IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v16y2013i3-4p337-354.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a new approach for the identification of atypical accident scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Paltrinieri
  • Nicolas Dechy
  • Ernesto Salzano
  • Mike Wardman
  • Valerio Cozzani

Abstract

Proper hazard identification (HAZID) in safety reports has become progressively more difficult to achieve. Several major accidents in Europe in recent years, such as Buncefield and Toulouse, were not even considered by their site 'Seveso-II' Safety Case. One of the reasons is that available HAZID methodologies take no notice of apparently least likely events. Nonidentified scenarios thus constitute a latent risk, whose management is extremely complex and open ended. For this reason, the EC project iNTeg-Risk, in one of its tasks, aimed to investigate the issue of atypical scenarios and explain how they could have been identified. This study wants to describe the approach used and its immediate results, paving the way towards a new method for the identification of atypical accident scenarios. An in-depth accident analysis of some of these accidents was performed, in order to outline general features of plants in which they occurred, their causes, consequences, and lessons learned. This analysis followed a precise common scheme, which allowed a systematic approach to the problem by the experts involved. Based on the findings, failures connected to risk management and risk appraisal were identified. Three main basic issues in risk appraisal were identified: the low perception of emerging risks related to atypical accident scenarios, the lack of knowledge about related events, such as early warnings, and the incapability of current techniques in leading analysts to the identification of atypical scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Paltrinieri & Nicolas Dechy & Ernesto Salzano & Mike Wardman & Valerio Cozzani, 2013. "Towards a new approach for the identification of atypical accident scenarios," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3-4), pages 337-354, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:3-4:p:337-354
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2012.729518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2012.729518
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2012.729518?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas, Steve, 2012. "What will the Fukushima disaster change?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 12-17.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hou, Lei & Wu, Xingguang & Wu, Zhuang & Wu, Shouzhi, 2020. "Pattern identification and risk prediction of domino effect based on data mining methods for accidents occurred in the tank farm," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
    2. Nam, Hoseok & Konishi, Satoshi & Nam, Ki-Woo, 2021. "Comparative analysis of decision making regarding nuclear policy after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Case study in Germany and Japan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. S. Taniguchi, Kazuhiro, 2022. "Why Fukushima? A diachronic and multilevel comparative institutional analysis of a nuclear disaster," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Verbruggen, Aviel, 2013. "Belgian nuclear power life extension and fuss about nuclear rents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 91-97.
    5. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting & Meng, Xiaochun, 2016. "Post-Fukushima public acceptance on resuming the nuclear power program in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 685-694.
    6. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J. & Yonezawa, Koichi & Roosen, Jutta, 2017. "Consumer preferences for electricity tariffs: Does proximity matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 413-424.
    7. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Spyridon Galatsidas & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2019. "An Investigation of Factors Affecting the Willingness to Invest in Renewables among Environmental Students: A Logistic Regression Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    9. Park, Eunil & Ohm, Jay Y., 2014. "Factors influencing the public intention to use renewable energy technologies in South Korea: Effects of the Fukushima nuclear accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 198-211.
    10. Furlan, Claudia & Guidolin, Mariangela & Guseo, Renato, 2016. "Has the Fukushima accident influenced short-term consumption in the evolution of nuclear energy? An analysis of the world and seven leading countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 37-49.
    11. Hartmann, Patrick & Apaolaza, Vanessa & D'Souza, Clare & Echebarria, Carmen & Barrutia, Jose M., 2013. "Nuclear power threats, public opposition and green electricity adoption: Effects of threat belief appraisal and fear arousal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1366-1376.
    12. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The policy responses to the Fukushima nuclear accident and their effect on Japanese energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 86-101.
    13. Huang, Lei & He, Ruoying & Yang, Qianqi & Chen, Jin & Zhou, Ying & Hammitt, James K. & Lu, Xi & Bi, Jun & Liu, Yang, 2018. "The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 294-301.
    14. Heetae Kim & Jinwoo Bae & Seoin Baek & Donggyun Nam & Hyunsung Cho & Hyun Joon Chang, 2017. "Comparative Analysis between the Government Micro-Grid Plan and Computer Simulation Results Based on Real Data: The Practical Case for a South Korean Island," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, January.
    15. Dagmar Kiyar & Bettina F. Wittneben, 2012. "Nuclear Energy in the European Union after Fukushima: Political and Economic Considerations," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(3), pages 09-15, November.
    16. Nikolett Deutsch, 2017. "The Changing Role of Nuclear Power in the European Union: Reflections from Official Scenarios Released before and after the Fukushima Daiichi Accident," Theory Methodology Practice (TMP), Faculty of Economics, University of Miskolc, vol. 13(01), pages 17-36.
    17. Erman Çakıt & Andrzej Jan Olak & Atsuo Murata & Waldemar Karwowski & Omar Alrehaili & Tadeusz Marek, 2019. "Assessment of the perceived safety culture in the petrochemical industry in Japan: A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Dagmar Kiyar & Bettina F. Wittneben, 2012. "Nuclear Energy in the European Union after Fukushima: Political and Economic Considerations," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(03), pages 09-15, November.
    19. Bjoern Hagen & Adenike Opejin & K. David Pijawka, 2022. "Risk Perceptions and Amplification Effects over Time: Evaluating Fukushima Longitudinal Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    20. Sena, Marcelo Fonseca Monteiro de & Rosa, Luiz Pinguelli & Szklo, Alexandre, 2013. "Will Venezuelan extra-heavy oil be a significant source of petroleum in the next decades?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 51-59.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:3-4:p:337-354. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.