A newspaper report (Hindu dated 14.5.10) indicates the following points about the oil spil in the Gulf of Mexico:"Oil executives ignored warning signs in the hours before the Deepwater rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico last month, a congressional hearing heard on Wednesday.
In a second day of hearings, the U.S. House of Representatives' energy and commerce committee said documents and briefings suggested that BP, which owned the well; Transocean, which owned the rig; and Halliburton, which made the cement casing for the well, ignored tests in the hours before the 20 April explosion that indicated faulty safety equipment".
No major incident occurs without warning. Do not ignore your near misses!Read more of the article in this link
May 17, 2010
Bhopal Gas disaster and the recent BP oil spill
A newspaper report indicates that the verdict on the Bhopal Gas Disaster court case will be delivered on June 7th,2010 in a Bhopal Court in India. During the trial, 178 prosecution witnesses and 3008 documents were examined. The disaster happened in 1984 and the wheels of Justice move slowly! Cut to the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last month. Already the US house of representatives has begun an inquiry to pinpoint responsibility and accountability. In the Bhopal gas disaster, the entire liability was settled for 470 million US dollars. In 1989 a oil tanker called Exxon Valdez spilled oil in Alaska and the damages reportedly paid by Exxon was US dollar 5 billion. Exxon reportedly paid US dollar 940 each for every penguin that was contaminated with oil and had to be cleaned. In contrast, the Bhopal gas victims damaged for life received US Dollar 500 each!(Source: Greenpeace report).
Lets us wait for the verdict in the Bhopal Gas Disaster!!
Lets us wait for the verdict in the Bhopal Gas Disaster!!
May 10, 2010
Crisis management and the media
The BP oil spill and the media coverage about it throws up the powerful role of the internet in disseminating information. Companies must be fully prepared to handle such crisis. BP is also using twitter to keep the public updated on the oil spill containment efforts. In India, most of the the media coverage of any incident borders on the paranoid and is aimed at getting high viewership ratings at that instant. The Jaipur oil depot fire is a classic example of this. Companies must have a crisis management plan ready and test it periodically.
May 9, 2010
Process Safety and Leadership
After the BP Texas disaster in 2005, the then CEO of BP Lord John Browne resigned and Mr Tony Hayward took over. An article mentions the following: 'When Mr. Hayward took over BP's leadership from John Browne three years ago this week, the company was at one of the lowest points in its history: badly run, accident-prone and accused in the aftermath of a deadly explosion at its Texas City refinery of putting profits before safety. Mr. Hayward turned BP around, boosting production, cutting costs and significantly reducing on-the-job injuries. Mr.Hayward set about radically simplifying the company and cutting costs. Senior executives were cut by a quarter. In all, 6,500 people, or just under 10% of its work force, lost their jobs. Last month, he was confident enough to talk of an irreversible "change of culture" at BP.None of that seems to matter now, as BP heads into the crisis grinder that has chewed up big names like Toyota and Goldman Sachs. And with about 5,000 barrels of oil leaking from the damaged well each day, Mr. Hayward knows it".
Read more about this interesting article in this link.
Read about the mitigation efforts in this link
Read more about this interesting article in this link.
Read about the mitigation efforts in this link
Process safety information and BP incident
A number of articles are going around on the BP oil spill incident. In one of them, a whistleblower is supposed to have raised safety concerns about BP Atlantis, the world’s largest and deepest semi-submersible oil and natural gas platform. In this article it mentions the following "It was then that the whistle-blower, who was hired to oversee the company’s databases that housed documents related to its Atlantis project, discovered that the drilling platform had been operating without a majority of the engineer-approved documents it needed to run safely, leaving the platform vulnerable to a catastrophic disaster that would far surpass the massive oil spill that began last week following a deadly explosion on a BP-operated drilling rig.
BP’s own internal communications show that company officials were made aware of the issue and feared that the document shortfalls related to Atlantis “could lead to catastrophic operator error” and must be addressed.“The risk in turning over drawings that are not complete are: 1) The Operator will assume the drawings are accurate and up to date,” the email said. “This could lead to catastrophic Operator errors due to their assuming the drawing is correct,” said Duff’s email to BP officials Bill Naseman and William Broman. “Turning over incomplete drawings to the Operator for their use is a fundamental violation of basic Document control, [internal standards] and Process Safety Regulations.” Read more of this article in this link.
BP’s own internal communications show that company officials were made aware of the issue and feared that the document shortfalls related to Atlantis “could lead to catastrophic operator error” and must be addressed.“The risk in turning over drawings that are not complete are: 1) The Operator will assume the drawings are accurate and up to date,” the email said. “This could lead to catastrophic Operator errors due to their assuming the drawing is correct,” said Duff’s email to BP officials Bill Naseman and William Broman. “Turning over incomplete drawings to the Operator for their use is a fundamental violation of basic Document control, [internal standards] and Process Safety Regulations.” Read more of this article in this link.
May 2, 2010
BP Oil Spill
The latest BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could turn out to be bigger than the Exxon Valdez spill. The President of the US himself has flown to Louisana for a first hand look. One would have thought that after the BP Texas Disaster in 2005, many checks and balances would have been put to prevent another disaster. We will have to wait and see the results of the investigation...
See photos of the spill in this link
See photos of the spill in this link
May 1, 2010
Process safety in batch operations
What goes around comes around! As far as process safety incidents in batch process go, I sometimes despair whether we will ever learn from previous incidents. Last year I had investigated some batch process incidents, the causes of which are very very familiar - incompatibility,scale up issues, heat removal issues, MSDS issues and raw material storage issues. For those of you working in the batch process industry, the UK Chemical Reaction Hazards Forum is a good place to get information on batch incidents. Share these incidents with your operating personnel and check whether it could happen in your organization. For further details go to this link.
