As per news report in The New Indian Express, an explosion in a chemical reactor in a bulk drug company, caused death to a person and injuries to three persons.
The metal piece of reactor after explosion, flew by 100 meters, passed through by breaking a wall and hit the person working at distance. The person died immediately due to head injury.
The incident reveals dangers of flying fragments from explosion and need for assessment of explosion consequences.
Showing posts with label consequence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consequence. Show all posts
Nov 27, 2016
Construction scaffolding collapses, killing 74 at Chinese power plant - World Socialist Web Site
Construction scaffolding collapses, killing 74 at Chinese power plant - World Socialist Web Site
It is reported that during construction work in a power plant, a tower crane collapsed. This caused a 70 m high scaffolding collapse leading to more than 74 deaths and injuries to others. Reports say 90% of the workers at site died in the accident. The accident occurred during shift changeover at about 0730 hr, resulting in more deaths.
Speeding up of the work, possibly with bypassing of safety procedures to cut costs appears to be the cause, as per the reports.
One has to know that safety is not cost addition, but a cost saving measure. Any work completed without accidents by safety procedure violations, is only by luck. And, one can't depend on luck for ever. Companies will face the consequences leading to closures with this type of attitude.
One can sacrifice productivity, but not safety of persons.
It is stated that in the year 2015, about 66000 persons died in the country during industrial accidents at 181 per day (appears exaggerated, but reports say so).
13 persons were arrested in connection of with this accident as per the report.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/chinese-officials-detain-13-construction-accident-kills-74-article-1.2887359
Photos of the scene can be seen in the link above.
It is reported that during construction work in a power plant, a tower crane collapsed. This caused a 70 m high scaffolding collapse leading to more than 74 deaths and injuries to others. Reports say 90% of the workers at site died in the accident. The accident occurred during shift changeover at about 0730 hr, resulting in more deaths.
Speeding up of the work, possibly with bypassing of safety procedures to cut costs appears to be the cause, as per the reports.
One has to know that safety is not cost addition, but a cost saving measure. Any work completed without accidents by safety procedure violations, is only by luck. And, one can't depend on luck for ever. Companies will face the consequences leading to closures with this type of attitude.
One can sacrifice productivity, but not safety of persons.
It is stated that in the year 2015, about 66000 persons died in the country during industrial accidents at 181 per day (appears exaggerated, but reports say so).
13 persons were arrested in connection of with this accident as per the report.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/chinese-officials-detain-13-construction-accident-kills-74-article-1.2887359
Photos of the scene can be seen in the link above.
Feb 6, 2013
Design changes - no compromise for safety
Operating facilities, in order to increase capacities, try to carry out modifications in the equipment, replace some, change process parameters, etc. This can also be done through bypassing of safety systems, to achieve quick gains. While doing all these, if the consequences on safety of the personnel, environment and property are not analyzed, then it is likely that some foolish action will lead to total closure of the plant one day. Any change proposal should undergo HAZOP/WHAT IF/ETA/FTA studies. The design should be carried out only by experienced persons and safety studies should be carried out by safety professionals. If it is done by some entry level person and is endorsed by higher ups without review, we may be inviting the disaster.
Even though the safety studies will be time consuming, it is worth doing before carrying out changes rather than repenting later. Top management should recognize this and support the safety programmes. Else, shortsightedness will shut the plant at a later date. Though, it is easy to blame safety department at that time for not doing their job, one should introspect whether the advise of safety officer was given due importance or not.
Management of change is an important activity and shall be followed by all facilities, irrespective of their size, nature of work and product.
Feb 14, 2009
Risk = Probability (???) x SEVERITY
Yesterday I read a news item that a US satellite Iridium-33 in use collided with a Russian satellite Cosmos 2251 that is no longer in use on Tuesday (10.02.2009) at 0455 GMT at 790 km height above Siberia. It seems that this type of accident happened for the first time. There are more than 17000 man-made objects at present in the space. I went through internet and found that the probability of such collision is once in tens of years and the debris now generated can reduce this probability to once in a year or so as there are some more satellites in the same altitude and the total debris may hinder space craft movement in the future.
Now, the question is not about space but on the events on the earth.
In any factory, accidents keep occurring. When somebody (normally safety officer / advisor) points out about unsafe acts / unsafe conditions in the shop floor / factory premises and asks for correction, the usual reaction is, a staring look and then the reply comes, "oh, we have been doing this for the last few years / we are doing like this from the beginning / who is expert -you are me - you safety people does not know any thing other than talking / I can't do - you come and do / so on...
How true are the words of the famous safety professional Trevor Kletz -
Corporates do not have memory.
