Reducing the Risks of Petrochemical Companies - Research Paper Example

Reducing the Risks of Petrochemical Companies Proposed Guidelines for Use in Industrial Applications Introduction It is generally known that it is impossible to live a life free of risk. However, there is only a slight recognition of the form of hazards which populations may be exposed to, and the intensity of hazard occurring. A key dilemma emerges because it is usual for the segment of the society which gains most apparently from the presence of the hazardous operations, like those of petrochemical plants, to be poles apart from segment which is exposed to the hazards. In short, the problems or detrimental effects are concentrated on one segment of the society, such as the immediate neighborhood, and the gains are acquired by another segment, such as firms and shareholders. Contemporary industrial period greatly relies on the utilization of numerous capably hazardous chemical substances. Wastes of petrochemical companies are harmful. These risks could be divided into three criteria, namely, (1) ergonomic harm, (2) fires/explosion, and (3) environmental contamination. Apparently, the major problem is how to effectively decrease such potential hazards in petrochemical companies. Petrochemical companies belong to a chemical system dependent on the products of gas and oil, and related processing of natural gas and petroleum. Hazardous wastes, on the other hand, are those which create a considerable risk or possible danger to the health of living beings for these are naturally deadly, constant, and non-degradable. Hazardous wastes are basically toxic, reactive, corrosive, and flammable (Jasanoff 1994). Ergonomic harm is one of the risks of petrochemical companies. Ergonomics denotes the interface between human beings and the device and machine in the workplace. Workers in petrochemical companies are highly exposed to ergonomic harms, such as musculoskeletal disorders (common for workers of drilling companies), or diseases caused by toxic fumes or substances (Attwood, Deeb, & Danz-Reece 2004). Petrochemical companies are also prone to accidental fires or explosions due to their handling of fuels, such as hydrocarbons. Even though these accidents may be quite unusual, when they do happen the effects can be quite serious, such as financial damage, employee casualty, or public injury (Khan & Abbasi 1998). Lastly, petrochemical companies carry with it several environmental hazards, just like in China and Argentina wherein massive environmental catastrophes have brought about a cycle of damages to the health of the local population. Several of the materials most intensely demanded by people for their use are innately harmful. Petroleum, for instance, is an expedient energy source. This convenience, while making petroleum important, also is the root of its risk. Numerous of the substances or materials used by the petrochemical industry are innately dangerous. Several of the procedures are dangerous as well. In order for petrochemical plants to operate with minimal risk, they should be properly planned and designed, and appropriate procedure and guidelines should be implemented in their operation and management. The safety of petrochemical plants has drawn a great deal of public attention due to a number of major accidents, several of which are identified as the following (Banerjee 2003, 2): the 1974 Flixborough explosion in which 28 were killed, 89 injured and severe damage caused to buildings, the 1975 Beek propylene release and refinery fire in which 14 were killed, the 1976 Seveso accident in which highly toxic substances were released to the environment causing contamination to wide areas with attendant health implications for the surrounding populace, the gas storage plant catastrophe near Mexico City at San Juan Ixhuatepec (1984) in which about 500 people perished and extensive damage was done, the Bhopal toxic gas release (1984) in which about 3400 were killed and many more injured, etc. In every one of these accidents an explosion, a fire, or a harmful chemical discharge was present. Furthermore, there have been many industrial accidents of slighter enormity. These accidents, both major and minor, resulted in an increase in regulatory measures, such as those of the Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Moreover, the accessibility of documents and data concerning accidents has been considerably improved. To acquire an idea of the forms of accidents and outcomes related to these, one has to take a look at the research of Doyle (1969) that reported two primary sources of accidents and losses as explosions and fires (as cited in Banerjee 2003, 3). It is important to mention that the term ‘explosions’ as reported by Doyle (1969) involve harmful chemical effects. Several interesting assumptions can be obtained by analyzing the research of Nostrom (1982). For instance, most of the financial damage is situated in purported ‘heavy hazard’ petrochemical companies in contrast to the group of ‘extra heavy hazard’ (as cited in Banerjee 2003, 3-4). The heavy hazard group involves procedures requiring explosive or flammable substances, such as sulphonation and polymerization methods. The extra heavy group includes nitrations, combustible production, organic peroxides, and others. Perhaps due to the safety measures implemented in extra heavy hazard industries, they make up merely 4.2 percent of the financial damage (Banerjee 2003, 3). Another key group is petrochemical production which comprises roughly 20 percent of the financial damage. The rate of recurrence for the heavy hazard group, petrochemicals group, and extra heavy hazard group are 32.1 percent, 8.9 percent, and 4.9 percent respectively (Banerjee 2003, 3). Recently, there have been a number of large-scale accidents associated