01-230541

1.1: Introduction to
Environmental Risk Assessment
by

Assoc.Prof.Dr. Thumrongrut Mungcharoen

Advisor, Sustainable Development Program
National Science and Technology Development Agency
(and Faculty of Engineering, Kasetsart University)
 350 ppm in 1985 and 400 ppm in Apr14
Unsustainable Earth

agreement
Global T  20C
CO2  450 ppm Apr 2014 is the 1st month beyond
400 ppm in millions of years

Global footprints vs Suggested

maximum sustainable level
Source: Hoekstra & Wiedmann, Humanity’s unstainable environmental footprint, 2014

Ecological Footprint vs
Biocapacity of Thailand 2
 Ecological Footprints of Nations and Persons
The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's
ecosystems. It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area
necessary to supply the resources a human population consumes, and to assimilate
associated waste. (Wikipedia)
The world-average ecological footprint in 2007 was 2.7 global hectares/person,
while there are only 2.1 global hectare (of bio-productive land and
water)/capita on earth. This means that humanity has already overshot global
biocapacity by 30% and now lives unsustainably by depleting stocks of "natural capital”

Source: Hoekstra & Wiedmann, 2014

 Definition of “Sustainable Development”

According to the WCED, this is

"Development that meets the needs
of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs."
•1992: WCED: World Commission on Environment and Development,
organized by UN in 1983 → Earth Summit meeting in Rio, Brazil endorsed
by 178 countries, called “Agenda 21” in order to protect environment and
create sustainable development on earth (Rio Summit) SD
• 2002 → Johannesburg Summit (Rio + 10) SCP
• 2012 → Rio + 20 (June) Green Economy + 10 YFP
 Linkages between New Climate Regime (@ COP21) and SDGs

© NSTDA 2012 5
www.nstda.or.th
17 Goals & 169 Targets to be adopted Sept 2015 in NY 6
 Sustainability and Triple Bottom Line
• SD should ideally improve the quality of life for every individual
on each without expanding the earth’s resources beyond its
capacity.
• Journey towards SD requires that business and individuals take
action, i.e., changing consumption and production behaviors

SD = Sustainable Production + Sustainable Consumption

• Three pillars (dimensions) of Sustainability: Economic / Social / Environment

Sustainable Dimensions
“Triple Bottom Line”
of Business Community

Sustainable business
Good Governance Ref: UNEP, 2006.
 LCT/ LCM Objectives, Strategies,
Systems, Tools
Social dimension Environmental dimension Economical dimension

Objective SUSTAINABILITY

Concept LIFE CYCLE THINKING

Management Level

Strategies LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT

Corporate social Product- and supply

Pollution Prevention
responsibility chain management

Systems OHSAS 18001 ISO 14001 & POEMS ISO 9001, TQM, EFQM

Risk Assessment: Safety/Environment

Tools Cleaner Production,
Work place assessment EMA & LCC
LCA, EcoDesign,

Explanations: OHSAS = Occupational Health And Safety, POEMS = Product Oriented Environmental
Management System, TQM = Total Quality Management, EFQM = European Foundation for Quality
Management, LCA = Life Cycle Assessment, EMA = Environmental Management Accounting, LCC =
Life Cycle Cost Analysis.
 Fire &
Explosion
(in
industry)
of LPG
Container
Extinguish Method Symbol
-----------------------------
Reduce Temp. A

Separate
Segregate O2 B
Segregate Fuel

Multi-Purpose Fire
Extinguisher: dry C
chemical powder or
Carbon dioxide (CO2)

Cover with dried sand

or dried ash/ dried
chemical powder D
(Purple-K, Super-K)
 Fire:
When all sides
are connected

Ignition source

No Fire:
When any one
side is missing Ignition source

Basic concept of “Fire protection”

Careless ?
Neglect ?

