Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A template for quantitative risk assessment of facilities storing hazardous chemicals

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A large number of highly flammable and/or toxic substances are stored in huge quantities in chemical process industries throughout the world. In the past, when such hazardous facilities have met with a major accident, the resulting explosions/fires or toxic releases have led to massive losses of lives and of property worth billions of rupees. This has, in turn, given rise to risk perception vis a vis the probability of the likely accidents and extents of their impacts that may occur in similar installations. If this risk can be quantified and ways found to reduce the risk, it can help in reducing the occurrence such an accidents as also tell us the measures needed to cushion the impact when a major accident does take place. This paper identifies the risks associated with facilities storing hazardous substances and provides a template for conducting quantitative risk assessment of such facilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2007) The boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion (BLEVE): mechanism, consequence assessment, control. J Hazard Mater 141:489–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbasi T, Pasman H, Abbasi SA (2010) A scheme for the classification of explosions in the chemical process industry. J Hazard Mater 174:270–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdolhamidzadeh B, Abbasi T, Rashtchian D, Abbasi SA (2010) A new method for assessing domino effect in chemical process industry. J Hazard Mater 182:416–426

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdolhamidzadeh B, Rashtchian D, Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2011) Domino effect in process-industry accidents: an inventory of past events and identification of some patterns. J Loss Prev Process Ind 24(5):575–593

    Google Scholar 

  • AIChE (1988) Guidelines for storage and handling of high toxic hazard materials. Center for Chemical Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • AIChE (1993) Guidelines for engineering design for process safety. Center for Chemical Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • ASME (2004) Boiler and pressure vessel code. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  • Basheer A, Tauseef SM, Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2018) A new method for siting hazardous units in chemical process facilities which minimizes risk at least cost: RIDIMPUS. J Fail Anal Prev 18(1):83–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernechea EJ, Vílchez JA, Arnaldos J (2013) A model for estimating the impact of the domino effect on accident frequencies in quantitative risk assessments of storage facilities. Process Saf Environ Prot 91(6):423–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Buncefield incident, 11 December (2005) The final report of the Major Incident Investigation Board. Health and Safety Executive, 2008

  • Casal J (2007) Evaluation of the effects and consequences of major accidents in industrial plants, vol 8. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Casal J (2017) Evaluation of the effects and consequences of major accidents in industrial plants. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • CCPS (2003) Guidelines for facility siting and layout. Center for Chemical Process Safety, AIChE, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang JI, Lin CC (2006) A study of storage tank accidents. J Loss Prev Process Ind 19(1):51–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng CW, Yao HQ, Wu TC (2013) Applying data mining techniques to analyze the causes of major occupational accidents in the petrochemical industry. J Loss Prev Process Ind 26(6):1269–1278

    Google Scholar 

  • Chettouh S, Hamzi R, Benaroua K (2016) Examination of fire and related accidents in Skikda Oil Refinery for the period 2002–2013. J Loss Prev Process Ind 41:186–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Darbra RM, Casal J (2004) Historical analysis of accidents in seaports. Saf Sci 42(2):85–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Darbra RM, Palacios A, Casal J (2010) Domino effect in chemical accidents: main features and accident sequences. J Hazard Mater 183(1–3):565–573

    Google Scholar 

  • de Lira-Flores JA, Gutiérrez-Antonio C, Vázquez-Román R (2018) A MILP approach for optimal storage vessels layout based on the quantitative risk analysis methodology. Process Saf Environ Prot 120:1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Delvosalle C, Fievez C, Benjelloun F (1998) Development of a methodology for the identification of potential domino effects in “SEVESO” industries. In: Proceedings 9th international symposium on loss prevention and safety promotion in the process industries, vol 3, pp 1252–1261

  • DNV (1997) Fires and explosions in atmospheric fixed roof storage tanks. Confidential Report for Oil Refineries Ltd, Project No. C8263

  • Fabbrocino G, Iervolino I, Orlando F, Salzano E (2005) Quantitative risk analysis of oil storage facilities in seismic areas. J Hazard Mater 123(1–3):61–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghasemi AM, Nourai F (2017) A framework for minimizing domino effect through optimum spacing of storage tanks to serve in land use planning risk assessments. Saf Sci 97:20–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmatian B, Abdolhamidzadeh B, Darbra RM, Casal J (2014) The significance of domino effect in chemical accidents. J Loss Prev Process Ind 29:30–38

