Thu, Nov 21, 2024
[Archive]
.png)
Volume 8, Issue 3 (9-2022)
jhehp 2022, 8(3): 144-153 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Azizi H, