Advertisement

Multidisciplinary Approach to Prevention and Health Protection by Monitoring: Role of Individual Disciplines. The Engineer: Equipment, Plant Modifications, and Design I

  • J. M. Evans

Summary

This paper shows that the chemical engineer’s role in occupational health extends from the laboratory, where the fundamental elements of a process are developed; to the pilot plant, where questions of unit operation and equipment design can impact heavily on elements of occupational health and safety; and then to the commercial operation, where monitoring and improved equipment design are intertwined to lower fugitive emissions and reduce worker exposure to potentially toxic products.

This paper illustrates how the chemical engineer’s involvement in occupational health can extend beyond these normal uses of his skills to the development of data for use in defining safety measures and in the development of regulations themselves.

Examples are drawn from experiences in the conversion of coal to gas and oil.

Keywords

Chemical Engineer Occupational Health Pilot Plant Coal Gasification Industrial Hygienist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    Report of visits to Synthane Pilot Plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc. September 1976, February 1977, and April 1979 (submitted to NIOSH under contracts 210–76-0171 and 210–78-0084).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lewis, R., Santore, R.R., Dubis, D. Coal pressurisation and feeding: use of a lockhopper system. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lewis, R., Strakey, J.P., Haynes, W.P., et al. Update of Synthane Pilot Plant status. Presented at the Tenth Synthetic Pipeline Gas Symposium, Chicago, Illinois, October 30-November 1, 1978.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Epler, J.L., Young, J.A., Hardigree, A.A., et al. Analytical and biological analyses of test materials from the synthetic fuel technologies - I, mutagenicity of crude oils determined by the Salmonella typhimurium/microsomal activation system. Mutat. Res. 1976; 57:265–76.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nakles D.V., Massey, M.J., Forney, A.J. Influence of Synthane gasifier conditions of effluent and product gas production. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh Energy Research Centre, 1975–76; [PERC/RI-75/6].Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Report of the industrial hygiene comprehensive survey for the Cresap Test Facility. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc. (submitted to NIOSH under contract 210-78–0101), 1980.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Committee on Processing and Utilisation of Fossil Fuels. Assessment of technology for the liquefaction of coal. Washington: National Research Council for the National Academy of Sciences, 1977.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman, S., Akhtar, S., Yavorsky, P.M. An overview of coal liquefaction projects. Presented at the Technology and Use of Lignite Symposium, Grand Forks, N.D., May 14–15, 1975.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stotler, H.H., Schutter R.T. H-Coal Pilot Plant status and operating plans. Presented at the AIChE meeting, Philadelphia, Pa, June 5–7, 1978.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Report of the industrial hygiene comprehensive survey for the Solvent Refined Coal Pilot Plant. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc. (submitted to NIOSH under contract 210–78-0101), 1980.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Report of visit to HYGAS Pilot Plant, Chicago, Illinois. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc., November 8–11, 1976 (submitted to NIOSH under contract 210–76- 0171).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Report of visit to the Solvent Refined Coal Pilot Plant, Fort Lewis, Washington. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc. February 1979 (submitted to NIOSH under contract 210–78-0084), 1980Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Report of visit to South African Coal, Oil and Gas Corporation, Ltd (SASOL), Sasolburg, South Africa. Rockville, Md, Enviro Control, Inc., Dec 5–8, 1977 (submitted to NIOSH under contract 210–76-0171).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Industrial Hygiene Review Panel of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s Life Sciences Synthetic Fuels Program. University of Minnesota, Duluth gasifier, industrial hygiene review. Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1980.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Criteria for a recommended standard…occupational exposures in coal gasification plants. Rockville, Md: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1978. (DHEW [NIOSH] publication No. 78–191).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Recommended health and safety guidelines for coal gasification pilot plants. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1978 (DHEW [NIOSH] publication No. 78–120)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ECSC, EEC, EAEC, Brussels-Luxembourg. 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Evans
    • 1
  1. 1.USA

Personalised recommendations