Contribution to developing a new environmental risk management methodology for industrial sites
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
A fundamental requirement of any environmental management system for industrial sites is the identification and assessment of risk. To meet international standards in terms of environmental protection and preservation, industrial sites should ensure that a comprehensive environmental risk management process is in place by systematically identifying and managing risks arising from internal and external factors. The purpose of this study was to develop a new methodology to determine the significance of environmental hazardous situations associated with a process or activity. It uses qualitative or quantitative techniques to pinpoint weaknesses in design, operation, and lines of defense provided by engineering and administrative controls, which can lead to an environmentally hazardous event. It may also provide an assessment of risk resulting from the magnitude of the consequence and the probability of the environmental event occurring. The fundamental principle of this new risk-based hazard methodology is that whilst risk cannot be eliminated, it should be possible to reduce to ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable), and the environmental risk matrix could be a useful tool for establishing if an environmental risk rating is tolerable or not based on the likelihood and consequences. The outcome of this study is developing a new environmental risk matrix based on different consequences (health, environmental, reputation, and business interruption) with likelihood criteria. This matrix could be applied by industrial sites to identify and control their environmental risks.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Environmental management, Industrial sites, Risk management, Risk matrix
Anguenot, F. & Borysiewicz, J. (1998). Guidelines for integrated risk assessment and management in large industrial areas. International atomic energy agency.
Aven, T. (2016). Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation. European Journal of Operational Research, 253(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023
Aven, T. (2017). Improving risk characterisations in practical situations by highlighting knowledge aspects, with applications to risk matrices. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 167, 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.05.006
Aven, T. (2018). An emerging new risk analysis science: Foundations and implications: An emerging new risk analysis science. Risk Analysis, 38(5), 876–888. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12899
Aven, T. & Renn, O. (2009). The Role of quantitative risk assessments for characterizing risk and uncertainty and delineating appropriate risk management options, with special emphasis on terrorism risk. Risk Analysis, 29(4), 587–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01 17 5.x
Bao, C. Wu, D., Wan, J., Li, J., & Chen, J. (2017). Comparison of different methods to design risk matrices from the perspective of applicability. Procedia Computer Science, 122, 455–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proc s.2017.11.393
Baybutt, P. (2015). Calibration of risk matrices for process safety. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 38, 163–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.0 9.0 10
Bentivegna, V., Curwell, S., Deakin, M., Lombardi, P., Mitchell, G. & Nijkamp, P. (2002). A vision and methodology for integrated sustainable urban development: BEQUEST. Building Research & Information, 30(2), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/096132102753436468
Bérenguer, C., Grall, A., & Soares, C. G. (2012). Advances in Safety, Reliability and Risk Management. 1174
Duijm, N. J. (2015). Recommendations on the use and design of risk matrices. Safety Science, 76, 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.02.014
Falakh, F. & Setiani, O. (2018). Hazard identification and risk assessment in water treatment plant considering environmental health and safety practice. E3S Web of Conferences, 31, 06011. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/2018 3106011
Office for Nuclear Regulation (2020). Guidance on the Demonstration of ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable). Office for Nuclear Regulation.
Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General. (2000). First report on the harmonisation of risk assessment procedures. Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General. European Commission.
ISO 14001:2015. (2021). The International Organization for Standardization. https://www.iso.org/
Langston, C. A. & Ding, G. K. C. (Eds.). (2001). Sustainable practices in the built environment (2nd ed). Butterworth-Heinemann.
Macciotta, R. & Lefsrud, L. (2018). Framework for developing risk to life evaluation criteria associated with landslides in Canada. Geo Environmental Disasters, 5(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-018-0103-7
Maselli, G., Macchiaroli, M. & Nesticò, A. (2021). ALARP Criteria to estimate acceptability and tolerability thresholds of the investment risk. Applied Sciences, 11(19), 9086. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11199086
Menon, C., Clement, T. & Bloomfield, R. E. (2013). Interpreting ALARP. 8th IET International System Safety Conference Incorporating the Cyber Security Conference 2013, 4.3-4.3. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2013.1712
Nesticò, A., He, S., De Mare, G., Benintendi, R. & Maselli, G. (2018). The ALARP principle in the cost-benefit analysis for the acceptability of investment risk. Sustainability, 10(12), 4668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124668
Pike, H., Khan, F. & Amyotte, P. (2020). Precautionary Principle (PP) versus As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP): Which one to use and when. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 137, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.02.026
Standards Australia (Organization), S. N. Z. & International Organization for Standardization. (2009). Risk management: Principles and guidelines. Standards Australia ; Standards New Zealand.
Health and Safety Executive (1992). The tolerability of risk from nuclear power stations. Health and Safety Executive (HSE). https://www.hse.gov.uk
Tron, H. T. & Than, N. H. (2021). Hazard identification and risk assessment in wastewater treatment plant of Di An City. Thu Dau Mot University Journal of Science, 3(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.37550/tdmu.EJS/2021.01.154
Zio, E. & Aven, T. (2013). Industrial disasters: Extreme events, extremely rare. Some reflections on the treatment of uncertainties in the assessment of the associated risks. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 91(1–2), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2012.01.004
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) © Author (s)