We have done this way 100 times is not acceptable unless an accident on 101st time is acceptable.
We never imagined that satellite collision is possible. But, it happened. Where the chances are remote, still it happened and where the chances are high in our activities in the shop floor, we do not want to correct our selves.
If we see the accident history in any factory, after the accident, the usual sheepish answer from the injured or his colleagues or manager is that it happened for the first time, the person is experience, skilled, safety conscious, near retirement, he doesn't want to take official leave and will take personal leave for the period away from duty due to accident, so on.
In spite of all the above qualities, still accidents occurred, then imagine what can happen to others. It is the attitude that requires correction rather than any thing else.
When somebody narrates their own experience, people listen attentively, appreciate him that he came clean and after coming out from the room the listeners do the same old things. This is why accidents keep occurring again and again, if not to the same person / or same shop floor, they will be occurring somewhere else to some body else.
We love short cuts and feel that we are above all others, accident does not occur when we are working.
One of my colleague, who retired 4 years ago, used to tell in all his training classes, that we should leave the organization with same organs as we had when we joined.
Yes, it is true that no body wants to lose their organs and suffer. But, momentary decision without thought for consequences will lead to accidents.
Rarely, does the type of accident will be new in any factory that is few years old. May be after the accident, corrective actions are taken. But after few years, the corrected systems will be replaced because people forget the reasons for safe guards in place and meddle with the systems. They want to prove to their bosses that they are inventors and soon after their will be accidents and shop floor persons will be suffered. But, the so called inventor would have got his promotion or pay rise and even would have left the organization.
So, every body should work seriously on the hazards at the shop floor, let the probability is however less. Nobody says there is no (zero) probability of occuring for an accident. In fact the word probability it self gives meaning of some uncertainty. Hence, if the severity / consequence from even from remote probable event is not acceptable, without looking for chance of occurrence, we should eliminate all those hazards and make our work place safer.
Risk assessment and actions should concentrate more on consequence rather than on probability and make life safer for persons.
Now, the question is not about space but on the events on the earth.
In any factory, accidents keep occurring. When somebody (normally safety officer / advisor) points out about unsafe acts / unsafe conditions in the shop floor / factory premises and asks for correction, the usual reaction is, a staring look and then the reply comes, "oh, we have been doing this for the last few years / we are doing like this from the beginning / who is expert -you are me - you safety people does not know any thing other than talking / I can't do - you come and do / so on...
How true are the words of the famous safety professional Trevor Kletz -
Corporates do not have memory.
We have done this way 100 times is not acceptable unless an accident on 101st time is acceptable.
We never imagined that satellite collision is possible. But, it happened. Where the chances are remote, still it happened and where the chances are high in our activities in the shop floor, we do not want to correct our selves.
If we see the accident history in any factory, after the accident, the usual sheepish answer from the injured or his colleagues or manager is that it happened for the first time, the person is experience, skilled, safety conscious, near retirement, he doesn't want to take official leave and will take personal leave for the period away from duty due to accident, so on.
In spite of all the above qualities, still accidents occurred, then imagine what can happen to others. It is the attitude that requires correction rather than any thing else.
When somebody narrates their own experience, people listen attentively, appreciate him that he came clean and after coming out from the room the listeners do the same old things. This is why accidents keep occurring again and again, if not to the same person / or same shop floor, they will be occurring somewhere else to some body else.
We love short cuts and feel that we are above all others, accident does not occur when we are working.
One of my colleague, who retired 4 years ago, used to tell in all his training classes, that we should leave the organization with same organs as we had when we joined.
Yes, it is true that no body wants to lose their organs and suffer. But, momentary decision without thought for consequences will lead to accidents.
Rarely, does the type of accident will be new in any factory that is few years old. May be after the accident, corrective actions are taken. But after few years, the corrected systems will be replaced because people forget the reasons for safe guards in place and meddle with the systems. They want to prove to their bosses that they are inventors and soon after their will be accidents and shop floor persons will be suffered. But, the so called inventor would have got his promotion or pay rise and even would have left the organization.
So, every body should work seriously on the hazards at the shop floor, let the probability is however less. Nobody says there is no (zero) probability of occuring for an accident. In fact the word probability it self gives meaning of some uncertainty. Hence, if the severity / consequence from even from remote probable event is not acceptable, without looking for chance of occurrence, we should eliminate all those hazards and make our work place safer.
Risk assessment and actions should concentrate more on consequence rather than on probability and make life safer for persons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Featured Post
Reduced my weight from 96 to 76 kg and tummy from 38-40 to 34-35 inches in about 9 months
I am working in the safety department of a government organization. As a part of the job, I used to go around and interact with person...
