The Role of Quantitative Risk Assessment in Improving Hazardous Installations Siting: A Case Study

Safety distance has already been a main measurement for the hazard control of chemical installations interpreted to mean providing space between the hazardous installation and different types of targets. But, the problem is how to determine the enough space. This study considers the application of q...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Naser Badri, Farshad Nourai, Davood Rashtchian
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Iranian Institute of Research and Development in Chemical Industries (IRDCI)-ACECR 2011-12-01
Series:Iranian Journal of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ijcce.ac.ir/article_6122_7d63d86fa38aed46ffc9b8377cf0f86d.pdf
Description
Summary:Safety distance has already been a main measurement for the hazard control of chemical installations interpreted to mean providing space between the hazardous installation and different types of targets. But, the problem is how to determine the enough space. This study considers the application of quantitative risk assessment to evaluating a compressed natural gas station site and to identify nearby land use limitations. In such cases, the most important consideration is to assure that the proposed site would not be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity. This scope is possible by categorization of estimated levels of risk imposed by the proposed site. It means that an analysis of the consequences and likelihood of credible accident scenarios coupled with general acceptable risk criteria should be undertaken. This enables the calculated risk of the proposed site to be considered at an early stage, to allow prompt responses or in the later stages to observe limitations. It is concluded that not only adequate distance is not been provided but also the compressed natural gas station is located in the vicinity of populated areas and this is chiefly because of inadequate risk assessment studies and ambiguities in defining acceptable risk criteria.
ISSN:1021-9986
1021-9986