with the petrochemicals and petroleum industry that could influence the comparative value of this group. Reducing Risks in the Petrochemical Industry For two centuries, local and state authorities have been looked upon to guarantee public security and wellbeing. Every state has formed several organizations to hinder safety risks, such as petrochemical accidents. Nevertheless, outcomes have differed from state to state and are usually regarded insufficient in handling petrochemical plants because these authorities generally lack the needed public support, familiarity of and updates from the industry, technical knowledge (Institution of Chemical Engineers 2008). Furthermore, according to Beebe (2006), their focus on local economic situations, such as employment and taxes, has usually encouraged these authorities to underestimate safety when an organization resists their safety policies and makes threat to relocate or close down. Such weaknesses and the tragedy of the 1984 Bhopal disaster pushed Congress to reinforce local administrative efforts and to build a new federal function. Congress endorsed the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) in 1986 (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 227). EPCRA obliges organizations that produce, stock, or handle harmful chemicals or substances to disclose information to Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), and mandated the formation of LEPCs in every state in order to utilize information from the industry to create emergency response programs to be executed in case of a plant accident. In addition, EPCRA mandates that the emergency programs, and the reports given by LEPCs, be publicized (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 227). Nevertheless, the federal function in this arrangement is confined to imposing the disclosure provisions. EPCRA brought about varied outcomes. It did not focus enough on accident prevention, but on accident response, nor did it allow ratification of technical norms. It gave local authorities more accurate information about risk and encouraged the formation of response programs, but it failed to enhance their industrial knowledge or supply financial capital (Boyer, Hiriart, & Martimort 2006, 70). It facilitated the public disclosure of industrial data with the anticipation that new public knowledge of accident hazards would pose demands to company managers and owners and local government authorities to implement precautionary measures, but thus far, community awareness and demands continue to be insignificant (Boyer et al. 2006). It obliged organizations to prepare and disclose risk information, and thus raised further management interest in accident prevention and plant security. Nevertheless, according to Alson (2003), numerous companies were not able to meet reporting provisions and have not implemented deliberate precautionary measures. Due to these varied outcomes and the persistence of petrochemical accidents, Congress exerted additional efforts to institute a new federal plan for enhancing plant safety. In 1990, in its ratification of Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), Congress stated that organizations that produce, stock, or handle special substances have a ‘general duty’ to make sure plant safety, thus placing all companies under legal accountability to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 228). Furthermore, all companies are obliged to implement precautionary measures to enhance plant safety, prepare a ‘risk management plan’ for the assessment by EPA, and carry out a ‘hazard assessment’ of all plants (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 228). EPA is given the power to evaluate these plans and assessments, implement enforcement measures against organizations that fail to abide by and keep on sustaining risky plants, and enforce industrial policies and guidelines if needed to guarantee that organizations implement proper measures (Bier, Kunreuther, & Phimister 2004). Organization that do not comply with such policies and satisfy EPA provisions for each plant will not be allowed to continue its plant operation. OSHA has also monitored petrochemical plants since the 1970s to safeguard workers from health risks and accidents. Due to the fact that an accident that threatens employees may threatens the surrounding or nearby areas as well, the administrative roles of OSHA coincided with the new directive of EPA (Boyer et al. 2006). OSHA monitors plants, implements a ‘general duty’ for organizations to safeguard their employees, and has endorsed a lot of industrial policies (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 228). In addition, it circulated in 1985 a ‘worker right-to-know’ (p. 228) to make sure that employees are updated and instructed about the harmful substances they are exposed to. Large-scale petrochemical accidents in the recent period have prompted OSHA to build up its plan for monitoring petrochemical plants, and to suggest ratification of a new ‘process safety’ policy (Wilpert & Qvale 1993, 228). This federal participation in how petrochemical companies address safety is placed over the previous EPCRA provisions and the comprehensive range of local and state departments. However, according to Bier and colleagues (2004), it is apparent that petrochemical companies are being granted the chance to exercise its judgment and knowledge in dealing with the distinct group of risk factors at every plant, and that the federal function will stay administrative or regulatory except if the industry was unsuccessful, where in the federal function will become more regulatory. Ergonomic Harm In spite of precautionary measures implemented to prevent them, accidents can take place. Roughly forty major petrochemical accidents took place between 1970 and 