...Whose fault?
 Safety
Traditional Safety
• Focus on losses from injuries
and deaths
• Focus on careless of the
workers
• Focus on corrective measures
after the accident occurred
• Use Top down approach
• Safety officer(s) is the center
• Not often evaluate the losses,
safety investment and expenses
• Only major accident that draws
attention
Modern Safety
• Focus on total losses of life,
assets, and production time
• Focus on the effectiveness of
management
• Focus on preventive measures
before the accident occurs
• Use Bottom up approach or all
stakeholders involvement
• Everyone in the production lines
is the center (Safety officer is
the coordinator)
• Has system for economic
estimation of losses, safety
investment and expenses
• Even minor accident can draw
attention
25 tons of Potassium
Chlorate/Nitrate can destroy
Chiang Mai !!!
Consequence Analysis
Is it true? of Accident
 Road Accidents: cause almost 2 deaths per hour

Probability
Analysis
of Accident

You attend this course for 7 hours.

How many people would die in the road accident?
Safety = Loss Prevention
• Environment: Pollution Prevention
• Modern Safety: Loss Prevention
Risk Reduction
Risk = P x S
a ) the likelihood (or probability) of the hazard being released (P)
b ) the seriousness of the outcome of the release of the hazard (S))
 Losses from accident
Direct Indirect
worker - loss salary - moral loss, discourage
- injury, death
factory - compensation - loss time of worker
- medical expenses (from injury) and others
- equipment damage - damage from no production
- repair expenses - PR expenses
nation - loss of labor force - person with disabilities
for the country - higher cost,
more expensive goods
 Shell Belief

All Incidents Are

Preventable
Incidents = Accidents + Near Misses
Incident Iceberg –the hidden cases

Serious/ Major Injury

1

10 Minor Injury

30 Property Damage

600 Near Miss

Accident Ratio: Studied by Frank E. Bird (1969)

 Hazard

• Something that has the potential to cause

injury, damage or loss
– Working at heights
– Stored energy-electrical,steam,compressed air
– Flammable liquid
– Ignition source
– Heavy goods vehicle
 Risk

A combination of :
a ) the likelihood (or probability) of the hazard
being released (P)
b ) the seriousness of the outcome of the
release of the hazard (S)

Risk = P * S
Risk Mgt Matrix
 Risk Assessment

• Principles and Engineering Techniques

• MOI Regulation # 3 (B.E. 2542) เรือ

่ ง
“มาตรการคุม
้ ครองความปลอดภ ัยในการดาเนินงาน”
(Occupational safety measures in the workplace)
 Risk Assessment
Types of Industry according to MOI regulation#3 B.E. 2542
No. Type Details according to Factory Act 1992
1 7(1)(4) Oil (vegetable, animal) extraction using solvent
2 42(1)(2) Chemical Factory (exclude fertilizer)
3 43(1)(2) Chemical fertilizer, Herbicides, Pesticides
4 44 Synthetic Fibers (exclude glass-fiber)
5 45(1)(2) Paint and Enamels
6 48(4) Matches, Fireworks
7 49 Petroleum Refineries
8 50(4) Product Mixing from Petroleum
9 89 Gas (exclude NG) production
10 91(2) Gas filling
11 92 Cold storage
12 99 Firearms, Explosive materials, etc.
 Risk Assessment according to MOI regulation #3 (1999)

Main Contents
▪- For factories need new license, extend license or expand
capacity: must submit “Risk Analysis Report” to the authority
▪- Issue on November 1999, start enforcement on November 2000
▪- Need to submit the report within 360 days after the law
enforcement date

“Risk Analysis Report” includes:

1) Detailed data of the factory
2) Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Report
3) Risk Management Plan
 Risk Assessment according to MOI regulation #3 (1999)
Main Contents
1. Detailed data of the factory
Factory Map including others within the 500 meters radius
Locations that may have accidents such as fire, explosion, toxic release,
etc.
Locations for machinery, fuel storage, chemical warehouse, and other
important areas that may cause accident
Production steps, process flow diagram and process conditions including
annual consumption of raw materials and chemicals
Numbers of workers and period of work
Other data such as accident statistics, accident investigation report,
safety audit report, etc.
 Risk Assessment according to MOI regulation #3 (1999)

