Quantitative risk assessment and risk reduction of worst-case accident scenario at fuel storage terminal

• Main Authors: Juwari, Juwari, Anugraha, Rendra Panca, Zanata, Mabrur, Leksono, Nutfah Amirah, Hamid, Mahar Diana, Cahyono, Teguh
• Format: Article
• Published: Elsevier 2024
• Subjects: TP Chemical technology
• Online Access: http://eprints.um.edu.my/45597/; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2024.105272
• Institution: Universiti Malaya

In the distribution of the oil and gas industry, fuel storage terminals play an important role in delivering fuel from refineries to consumers. However, the fuel storage terminal carries numerous potential risks of high impact accidents such as fires and explosions. The worst-case approach of explosion of the facility is often too conservative and missed other possible scenarios due to different conditions and situations. More refined approaches studying accident scenario based on a realistic worst-case scenarios approach from the main activities at a fuel storage terminal can give a more precise description of the worst-case consequences. In order to minimize the potential risk, the development of the consequences of modeling and risk modeling is required based on the realistic worst-case scenarios. In this study, quantitative risk assessment is conducted to fuel storage terminal based on realistic worst-case scenarios approach using EFFECTS and RISKCURVES software. The consequences modelling result using EFFECTS shows that the worst consequences are a dispersion of gasoline with concentration 7500 mg/m3 at a distance of 468 m to the residential area, 49 lethalities due to heat radiation of 10 kW/ m2 in the residential area, and light until moderate damage in the fuel storage facility and the residential area due to the explosion. The risk modelling result using RISKCURVES shows that the facility is on acceptable risk criteria for individual risk. ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) criteria was used to evaluate the societal risk. Buffer zone study is conducted for risk reduction to ``broadly acceptable'' criteria with value of 6 kW/m2. Risk reduction with the buffer zone is considered effective in reducing risk up to the Broadly Acceptable Risk of the FN-curve but is considered not practicable based on economic analysis. However, USD$702,000 budget can be studied further to provide a practicable risk reduction.