An Amine Unit Case Study: The High Costs of Inconsistent PHAs

Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) studies (including HAZOP, What-if?, HAZID, and more) are easily subjective. This leads to multiple inconsistencies that have major safety and cost implications.

We know how important it is to ensure complete risk discovery for safer, smarter operations, but also equally important is having consistency in the analysis of consequence severities and likelihoods.

In the field of psychology, it is commonly believed that risk is extremely difficult for people to determine. Whether considering a benign, everyday risk like driving a car or evaluating a major accident hazard in a processing facility, risk assessment is a constant struggle, creates frequent challenges, and can be a point of contention.

The High Cost of Inconsistent Assessments

What happens when a facility comes up with a fatality severity consequence ranking for a certain scenario and it’s sister facilities all have low severity rankings? Who got it right? Did they all get it right? Are they different enough that it makes sense there would be a higher severity for the one plant? These inconsistencies can drive significant costs, introduce risks, and need to be understood.

Learn how to this critical knowledge can help save organizations like yours from the high costs of inconsistency, as we examine a single scenario analyzed incorrectly, which can easily then drive recommendations resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars misspent…