Main Contents

2. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Report

Hazard Identification:
to identify all potential hazards in the factory
Risk Assessment:
to analyze the probability and the severity (consequence) of all potential hazards
which may cause harmful affect on life, assets, environment and social

3. Risk Management Plan

➢ Preventive and corrective measures to prevent and/or reduce negative impact found
in the hazard identification and risk assessment step
➢ To control/reduce the risk into the acceptable level
➢ To provide all necessary resources for the preventive and corrective measures
 Risk Assessment Process

Hazard Identification
Risk Analysis
Risk Risk Estimation
Assessment
Measures Propose Measures
Evaluation Analyze Measures
Measures Selection
Implementation
Risk Management Follow-up & Evaluation
Review
 Risk Assessment Methods

Divide into 3 types

1) Qualitative Risk Assessment: assess without specific
number of probability and severity/consequence
2) Semi-Qualitative Risk Assessment: identify specific number
for probability and severity, but not a real risk quantity or not
in monetary terms
3) Quantitative Risk Assessment: use calculation method to
determine actual numeric quantity of probability and severity
 Qualitative Risk Assessment
Risk = Probability x Consequence
Probability Definition
High Likely to occur several times in life cycle of system
Medium Likely to occur sometime in life cycle of system
Low Not Likely to occur in life cycle, but possible
Consequences Considerations
Illness/Injury Public Disruption Media Attention Financial Impact Env. Impact
High Death/Disabling Community National Corporate Major
Med Medical Treatment Few Families Local Div./Regional Serious
Low First Aid Individual None Other Minor
MATRIX
Consequence Probability High Medium Low
High Highest Risk
Medium
Low Lowest Risk
 SEMI-QUALITATIVE APPROACH
CRITICALITY HAZARD RATING (consequence)
I Catastrophic: results in either
- An on-site or off-site death
- Damage and production loss greater than $1,000,000
II Severe : results in either
- Multiple injuries
- Damage and production loss between $100,000 and $1,000,000
III Moderate: results in either
- A single injury
- Damage and production loss between $10,000 and $100,000
IV Slight : results in either
- No injury
- Damage and production loss less than $10,000
 SEMI-QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

FREQUENCY (of occurrence) RATING

A = Occurs more than once per year (Frequent)
B = Occurs between 1 and 10 years (Probable)
C = Occurs between 10 and 100 years (Occasional)
D = Occurs between 100 and 10,000 years (Remote)
E = Occurs less often than once per 10,000 years (Improbable)
Risk Matrix
A B C D E Hazard Risk Index
I 1 1 1 2 3 1 = Unacceptable
II 1 1 2 2 3 2 = Undesirable
III 1 2 2 3 3 3 = Acceptable with review
IV 3 3 4 4 4 4 = Acceptable without review
 Semi-Qualitative Assessment

Risk Score
Likelihood Tie Line Possible 500 Very High
Almost Certain Exposure
Consequence 400 Discontinue
Catastrophic High
Very Rare 200
Very Likely Immediate
Rare Disaster Correction required
100
Unusual but possible Unusual Very Serious
80 Substantial
Occasional Correction Required
Remotely possible Frequent Serious 40
Continuous Possible Risk
Important 20 Attention indicated
Conceivable but
very unlikely Noticeable
10
Practically Impossible Risk Perhaps
acceptable
5

Fine Chart Nomogram

 Semi-Qualitative Risk Assessment: DIW method
Table 1 Rating for Probability of Occurrence
Table 2.1 Rating for Severity to Worker
Rating Description
Rating Severity Description
1 Improbable, never occur within 10 years
1 Low บาดเจ็บเล็กน ้อย ในระดับปฐมพยาบาล
2 Remote, occur 1 within 5-10 years
2 Medium บาดเจ็บทีต
่ ้องได ้รับการรักษาทางการแพทย์
3 Probable, occur 1 within 1-5 years
3 High บาดเจ็บหรือเจ็บป่ วยทีร่ ุนแรง
4 Frequent, occur more than 1 within 1 year
4 Very high Disabling/ Death (ทุพลภาพหรือเสียชีวต
ิ )

