Toxic Gas Release

Models toxic gas releases. Two models available SHELL SPILLS and TRPUF (based on EPA PUFF). Graphical output. Requires 512K memory and 132 column printer. 

TOXIC, PUFF, SPILLS, INPUFF, AND INPUFF 2.0 Bowman Environmental Engineering P.O. Bo 29072 Dallas, TX 75229 (214) 241-1895 In ascending order of data complexity, these systems address toxic gas releases using models designed for each type of release, based on emission rate, facility characteristics and weather data. 

Harris, N. C. (1987). Mitigation of Accidental Toxic Gas Releases. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Preventing Major Chemical Accidents, February 3-5, 1987, Washington, D. C., ed. J. L. Woodward, 3.139-3.177. New York American Institute of Chemical Engineers. 

Some possible causes for a toxic gas release from a storage tank are ... 

Some possible effects of a toxic gas release are listed below ... 

Effect models describe the impact of the physical effects of a fire, e.xplosion, or toxic gas release on exposed people, the environment or property, based on the results of tlie source, dispersion, and fire and explosion models. 

Familiarity with the different alarms, e.g. so as not to confuse a process plant alarm for a fire/toxic gas release signal. 

Know what the consequences would be if such a reaction took place (e.g., toxic gas release, fire, explosion). 

In addition to causing injuries and fatalities to plant personnel and the public, reactive incidents can also result in environmental harm and equipment damage. These impacts may be due to fires, explosions, hazardous liquid spills, toxic gas releases, or any combination of such (Figure 6). Fires and explosions are the most frequent occurrence in CSB data, followed by toxic gas releases. 

On June 4, 1999, the inadvertent mixing of two incompatible chemicals caused a toxic gas release at Whitehall Leather Company in Whitehall, Michigan (Figure 7).26 One person was killed, and another was injured. 

On December 3, 1984, a toxic gas release from a pesticide plant in India killed nearly 3000 people and injured at least 100,000 others. The chemical that leaked was methyl isocyanate, a chemical intermediate that was supposed to be stored in a cooled bunker near the plant s outer boundary. The vapor is highly toxic and causes cellular asphyxiation and rapid death. Despite engineering and procedural provisions to prevent its release, a total system breakdown resulted in the release of 40 tons of the deadly material into the densely populated community of Bhopal. Because of this incident, the plant was dismantled and ultimately the parent corporation. Union Carbide, was forced to make a number of organizational changes. The occurrence is considered by many to have been the most tragic chemical accident in history. 

Besides the temperature, other possible consequences of decomposition reactions are flammable or toxic gas release, solidification, swelling, foaming, carbon-ation, that may cause the loss of a batch, but also damage leading to the loss of a plant unit and impinging on the production of the desired product. These consequences should also be considered in the assessment. Therefore, the determination of the decomposition energies is a preliminary to any assessment of thermal risks. 

Toxic gas release Operator impairment Plume behaviour Toxic concentrations and effects... 

Another group of shelters can be classified as temporary havens. They do not provide the same level of protection as a safe haven but can provide shelter at the start of a crisis. A temporary haven is also a room or building that can provide protection from toxic fumes, but for a limited period of time. This may be adequate for toxic gas releases of short duration. However,... 

Chikhliwala E. D M. Oliver, and P. R. Jann. 1989. Exposure Mitigation Shelters during a Toxic Gas Release. In L. J. Brasser and W. C. Mulder. (Eds.) Man and His Ecosystem Proceedings of the 8th World Clean Air Congress at The Hague, Netherlands, September, 11-15, Vol. 1, pp. 265-270. Amsterdam Elsevier Science Publishers. 

On most older chemical facilities, the basic component of the emergency warning system is the fire alarm. It is essential that there be different signals to distinguish between an actual fire and other threatening events, as the action taken in response to a toxic gas release, for example, may be quite different from that taken in response to a fire. On multi-process sites, the signals also should identify the work unit involved. 

Buckley, R.L., Hunter, C.H., Addis, R.P., Parker, M.J. (2007). Modeling dispersion from toxic gas released after a train collision in Qraniteville, SC. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 57(3) 268-78. 

ASTM E 906 Heat and Visible-Smoke-Release Rate Test (based on Ohio State University Release Rate Apparatus). In this test the specimen is injected into an environmental chamber through which a constant flow of air passes. A radiant-heat source is used to produce the desired heat flux in the specimen, which way be tested horizontally or vertically. Combustion may be initiated by a number of different methods. The changes in temperature and optical density of the gas leaving the chamber are monitored, and from the resultant data the heat-release rate and visible anoke-release rate are calculated. Toxic-gas release and oxygen consumption rates may also be measured. 

---