection parts are reactive). In fact, the safety barriers can be categorized according to their influence of safety. Safety barriers need to be evaluated before selection. These safety barriers actually are provided by layers of protection. From the discussions on layers of protection analysis (LOPA), it is known that safety barriers or independent protection layer (IPL) can be credited with risk reduction if they are ... 

---