Table 2.2 Rating for Severity to Environment

Table 2.3 Rating for Severity to Community
Rating Severity Description
Rating Severity Description
1 Low ผลกระทบต่อสวล.น ้อย สามารถควบคุมหรือแก ้ไขได ้
1 Low ไม่มผ
ี ลกระทบต่อชุมชนรอบโรงงานหรือมีผลกระทบน ้อย
2 Medium ้
ผลกระทบต่อสวล.ปานกลาง สามารถแก ้ไขได ้ในเวลาสัน
2 Medium ้
มีผลกระทบต่อชุมชนรอบโรงงานและแก ้ไขได ้ในเวลาสัน
3 High ผลกระทบต่อสวล.รุนแรง ต ้องใช ้เวลาในการแก ้ไข
3 High มีผลกระทบต่อชุมชนรอบโรงงานและต ้องใช ้เวลาในการ
4 Very high ผลกระทบต่อสวล.รุนแรงมาก ต ้องใช ้ทรัพยากรและ แก ้ไข
เวลานานในการแก ้ไข
4 Very high มีผลกระทบต่อชุมชนเป็ นบริเวณกว ้างหรือหน่วยงานของรัฐ
ต ้องเข ้าดาเนินการแก ้ไข

Table 2.4 Rating for Severity to Assets

Rating Severity Description Table 3 Risk Rating

ิ เสียหายน ้อยมาก หรือไม่เสียหายเลย Rating Risk Interpretation

1 Low ทรัพย์สน
Score
2 Medium ิ เสียหายปานกลางและสามารถดาเนินการผลิต
ทรัพย์สน
ต่อไปได ้ 1 1-2 Acceptable without review (low risk)

3 High ิ เสียหายมากและต ้องหยุดการผลิตในบางส่วน

ทรัพย์สน 2 3-6 Acceptable with review (review the risk assessment
plan)
4 Very high ิ เสียหายมากและต ้องหยุดการผลิตทัง้ หมด
ทรัพย์สน
3 8-9 Undesirable, need action to reduce risk
4 12-16 Unacceptable, must stop production and take action
to reduce risk right away
 Semi-Qualitative Risk Assessment: DIW method
• As a matrix 4x4 (1-2, 3-6, 8-9, 12-16 points)
Prob./ 1 2 3 4
Consequence Low Medium High Very High
(1) (2) (3) (4)
1
Acceptable Acceptable without Acceptable with Acceptable with
Improbable
without review review review review
(2) (4) (6)
2 (8)
Acceptable Acceptable with Acceptable with
Remote Undesirable
without review review review
(3) (6)
3 (9) (12)
Acceptable with Acceptable with
Probable Undesirable Unacceptable
review review
(4)
4 (8) (12) (16)
Acceptable with 36
Frequent Undesirable Unacceptable Unacceptable
review
 QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT

QRA may be defined as:

“The identification of causes of possible
accidents followed by a technical
analysis to determine the likelihood of
occurrence and potential consequences
of those accidents leading to a
numerical estimate of an appropriate
measure of risk”
 Quantitative Risk Assessment
Risk = Probability x Consequence
Estimate in term of cash value

Probabilities Consequences ProbabilityConsequence Risk ($)

50% 5,000 5,0000.50 2,500
40% 10,000 10,0000.40 4,000
10% 40,000 40,0000.10 4,000
10,500
 Quantitative Assessment

Risk Contour (with google map)

