A place for my personal thoughts/views on safety, with focus on industrial safety.
We are nothing after our death. Let us donate our body organs for the poor.
Be not afraid of anything. You will do marvelous work The moment you fear, you are nobody - Swamy Vivekananda
If you think safety is expensive, try an accident... - O.P.Kharbanda
Preventable accidents, if they are not prevented due to our negligence, it is nothing short of a murder - Dr. Sarvepalli Radha Krishna, 2nd President of India
Zero accidents through zero unsafe behaviors. Do not be complacent that there are no accidents. There may be near miss accidents (NMAs). With luck/chance, somebody escaped knowingly or unknown to the person. But, we can't be safe, if we depend upon the luck.
Safety culture is how the organization behaves when no one is watching.
We make No compromise with respect to Morality, Ethics, or Safety. If a design or work practice is perceived to be unsafe, we do not proceed until the issue is resolved. - Mission statement by S&B Engineers & Consultants Ltd. http://www.sbec.com/safety/
Human meat gets least priority - A doctor's comment on accidents
CSB video excerpts from Dr.Trevor Kletz, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQn5fL62KL8
Feb 12, 2009
Location of industrial plants - safe distances
There were questions immediately about the wisdom of granting licence for setting up of factories in residential areas. Similar questions were raised even after the Bhopal incident in 1984.
This and such similar incidents always bring out few questions, like, which is first ?
The factory was set up first or residential buildings came up first?
In philosophy, a similar question is, seed first or (biological) plant first? OR egg first or chick first?
It is difficult to answer the philosophical questions as above. However, not so difficult for our question of factory or residential buildings, which is first? Even in the case of Union Carbide factory at Bhopal, as per the information available in various books, web sites, factory came up first. Shanties, hutments came up adjacent to the factory fence later. These habitats were not removed when they came up. The reason as mentioned in a famous book is that the management was also happy as cheap labour is available nearby. Apart from these, it is quite natural for development to take place near industrial set ups and this will lead to better realization of land and other properties.
In the case of accident mentioned at the beginning also, as is seen, the factory was set up in an industrial area about 7 years ago. However, by that time already the entire area is surrounded with thousands of residential buildings. Apart from this factory, there were other factories that were set up much before. I do not know whether at those times, the residential buildings existed or not. However, I am sure from hearsay that 35-40 years ago, this area was totally isolated from the city and is like a jungle and persons were afraid to reach other factories in the area after the sun set. Few less courageous persons used stay in side those factories in the night after their second shift (ends around 2200-2300 hrs) and go home only in the morning.
Now, these areas are so developed that it is difficult to get land and the price is as good as in the heart of the city, though these are located at about 10-15 km away from the railway station.
Then, the questions about why permission was granted look silly though the question about how safe is a safe distance for a factory remains. For this, the Environment Protection Act 1986 and the rules made under it will help. One has to prepare safety report and has to revise it atleast once in three years or if any additional information is available, it has to be revised even earlier also. Once, the distance of impact is known from toxic releases / fire / explosion, then a safe zone has to be maintained considering the future expansion of the factory as well as population growth in the area. However, preparation of safety reports are mandatory only when the chemical inventory / handled exceeds a threshold quantity. I feel, these limitations should be removed and should be made compulsory for chemicals of any quantity. If a factory is proposed to be set up, then impact distances and safe distances have to be determined and maintained for the chemicals, whatever be the quantity to be handled. Due consideration should be given to the domino effect that is effect of incidents in the proposed factory on the factories that are already in existence and if an incident occurs in the neighbouring factory due to the incident in the proposed factory, then what is the impact.
I also blame the greediness of people in the neighbourhood of the industrial areas. It is not correct to say that they do not know about factories. People spend so much time about genuiness of a property before purchase but care little about other factors. People buy vacant lands when they sense that some development activity is going to occur in the area, the activity can be any thing - setting up of factory / colleges / highway / railway station / etc. Then definitely, the greed is to also to be blamed when persons in residential areas are affected due to industrial activity in the neighbourhood, though the main blame goes to the factory management. When factories have to be set up, land should be enough for plant building area and this should be surrounded by forest cover upto the safe distance. The fence of the factory should be at the safe distance outer boundary. No expansion of factory should take place unless these two aspects are covered. If any violation occurs, the concerned persons should be tried by special courts, whether such expansion caused injury or not or plant operations are carried out without valid permissions.
When the profits are more compared to penalties, then people always prefer penalty. Here, I mean penalty in terms of money. If the penalty includes imprisonment or seizing of the total property of owners and their spouses (apart from the factory), then persons will not dare to do such acts.
Similarly, somebody puts up residential buildings within the impact distance, they should be demolished and persons responsible for granting permission should be taken to task.
Now, what to do with establishments already came up and later residential buildings came up.
Talk to concerned establishments for shifting to safe area in a reasonable time or if it is not feasible, then remove encroachments / take possession of residential and other buildings up to the safe distance as is done for expansion of roads / railway tracks. OR live with it and repeat the blame game as and when accidents occur.
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...

-
I was not clear about what is a danger sign, what is a warning sign and what is a caution sign, till I read this article in Safety Daily Ad...
-
A woman consumes cow dung powder and dies on the way to the hospital. She did this as her husband found that she had drawn Rs 50,000/- from ...
-
Bank employee takes a nap on keyboard, transfers millions | The Hindu 293 million US dollars were transferred by a bank employee who was a...