Environmental risk assessment of a gas power plant exploitation unit using integrated TOP-EFMEA method

• Autorzy: Jozi S.A. , Saffarian S. , Shaffie M.
• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

EN

Our study focuses on environmental risk assessment of a gas power plant in southern Iran. In this research, after investigating the different activities and processes of the power plant, potential harmful factors were initially identified. Afterwards, the identified risk factors were assessed and classified regarding the severity and probability of occurrence, possibility of recycling, and dispersion of pollution into the environment. The EFMEA method was applied to assess the risks. In order to improve the EFMEA technique, the integrated EFMEA and TOPSIS method was used. The method was suggested to remove the uncertainty arising from EFMEA and perform a consistent and logical analysis. Accordingly, using TOPSIS, the weights of the risks were multiplied to a risk priority number (RPN) of environmental aspects. The results obtained from comparing the calculated risk numbers showed that the risk of explosion and gas leakage caused by commissioning the unit with gas-fuel (with RPN equal to 163.014) assigns itself the first priority amongst other risks. The proposed technique has high potential impact on managerial policy within environmental decisions. Considering the application of expert opinion, the suggested TOP-EFMEA method is more flexible than EFMEA.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2012
• Tom: 21
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.95-105,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Jozi S.A.

• Department of Environmental, Faculty of Technical and Engineering, Islamic Azad University, North Teheran Branch, Teheran, Iran

autor

Saffarian S.

autor

Shaffie M.

Bibliografia

• 1. KERZNER H. Project management a systems approach to planning scheduling and controlling. John Will & Sons, New Jersey, 2003.
• 2. LEE E., PARK Y., SHIN J. Large engineering projected risk management using a Bayesian belief network, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 5880, 2008.
• 3. HARRALD R. H., SHAW G. L., RUBIN C. B., YELETAYSI S. Review of risk based priorization/decision making methodologies for dams, the Georg Washington University Institute for Crisis Disaster and Risk Management, 1776 gs4 nw suite110,Washington DC, USA, 2006.
• 4. TORMS A. Environmental risk analysis, Norway, 2004.
• 5. DATTA S., MUKERJEE S.K. Developing a Risk Management Matrix for Effective Project Planning – An Empirical Study, Project Manag. J., 32, 45, 2000.
• 6. AZADEH A., MOHAMMAD FAM I., GARAKANI M. M. A Total Ergonomic Design Approach to Enhance the Productivity in a Complicated Control System, Inf. Technol. J., 6, 1036, 2007.
• 7. AZADEH A., NOURI J., MOHAMMAD FAM I. he Impacts of Macroergonomics on Environmental Protection and Human Performance in Power Plants, Iran. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng., 2, 60, 2005.
• 8. CAHYANI S. Risk Management Strategy of Power Generation of PT -Indonesia Power. ISAHP, 7, 7, 2003.
• 9. RASHAD S. M., HAMMAD F. H. Nuclear Power and the Environment: Comparative Assessment of Environment and Health Impact of Electricity-Generating Systems, Appl. Energ., 65, 211, 2000.
• 10. AMIRI M., ZANDIEH M., VAHDANI B., SOLTANI R., ROSHANAEI V. An integrated eigenvector-DEA-TOPSIS methodology for portfolio risk evaluation in the FOREX spot market, Expert Syst. Appl., 37, 509, 2010.
• 11. TON, S., CHIA-JEN CH. A systematic methodology for the creation of Six Sigma projects. A case study of semiconductor foundry, Expert Syst. Appl., 34, 2693, 2008.
• 12. ETIATI M. C., OGAJI S. O. T., PROBERT S. D. Integrating reliability, availability, maintainability and supportability with risk analysis for improved operation of the Afam thermal power-station, Appl. Energ., 84, 202, 2007.
• 13. HU, A. H., HSU CH. W., KUO T. CH., WU W. CH. Risk evaluation of green components to hazardous substance using FMEA and FAHP, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 7142, 2009.
• 14. DANIELSSON M., GUNNARSSON S. A. Guideline for Implementation of Environment Failure Mode and Effect Analysis Method. Marmarit Publish. Sofia, Bulgaria. pp. 127, 2001.
• 15. HWANG C. L., YOON K. S. Multiple Attribute Decision-Making: Methods and Applications, Springer, New York, 1981.
• 16. CHANG HUNG C., HSUAN CHEN L. A Fuzzy TOPSIS Decision Making Model with Entropy Weight under Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment. In: Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, I IMECS, March 18-20, Hong Kong, 2009.
• 17. SACHDEVA A., KUMAR D., KUMAR P. Multi-factor failure mode critically analysis using TOPSIS, J. Ind. Eng. Int., 5, 1, 2009.
• 18. SRDJEVIC B., MEDEIROS Y., FARIA A. An Objective Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Water Management Scenarios. Water Resour. Manag., 18, 35, 2004.
• 19. DAG˘DEVIREN M., YAVUZ S., KILINC N. Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 8143, 2009.
• 20. DODANGEH J., YUSUFF R., JASSBI J. Using Topsis Method with Goal Programming for Best selection of Strategic Plans in BSC Model, J. Amer. Sci., 6, 136, 2010.
• 21. MAHMOODZADEH S., SHAHRABI J., PARIAZAR M., ZAERI M. S. Project Selection by Using Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Technique, Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci., 1, 333, 2007.
• 22. OPRICOVIC S., HSHIUNG TZENG G. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 156, 445, 2004.
• 23. ONUT S., SONER S. Transshipment site selection using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches under fuzzy environment, Waste Manage., 28, 552, 2008.
• 24. SHARMA R. K., KUMAR D., KUMAR P. Systematic failure mode effect analysis (FMEA) using fuzzy linguistic modeling, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage., 22, 986, 2005.
• 25. TAY, K. M., LIM C. P. Fuzzy FMEA with a guided rules reduction system for prioritization offailures. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage., 23, 1047, 2006.
• 26. ATHANASIOS I., PILAVACHI P. Objective and subjective evaluation of power plants and their non-radioactive emissions using the analytic hierarchy process, Energ. Policy, 35, 4027, 2007.
• 27. EPA. Profile of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation Industry, EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Project., Office of Compliance Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance U.S. Environmental Protection Agency401 M St., SW (MC 2223-A) Washington, DC 20460, 1997.
• 28. XU K., TANG L. C. Fuzzy Assessment of FMEA for Engine Systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe., 75, 17, 2002.
• 29. HIRSCHBERG S., BURGHERR P., SPIEKERMAN G., DONES R. Severe accidents in the energy sector: comparative perspective, J. Hazard. Mater., 111, 57, 2004.
• 30. AZADEH A., MOHAMMAD FAM I. Integrated M HSEE Management Systems For Industry: A Case Study In Gas Refinary, J. Chin. Inst. Eng., 32, 670, 2009.