10-5
10-6

10-7

10-8
 Quantitative Assessment

Figure: General description of Risk

Not
acceptable

Acceptable

Frequency
 Quantitative Assessment

1. Hazard Identification

2. Probability Analysis 3. Consequence Analysis

Proposed measure to 4. Calculate Risk Proposed measure to

reduce probability reduce consequence

Risk Acceptable?
No No
Yes
Suitable Risk Management
 Risk Assessment
ALARA (or ALARP) Principle
Unacceptable

As ยอมรับได้ ถ้าการลดความเสี่ ยง
Low ไม่สามารถทาได้ หรื อไม่เป็ น
As สัดส่ วนที่เหมาะกับผลที่จะได้
Reasonably
Achievable/ Possible ยอมรับได้ ถ้าการลดความเสี่ ยง
แพงกว่า ผลที่จะได้รับ

Acceptable
Risk too low to consider
Accident Statistics for Various Selected Industries

Industry OSHA Incidence rate FAR

(loss workdays & deaths) (deaths/108hr)
Chemical 0.49 4.0
Vehicle 1.08 1.3
Steel 1.54 8.0
Paper 2.06
Coal mining 2.22 40
Food 3.28
Construction 3.88 67
Agricultural 4.53 10
Meat products 5.27
Trucking 7.28
Fatality Statistics for Common Non-industrial Activities

Activity FAR Fatality Rate

(deaths/108hr) (deaths/person/year)
Voluntary activity
Staying at home 3
Travelling
car 57 17x10 -5
bicycle 96
air 240
motorcycle 660
Canoeing 1000
Rock climbing 4000 4x10 -5
Smoking (20 cigarettes/day) 500x10-5
Involuntary activity
Struck by lightning (U.K.) 1x10-7
Fire (U.K.) 150x10-7
Run over by vehicle 600x10-7
 Criteria for calculation: Hazard in process industry
Hazard Criteria
Toxic Release • 3% Fatality (for a release duration of < 30 min.)
(Max. IDLH (Immediate danger to life and health)
downwind • Injury (High likelihood of injuries: TLV-C)… 5 x TLV-TWA
distance to) • Hot Zone (TLV-STEL)..…  3 x TLV-TWA
(concentration)
• Warm Zone (TLV-TWA) …… หน่วย ppm หรือ mg/m3
Fire • Distances to 37.5, 25.0, 12.5, 4.0 and 1.6 kW/m2;
(Radiation) and
(heat from fire) • 3% fatality/ 500 TDU (for a fire of less than 30 sec)
TDU=Thermal dose units=exposure time (s) x heat load (kW/m2)
Explosion • Distances to 5, 2, 1, and 0.5 psi
(Overpressure)
Wind Speed Atmospheric
(m/s) Stability Individual Fatality Risk
Meteorological
conditions for 1 F a) 5 x 10-5 deaths per year
toxic release 2 B b) 5 x 10-6 per year
3 C
c) 1 x 10-6 per year
 RISK CONTROL
Mitigate the probability and consequences of release through
- Reduced frequency of failure at source (eg, add standby
pump)
- Additional hazard detection and protection systems
(eg, gas detection, fire fighting)
- Increased equipment separation distances (eg, fire walls,
blast walls)
- Depressuring / Low temperature systems
- Decreased population counts (partially unattended operation)
- Increased inspection and testing frequencies (providing
redundancy)
- Increased audit frequency and training
 RISK CRITERIA
(DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING; NSW, AUSTRALIA)
NEAREST RESIDENTIAL
- NOT MORE THAN 10 IN 106 YEARS
OVER PRESSURE 14 kPa, HEAT FLUX 12.6 kW/m2
- NOT MORE THAN 50 IN 106 YEARS
OVER PRESSURE 7 kPa, HEAT FLUX 4.7 kW/m2
- EXPLOSURE TO TOXIC GAS
Should not exceed: ‘dangerous’ levels for 0.5 to 1 hour with a
frequency of 10 in 106 , fatal level at a frequency of 0.1 to 1 in 106
WITHIN SITE BOUNDARY (PERSONNEL)
- OVER PRESSURE 14 kPa
HEAT FLUX 23 kW/m2
‘DANGEROUS’ TOXIC LEVELS NOT MORE THAN 50 IN
106 YEARS
- FATALITY (ALL EVENTS)
NOT MORE THAN 50 CHANCES IN 106 PER PERSON PER YEAR
 ACCEPTABLE RISK CRITERIA