1985 (Galambos, Hikino, & Zamagni 2007, 286). Important units of the petrochemical industry have significant hazard vulnerability; major impacts have been disclosed with regard to accidents, both concerning ecological effects and ergonomic harms in petrochemical companies. In several instances with bigger tragedies, appropriate remedies have been successful in mitigating hazards to a minimum. Such measures have been facilitated through preventive actions as well as emergency preparation and exercise, utilizing existing resources and expertise outside and inside an organization (Galambos et al. 2007). Similar to preparing, educating, and exercising for precautionary responses, organizations should conform to legal duties for safeguarding workers, guests, and nearby locals or residents against hazards created by industrial use of substances. According to Chaudhuri (2010), appropriate safeguard is improved by taking account of (1) the coherent use of substances, in relation to their quantities and usage requirements; and (2) the operation of equipment and plants, maintenance, building, design, and the location. Well-planned and suitable safety management in the petrochemical industry should be rooted in a firm organizational dedication to safety and its focus on developing particular policies and instructions for educating and training workers. This measure provides gains in the form of decreased occurrences of injuries, lowered regulatory penalties, higher profit, and greater quality. Since the petrochemical industry is physically taxing, firms should ensure that workers are physically able to perform their task. They must also give workers appropriate education about safe work processes and guidelines (Chaudhuri 2010). According to Lopez and colleagues (2012), petrochemical companies can reduce their risks by (1) training workers in correct analysis/evaluation processes and incident reporting; (2) carrying out safety evaluations; (3) training employees in chemical use and handling; (4) supplying all the needed personal protective equipment; and (5) establishing ergonomics. A worker’s handbook must not only specify the mandated safety level but also provide detailed guidelines. The following concerns must be integrated into a training course (Attwood et al. 2004): (1) workers’ duties and control; (2) safety guidelines; (3) emergency processes; (4) overall fire safety; and (5) incident and accident reporting. For the job of manual handling in petrochemical facilities, the interest of the ergonomist is generally about the highest force needed in one or merely several efforts. The musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) vulnerability of manual handling job is identified by weighing the force needed to perform the job against an approximation of the highest force that would be secure for this individual to use in the same situations (Attwood et al. 2004). Figure 1. Risk factors that influence the weight of the load *graphics taken from Attwood, Deeb, & Danz-Reece 2004, 71 Furthermore, environmental aspects like lighting quality in the workplace and maintenance aspects like impediments and state of the floor exterior also affect how securely a weight can be handled. Obviously, a safe manual handling chore is that which the weight of the cargo does not goes above the load that could be securely handled (Attwood et al. 2004, 71-72). The best possible lifting task is that where in the load is compressed, not difficult to hold and grip, and needs no uncomfortable movements to manipulate the weight. Circumstances that move away from the best possible setting involve risk factors. Common rules for the task of manual handling are (Attwood et al. 2004, 71-72): (1) organize manual handling tasks to prevent twisting or bending as much as possible; (2) develop automatic support for tasks needing regular lifting or handling of weighty cargos; (3) develop automatic support for tasks where in manual forces go above the operator’s limits; (4) evaluate and reorganize tasks necessitating the manual handling of weighty objects, as needed; and (5) steer clear of stationary job as much as possible. Fires/Explosion Petrochemical companies handle huge volumes of combustible materials, bulk of these are considerably lethal and of volatile or explosive nature. Fires in petrochemical companies have rapidly become major fires and have seriously damaged the plant equipment. In contrast, numerous major fires have been prevented by regulating and eradicating the roots by enhanced planning, engineering, and processes of fire safety (Banerjee 2003). The table below enumerates the 15 large-scale industrial tragedies from 1976 to 2006. The primary cause of these disasters is explosions (Assael & Kakosimos 2010, 68): *table taken from Assael and Kakosimos (2010, 68) The most intrinsic safety aspects that can be used in a petrochemical plant are the segregation and design of procedures and equipment. Several scholars stress that segregation is the leading safety aspect that can be used at any plant. This is factual from the point of view of avoiding exposure to workers or plants outside the vicinity under consideration. Nevertheless, this becomes quite unrealistic for the offshore production plants and huge process plants that are built nowadays (Lancaster 2000). Certainly the manned sites at process plants must be placed as distantly as possible from vulnerable vicinities. Numerous pipelines, several storage reservoirs, too many process liners, and spare process trains restrict the chances of finding all dangerous process hazards (Khan & Abbasi 1998). Moreover, operational efficacies would be impinged on and building expenses would go up. The more feasible strategy is to merge the aspects of segregation and design in a manner that results in a more structured and operationally