Kazakhstan
The purpose of this study is to validate an original methodology for assessing the risks of accidents, occupational injuries, and occupational diseases, using chemically hazardous sites within a nitrogen fertilizer production enterprise as a case study. The state of the occupational health and safety management system is evaluated based on three independent indicators: accident risk levels, work-related injury rates, and occupational sickness rate. The accident risk assessment method relies on expert evaluations, whereas the assessment of occupational injury and disease risks is based on statistical analysis. The study identifies that at the examined chemically hazardous sites, the primary factors influencing the risk of industrial accidents are indicators related to technological equipment used in production, as well as the storage volume and specific physical and chemical properties of hazardous substances. Despite these risks, the effective functioning of the enterprise’s occupational and industrial safety service helps maintain accident risk at a low level. However, even isolated accidents classify the enterprise as having an elevated risk of occupational injuries. Workplace compliance with sanitary and hygienic standards, along with the absence of newly diagnosed occupational diseases among employees, indicates no significant risk of occupational illnesses. The implementation of the proposed methodological approach will enable regulatory authorities in industrial safety, emergency management, and occupational health to assess the effectiveness of the enterprise’s safety management system. If necessary, it will also support the development of targeted measures to prevent chemical accidents and mitigate their consequences.
risk, risk assessment, chemically hazardous site, hazardous chemical, failure, accident, occupational sickness rate
1. Scharp J. Why was the texas fertilizer plant explosion so deadly? // Scientific American. 2013. URL: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-texas-fertilizer-plant-explosion-deadly/ (data obrashcheniya: 01.12.2024).
2. Than K. Explosion highlights dangers of anhydrous ammonia // National Geographic. 2013. URL: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/130418-west-texas-fertilizer-explosion-fire-anhydrous-ammonia-science (data obrashcheniya: 01.12.2024).
3. Reddy K.G., Yarakulla K. Analysis of accidents in chemical process industries in the period 1998–2015 // International Journal of ChemTech Research. 2016. № 4. P. 177–191.
4. Statistics on safety and health at work // International Labour Organization. 2021. URL: https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/safety-and-health-at-work/ (data obrashcheniya: 01.12.2024).
5. Experimental and numerical study of the behavior of LPG tanks exposed to wildland fires / G.E. Scarponi [et al.] // Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2018. Vol. 118. P. 251–270. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.12.013.
6. Three dimensional CFD simulation of LPG tanks exposed to partially engulfing pool fires / G.E. Scarponi [et al.] // Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2021. Vol. 150. P. 385–389. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2021.04.026.
7. Visualization of integrated failure consequences of hazardous chemical leakage and explosion / Yu. Kang [et al.] // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2024. Vol. 92. P. 105464. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2024.105464.
8. Crawley F., Tyler B. Hazard identification methods. Rugby: IChemE, 2003. P. 98.
9. Marhavilas P.K., Koulouriotis D.E., Mitrakas C. On the development of a new hybrid risk assessment process using occupational accidents’ data: application on the Greek Public Electric Power Provider // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2011. Vol. 24. P. 671–687. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2011.05.010.
10. Khan F.I., Abbasi S.A. Techniques and methodologies for risk analysis in chemical process industries // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 1998. Vol. 11. P. 261–277.
11. Review of 62 risk analysis methodologies of industrial plants / J. Tixier [et al.] // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2002. Vol. 15. P. 291–303.
12. Hurme M., Rahman M. Implementing inherent safety throughout process lifecycle // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2005. Vol. 18. P. 238–244. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2005.06.013.
13. Kudryavtsev S.S., Yemelin P.V., Yemelina N.K. The development of a risk management system in the field of industrial safety in the republic of kazakhstan // Safety and Health at Work. 2018. Vol. 9. № 1. P. 30–41.
14. Yemelin P.V., Kudryavtsev S.S., Yemelina N.K. Information and analytical system for hazard level assessment and forecasting risk of emergencies // Acta Polytechnica. 2019. Vol. 59. № 2. P. 182–191.
15. Yemelin P.V., Kudryavtsev S.S., Yemelina N.K. The methodological approach to environmental risk assessment from man-made emergencies at chemically hazardous sites // Environmental Engineering Research. 2021. Vol. 26. № 4. P. 100–111. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2020.386.
16. Yemelin P.V., Kudryavtsev S.S., Yemelina N.K. Improving the industrial safety management system at enterprises with chemically hazardous sites // Journal of Safety Science and Resilience. 2024. Vol. 5. № 4. P. 432–448. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2024.06.005.