PROPOSED CRITERIA (SUBJECTIVE)

EMPLOYEE
FAFR < 2.0 (ALL RISKS ON PLANT)
< 0.35 (ANY SINGLE RISK)
[ for 8760 hr/yr = 3 x 10-5 FATALITIES PER MAN-YEAR ]
PUBLIC
< 1 x 10-7 FATALITIES PER MAN-YEAR
PROFIT
Annual Cost of Proposed Change / Saving in Annual Cost of Incidents < 1
 Community emergency response
Plant emergency response
Post-release protection (dikes)
Physical protection (relief devices)
Safety instrumented functions

Alarms & human intervention

Process control system

Process design

Figure: Layers of Protection to lower the frequency of a specific accident scenario

 Example 1
Ex.1: To go from Bangkok to Phuket, which mean of
transportation (among by car, airplane, bicycle and
motorcycle) has least risk of accident fatality. Show your
calculation.
car airplane bicycle motorcycle
Soln.:
1. Look for FAR FAR 57 96 240 660
2. Definition of FAR: deaths/108 hr of contact time
3. Should find contact time of each mean of transportation
car airplane bicycle motorcycle
Distance from BKK Avg.speed (km/hr) 80 800 25 70
to Phuket = 840 km Contact time 10.5 1.05 33.6 12
4. Car: contact time 108 hr → 57 deaths
-- 10.5 → 57*10.5/108 = 598.5*10-8 deaths
car airplane bicycle motorcycle
Conclusion:
Deaths*108 598.5 100.8 8,064 7,920
 Example 2
Ex.2: For steel factory S with 50 workers who work 8 hr
per day, how many working days the factory S should
expect to have the first fatal accident.
Soln.:
1. For steel industry, FAR = 8
2. Definition of FAR: deaths/108 hr of contact time
3. Should find contact time of the workers in factory S
→ Contact time = 50 * 8 = 400 worker-hr/day
4. Calculate total hr/death for normal steel industry
From FAR, 8 deaths → 108 hr
So, 1 death → 108/8 hr
5. Factory A, 400 worker-hr in 1 day
For 1 death, work 108/8 hr → (1 day * 108/8 hr)/(400 hr)
→ 31,250 days or 104 yr (if 300 d/yr)
 HW # 1
• FAR → Risk (Problems in Chapter 1)
Exercise 1-8 HW. 1-3, 1-9, 1-26 Due date: by midnight of 24 Sep 2019

• HW#2 (Hazard Identification- Event Tree Analysis) Due date: by midnight of 24 Sep 2019
• HW#3 (Source Model) Due date: by midnight of 30 Sep 2019
• HW#4 (Consequence Analysis-Dispersion Model, Fire & Explosion) Due date: by
midnight of 30 Sep 2019
• HW#5 (Probability Analysis-Fault Tree Analysis) Due date: by midnight of 4 Oct 2019
• HW#6 (Risk Management) Due date: by midnight of 4 Oct 2019
Reference: Crowl, D.A. and J.F. Louvar, “Chemical Process Safety:
Fundamentals with Applications”,3rd edition, Prentice Hall, 2012
 Information on WWW
• http://www.epa.gov/ceppo/
(US EPA’s Chemical Emergency Preparedness and
Prevention Office)
- Chemical Accident Prevention and Risk Management
Program
- Emergency Planing and Response
- Databases and Software
- Case Studies, etc….
• http://www.chemsafety.gov/circ/
(Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board-
Chemical Incident Reports Center)
• http://www.tisi.go.th/18000/18001.html