efficient process plant. This stands for the minimum actual risk yet still prevents congestion (Assael & Kakosimos 2010). Planned or possible expansion must be dealt with and space allotted for identified and unidentified facility needs. Rational and systematic expansion can only be performed if prerequisites are considered during the initial plant construction. The main design should be postponed and only modified if a risk analysis of the adjustments is tolerable (Lewins & Worley 1988). As stated by Ryding (1994), surface overspill from one vicinity moves instantly to another vicinity, the aspect of segregation is therefore not achieved. Basically, to mitigate the risk of fires in petrochemical companies, the objective should be to communicate a concern over fire prevention to each person in the facility, from the management to the rank-and-file workers. It is vital that each understands the duty to perform the task without the presence of a fire risk in order for the production process to work continuously. This essentially implies that the familiarity with fire risks is taken into account in every operation and exact methods are launched to prevent such hazards (Alson 2003). Ultimately, the fire facility should be looked after and workers are to be expediently available to respond successfully during a fire. In the petrochemical industry, explosion prevention can be attained by distinct methods. The objective of precautionary procedures against explosions is to prevent the incident of an explosion a main concern. This can be performed in various ways (Lees 1980, 623): i) avoidance of ignition sources ii) avoidance of explosive concentrations of the material to be handled iii) exclusion of the oxygen/air, required for the combustion process Explosion prevention systems used in petrochemical companies for the safety of processing facilities have established their effectiveness on several instances. A fundamental requirement for the design of prevention systems is the familiarity with specific explosion information, which explains the explosive process of combustible materials in containers (Beebe 2006). Effective explosion prevention is merely feasible up to a certain explosion intensity of the combustible substance, and then again, it necessitates a specific minimum durability of the equipment to be safe. Environmental hazards Environmental safety has become an important concern for petrochemical companies, both in locating facilities and in the industrial outcome of process. Nevertheless, much work is required to create an appropriate and recognized model of integrating environmental effects into various production phases. Certainly, this is a difficult task for the petrochemical industry. Petrochemical companies have to repeatedly evaluate its production decisions, with regard to the manufacture and handling of waste, product usage, manufacturing, and unprocessed material so as to (Ryding 1994, 428): minimize the possibilities of pollution; apply the most appropriate pollution prevention and/or abatement techniques; conserve non-renewable resources, including energy; develop and utilize cleaner technologies; develop alternatives to maximize the recycling or reuse of materials and wastes; and, ensure that every effort is being made to conserve ecological systems, especially in areas subject to a critical balance of supplies. Hence, in relation to operations planning and management, petrochemical companies should implement a new model of environmentally-oriented operations. This notion should be rooted in the viewpoint of the limited nature of the planet’s non-renewable resources, natural ecosystems, and the human environment (Ryding 1994). Hence, the petrochemical industry should take into account the environmental risks of its operation through every stage in the whole process of production. Raw material and product distribution, including transportation processes, should be enhanced. Future attempts in relation to these concerns should involve more rigid demands on the suppliers of parts and raw materials, production of new goods less damaging to the environment and human health when utilized or discarded, and the chance of producing less poisonous waste (Abbasi & Khan 2000). Better priority should be given to every realistic chance for avoiding environmental hazards through thorough emergency planning for dependable transportation, and material use, handling, and storage. New methods should be developed for recognizing material damages during the processes of production. For instance, input-output assessments for materials and energy have shown to be an effective method in minimizing waste. Nevertheless, more ideas should be produced as regards to the idea of input-output assessments (Ryding 1994). For example, there is at times insufficient understanding of what is important or insignificant to take into account regarding pollutant discharges in the existing information on material flows in various production phases (Ryding 1994)—knowledge which is of huge importance in identifying the crucial production states as regards to environmental effects. First Steps to Solving the Problem First, engineers nowadays should design more powerful technology that is environmentally friendly and ergonomically efficient. Having a strong safety mechanism requires a safer structure or plan and less possibility of collapse. Second, petrochemical companies should enhance the quality of its workforce. Recently, the petrochemical, gas, and oil industry has increasing lacked qualified workers due to retirement, downsizing, and mergers (Institution of Chemical Engineers 2008). Because of mechanization and cost control, these employees with the industrial expertise needed to operate the equipment and facilities are not being substituted, letting employees, who