    Google Scholar 

  • HSE (2019) Failure rate and event data for use within risk assessments. Health and Safety Executive, Bootle

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang SY, Mannan MS (2013) Technical aspects of storage tank loss prevention. Process Saf Prog 32(1):28–36

    Google Scholar 

  • International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (2010) Storage incident frequencies, Report no 434-3. OGP Report

  • Kadri F, Châtelet E (2013) Domino effect analysis and assessment of industrial sites: A review of methodologies and software tools. Int J Comput Distrib Syst 2(III):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalantarnia M, Khan F, Hawboldt K (2009) Dynamic risk assessment using failure assessment and Bayesian theory. J Loss Prev Process Ind 22(5):600–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Abbasi SA (1998b) Models for domino effect analysis in process industries. Process Saf Prog 17:107–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Abbasi SA (1998a) Techniques and methodologies for risk analysis in chemical process industries. J Loss Prevent Process Industri 11(4):261–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Abbasi SA (2001) An assessment of the likelihood of occurrence, and the damage potential of domino effect in a typical cluster of industries. J Loss Prev Process Ind 14:283–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan FI, Abbasi SA (2002) A criteria for developing credible accident scenarios for risk assessment. J Loss Prev Process Ind 15:467–475

    Google Scholar 

  • Landucci G, Necci A, Antonioni G, Argenti F, Cozzani V (2017) Risk assessment of mitigated domino scenarios in process facilities. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 160:37–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannan MS (2011) The Buncefield explosion and fire—lessons learned. Process Saf Prog 30(2):138–142

    Google Scholar 

  • NFPA (1992) Standard for the storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases. National Fire Prevention Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  • Oggero A, Darbra RM, Munoz M, Planas E, Casal J (2006) A survey of accidents occurring during the transport of hazardous substances by road and rail. J Hazard Mater 133(1):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson H, Lönnermark A (2004) Tank fires—review of fire incidents 1951–2003

  • Reniers G, Cozzani V (eds) (2013) Domino effects in the process industries: modelling, prevention and managing. Elsevier, Amsterdam. ISBN 978-0-444-54323-3

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronza A, Félez S, Darbra RM, Carol S, Vílchez JA, Casal J (2003) Predicting the frequency of accidents in port areas by developing event trees from historical analysis. J Loss Prev Process Ind 16(6):551–560

    Google Scholar 

  • Samia C, Hamzi R, Chebila M (2018) Contribution of the lessons learned from oil refining accidents to the industrial risks assessment. Manag Environ Qual Int J 29(4):643–665

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweis FK (2006) Fires and related incidents in Jordan (1996–2004). Fire Saf J 41(5):370–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Tauseef SM, Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2010) Risks of fire and explosion associated with the increasing use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). J Fail Anal Prev 10(4):322–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Tauseef SM, Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2011) Development of a new chemical process-industry accident database to assist in past accident analysis. J Loss Prev Process Ind 24:426–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Technica 1990. Atmospheric Storage Tank Study, Confidential Report for Oil and Petrochemical Industries Technical and Safety Committee, Singapore, Project No. C1998

  • Vilchez JA, Sevilla S, Montiel H, Casal J (1995) Historical analysis of accidents in chemical plants and in the transportation of hazardous materials. J Loss Prev Process Ind 8(2):87–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood MH, Gyenes Z (2015) Lessons learned from corrosion-related accidents in petroleum refineries. Loss Prev Bull 246:12–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang HD, Zheng XP (2012) Characteristics of hazardous chemical accidents in China: a statistical investigation. J Loss Prev Process Ind 25(4):686–693

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng B, Chen GH (2011) Storage tank fire accidents. Process Saf Prog 30(3):291–293

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

SAA thanks the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi, for the Emeritus Scientist Grant (21(1034)/16/EMR-II).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Pollution Control and Environmental Engineering, Pondicherry University, Chinakalapet, Puducherry, 605 014, India

    Arafat Basheer, Tasneem Abbasi & S. A. Abbasi

  2. Environmental Research Institute, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, 248 007, India

    S. M. Tauseef

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology Srinagar, Srinagar, 190006, India

    Arafat Basheer

Authors
  1. Arafat Basheer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. M. Tauseef
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tasneem Abbasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. A. Abbasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tasneem Abbasi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Basheer, A., Tauseef, S.M., Abbasi, T. et al. A template for quantitative risk assessment of facilities storing hazardous chemicals. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 10, 1158–1172 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-019-00846-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-019-00846-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation