Back
 ACES  Vol.5 No.3 , July 2015
Risk Assessment for Propane Cooler in Natural Gas Liquefaction Plant
Abstract: Natural Gas Transportation requires Natural Gas to be in its Liquid state, liquefying Natural Gas requires decreasing temperature to a very low level. This requires severe temperature and pressure conditions. This paper will discuss a risk assessment study on a Node in the plant of Natural Gas, which is the propane heat exchanging unit, which decreases the temperature of the flow gradually at the beginning to remove heavy liquids. Risk assessment study is applied using three methods, HAZOP, DMRA and LOPA.
Cite this paper: Ezzat, K. , Ossaama, Y. , Kamal, N. and Farag, H. (2015) Risk Assessment for Propane Cooler in Natural Gas Liquefaction Plant. Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science, 5, 270-281. doi: 10.4236/aces.2015.53027.
References

[1]   National Academy of Sciences, 1976.

[2]   An Overview on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), Its Properties, the LNG Industry and Safety Considerations.

[3]   Woodward, J.L. and Pitblado, R.M. LNG Risk Based Safety Modeling and Consequence Analysis.

[4]   Curacao Cng-Lng Terminal Feasibility Study.

[5]   Zhang Wei, Wu Zhang. Distributed & Embedded Systems Lab Lanzhou University, Lanzhou.

[6]   HAZOP Pros and Cons—by David Gossman.

[7]   Marhavilas, P.K., Koulouriotis, D. and Gemeni, V. (2011) Risk Analysis and Assessment Methodologies in the Work Sites: On a Review, Classification and Comparative Study of the Scientific Literature of the Period 2000-2009. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 24, 477-523

[8]   Saudi Aramco HAZOP Guide Lines.

[9]   1997 CCPS Conference and Workshop Proceedings Layer of Protection Analysis: A New PHA Tool after HAZOP, before Fault Tree Analysis.

[10]   Dowell, A.M. (1999) Layer of Protection Analysis and Inherently Safer Process. Process Safety Progress, 18, 214-220.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/prs.680180409

[11]   Summers, A.E. (2003) Introduction to Layer of Protection Analysis. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 104, 163-168.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(03)00242-5

 
 
Top