may not possess all the knowledge, training, or time required to respond to a problem, operate complex equipment. Third, risk control engineers, in order to assist the assessment of insurance premiums, should review the following domains of the firm’s operation to identify the plant’s risk value (Institution of Chemical Engineers 2008): (1) safety hardware: direct monitoring of fire fighting instruments, control room, storage tanks, and process components; (2) plant: review of conditions of plants, process controls, and design; (3) processes: assessment of engineering standards, plant adjustment mechanisms, contingency plans, and work permits; and (4) management: evaluation of fire safety, engineering, monitoring, maintenance, and operations. Fourth, risk control engineers should review firm’s operation to identify the possibility of explosions and fires related to the hazardous materials required in the processing stage. For instance, according to Lancaster (2000), the primary cause of numerous vapor cloud occurrences is weak control mechanisms prior to, during, and after building or maintenance operations, which are at times brought about by external contractors. Risk control engineers should then be cautious about contractors and their precautionary measures. Fifth, weaknesses in the maintenance and monitoring of plants are a root cause of large-scale industry damages. In view of this, risk control engineers should examine every feature of a facility when carrying out their procedural assessment and should focus on short-term repairs, confirmation of building materials, piping, and plant’s apparatus. Since risk control engineers are highly knowledgeable of the rudiments of risk management and its relevance to each plant, their feedback or suggestions will aid petrochemical companies in identifying accurately possible risks. Conclusions Scholars, researchers, government officials, environmental organizations, and the petrochemical industry itself are all performing their tasks in improving technical knowledge about hazardous materials in the production domain and the possible risks they embody in both continual and severe exposures. It is possible that integrative policies and actions will certainly help prioritize such distinct attempts, in order for risks to be mitigated without forgoing the unquestionable advantages that petroleum and chemicals confer to economies and societies. A great deal of the debate around risks involved in petrochemical companies is rooted in incomplete, random, and disorganized information. Due to this, the outcome has been that stakeholders jump from one issue to the next or one petrochemical tragedy to the next instead of methodically addressing the issue in a manner that facilitates an understanding of where the actual hazards are and where the attention should be. Works Cited Abbasi, S.A. & Faisal Khan. Computer Aided Environmental Management. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House, 2000. Alson, Gregory. How safe is safe enough?: leadership, safety, and risk management. London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2003. Assael, Marc & Konstantinos Kakosimos. Fires, Explosions, and Toxic Gas Dispersions: Effects Calculation and Risk Analysis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2010. Attwood, Dennis, Joseph Deeb, & Mary Danz-Reece. Ergonomic Solutions for the Process Industries. Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing, 2004. Banerjee, S. Industrial hazards and plant safety. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2003. Beebe, James. “Inherently Safer Technology: The Cure for Chemical Plants Which Are Dangerous by Design” Houston Journal of International Law, 28.1 (2006): 239+ Bier, V., H. Kunreuther, & J.R. Phimister. Accident precursor analysis and management: reducing technological risk through diligence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004. Boyer, Marcel, Yolande Hiriart, & David Martimort. Frontiers in the Economics of Environmental Regulation and Liability. UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2006. Chaudhuri, Uttam Ray. Fundamentals of Petroleum and Petrochemical Engineering. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2010. Galambos, L., T. Hikino, & V. Zamagni. The Global Chemical Industry in the Age of the Petrochemical Revolution. London: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Jasanoff, Sheila. Learning from Disaster: Risk Management after Bhopal. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994. Khan, F. & Abbasi. Risk Assessment in Chemical Process Industries. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House, 1998. Institution of Chemical Engineers. Hazards XX: process safety and environmental protection: harnessing knowledge, challenging complacency. London: IChemE, 2008. Lancaster, John. Engineering catastrophes: causes and effects of major accidents. England: Woodhead Publishing, 2000. Lees, Frank. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries: Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control, Volume 1. Michigan: Butterworths, 1980. Lewins, J. & N. Worley. The Chernobyl Accident and Its Implications for the United Kingdom. London: Elsevier Applied Science, 1988. Lopez, J., R. Setola, & S. Wolthusen. Critical Infrastructure Protection: Advances in Critical Infrastructure Protection: Information Infrastructure Models, Analysis, and Defense. London: Springer, 2012. Ryding, Sven-Olof. Environmental Management Handbook. Burke, VA: IOS Press, 1994. Perrow, Charles. Normal accidents: living with high-risk technologies. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1984. Wilpert, Bernhard & Thoralf Ulrik Qvale. Reliability and safety in hazardous work systems: approaches to analysis and design. New York: Psychology Press, 1993. Read More