Risk Assessment Method Combining Independent Protection Layers (IPL) of Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) and RISKCURVES Software: Case Study of Hydrogen Refueling Stations in Urban Areas

Abstract

The commercialization of eco-friendly hydrogen vehicles has elicited attempts to expand hydrogen refueling stations in urban areas; however, safety measures to reduce the risk of jet fires have not been established. The RISKCURVES software was used to evaluate the individual and societal risks of hydrogen refueling stations in urban areas, and the F–N (Frequency–Number of fatalities) curve was used to compare whether the safety measures satisfied international standards. From the results of the analysis, it was found that there is a risk of explosion in the expansion of hydrogen refueling stations in urban areas, and safety measures should be considered. To lower the risk of hydrogen refueling stations, this study applied the passive and active independent protection layers (IPLs) of LOPA (Layer of Protection Analysis) and confirmed that these measures significantly reduced societal risk as well as individual risk and met international standards. In particular, such measures could effectively reduce the impact of jet fire in dispensers and tube trailers that had a high risk. Measures employing both IPL types were efficient in meeting international standard criteria; however, passive IPLs were found to have a greater risk reduction effect than active IPLs. The combination of RISKCURVES and LOPA is an appropriate risk assessment method that can reduce work time and mitigate risks through protective measures compared to existing risk assessment methods. This method can be applied to risk assessment and risk mitigation not only for hydrogen facilities, but also for hazardous materials with high fire or explosion risk.

Impact of Filling Stations: Assessing the Risks and Consequences of the Release of Hazardous Substances

“…The risk assessment of gas stations is linked to specific methods in the literature. The System Theoretic Accident Model and Processes [13] focuses on the extension of the causal principle of the safety nexus, the extended DEMATEL-STPA method and its application to hydrogen refueling stations [13], or the risk assessment of the location of a hydrogen refueling station in an urban area [14], or the use of the RISKCURVES software and the Layer of Protection Analysis method for the fire risk assessment of a hydrogen filling station in an urban area and also focusing on the applied the passive and active independent protection layers confirmed that these measures significantly reduced societal risk as well as individual risk and met international standards [15]. Another study used the Accident Risk Assessment Method for Industrial Systems (ARAMIS) [16] in conducted a risk assessment of the refueling area of a hydrogen-gasoline hybrid refueling station.…”

Application of GIS for the Control of Major Accident Hazards

“…To evaluate the major accident hazards of the chemical facilities, individual and societal risks that consider the population within the impact area of the major accident are used [2]. To calculate the effects of major accident to its surrounding, a large number of calculation models have been developed which are based on the physical and chemical properties of substances and physical behaviour in general, and on validation experiments for specific, often extreme process conditions.…”

Risk assessment of fire and explosion accidents in oil-hydrogen fueling station based on fault tree analysis

“…Camila Correa-Jullian et al [8] used traditional QRA modeling tools, like failure mode and impact analysis, event sequence diagram and fault tree analysis, to sort out the data of liquid hydrogen storage system required for quantitative risk assessment. Park and colleagues [9] evaluated the potential individual and social hazards linked to hydrogen refueling stations through an examination of the safety effectiveness of their protective measures. Haugom et al [10] analyzed the influence of different leakage sizes on the final consequences based on the Bayesian model.…”