What I learnt in Process Safety – A tribute to my senior managers at Madras Fertilizers Ltd
32 years ago, I joined the ammonia plant in Madras Fertilizers as a graduate engineer trainee and then went on to be shift in charge and assistant manager in the ammonia plant. The lessons I learnt in process safety from the senior management* are still fresh in my mind. There was no PSM system, no ISO 14001, no OHSAS 18001, but in the ten years I was there, there was no serious process safety incident!
The senior management then were all experts in plant operation and maintenance – you could not fool them! Their decisions were taken appropriate to the risk involved and clearly communicated. They also made sure that critical jobs which had a process safety issue were always supervised by them by giving clear instructions and follow up. This way we knew when we were going off track and correct ourselves before anything happened. They were true “managers” – who played the fine line between process safety and production with such a finesse, you could not but admire and learn from them.
We did take a lot of “process safety risks” when there was a situation, but it was a calculated and clearly communicated risk – with the result, we were always under control.
Cut to today – Today in many plants, there are distinct gaps between what senior management think what is going on as far as process safety is concerned and what is actually happening at the ground level. Why is this happening? My own understanding of the situation leads to the following:
1.Some of the senior management do not have an understanding of the plant – they may be qualified MBA’s but in a chemical plant, what matters most at senior management level is their conceptualization of key process safety risks!
2.Many Senior management do not want to hear “bad news” related to process safety but welcome “bad news” related to sales and profits. I compare the senior management I started my career with many of the senior management today – the difference is that “bad news related to process safety” used to be ferreted out by the senior management I worked with, even though I may think it was not necessary to tell them!
3.Many boards of directors in present chemical companies do not have a clear understanding of the difference between process safety and occupational health and safety.
4.Senior management are led astray by the numerous certifications of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 etc. leading to a false sense of complacency.
5.Many of the reactions of management today after a process safety incident are of a knee jerk reaction. A comprehensive long term approach is lacking. Everyone wants to safeguard their remaining time with the organization!
*I pay a strong tribute to my former senior managers at MFL: (Late) Mr P.N.Arunachalam, Mr Jacob Eapen, Mr N.Gajendran and (Late) Mr S.Rangaiah
The senior management then were all experts in plant operation and maintenance – you could not fool them! Their decisions were taken appropriate to the risk involved and clearly communicated. They also made sure that critical jobs which had a process safety issue were always supervised by them by giving clear instructions and follow up. This way we knew when we were going off track and correct ourselves before anything happened. They were true “managers” – who played the fine line between process safety and production with such a finesse, you could not but admire and learn from them.
We did take a lot of “process safety risks” when there was a situation, but it was a calculated and clearly communicated risk – with the result, we were always under control.
Cut to today – Today in many plants, there are distinct gaps between what senior management think what is going on as far as process safety is concerned and what is actually happening at the ground level. Why is this happening? My own understanding of the situation leads to the following:
1.Some of the senior management do not have an understanding of the plant – they may be qualified MBA’s but in a chemical plant, what matters most at senior management level is their conceptualization of key process safety risks!
2.Many Senior management do not want to hear “bad news” related to process safety but welcome “bad news” related to sales and profits. I compare the senior management I started my career with many of the senior management today – the difference is that “bad news related to process safety” used to be ferreted out by the senior management I worked with, even though I may think it was not necessary to tell them!
3.Many boards of directors in present chemical companies do not have a clear understanding of the difference between process safety and occupational health and safety.
4.Senior management are led astray by the numerous certifications of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 etc. leading to a false sense of complacency.
5.Many of the reactions of management today after a process safety incident are of a knee jerk reaction. A comprehensive long term approach is lacking. Everyone wants to safeguard their remaining time with the organization!
*I pay a strong tribute to my former senior managers at MFL: (Late) Mr P.N.Arunachalam, Mr Jacob Eapen, Mr N.Gajendran and (Late) Mr S.Rangaiah
April 30, 2010
Process safety and security
Dow Chemicals has beautifully pictured their "integrated approach to chemical security management" on their website in this link
I wonder when India will really wake up to chemical security threats and bring in legislation and enforce it. With the threats of naxalites and external terrorists and the fact that a number of hazardous chemical units are based on the coast,it becomes imperative that a coordinated approach to chemical plant security is implemented. Let us not wait for an attack to happen!
Fire at Pharma Plant at Ankleshwar
An article in economic times mentions the following "A fire at pharmaceutical major Wockhardt’s Rs 300-crore Ankleshwar facility damaged one of its six manufacturing plants. It will take six months to recommission the unit, a company spokesman said.
The incident adds to the woes of a debt-laden Wockhardt, which had defaulted on payment of its overseas convertible bonds last year, and was forced to accept a corporate debt restructuring package that included sale of some company assets". Read the full article at this link.
While the cause is being investigated, it must be remembered that when companies go under loss, it requires a great effort to maintain safety systems.
The incident adds to the woes of a debt-laden Wockhardt, which had defaulted on payment of its overseas convertible bonds last year, and was forced to accept a corporate debt restructuring package that included sale of some company assets". Read the full article at this link.
While the cause is being investigated, it must be remembered that when companies go under loss, it requires a great effort to maintain safety systems.
April 29, 2010
Process safety - uncomplicate things!
In the Times of India April 28,2010, an article mentions that powerpoint is the US military's new enemy - A general is reported to have said "When we understand that slide (seen above), we would have won the war"! The same general has said that "Its dangerous because it can create the illusion of understanding and the illusion of control". Now what does this have to do with process safety? It is the same as the complicated powerpoint! Just because you perform a complex PHA, SIL study or conduct a management of change study does not mean everything is in control. I have seen many incidents occur even though such studies were conducted. Be practical while conducting these studies and do not go overboard!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)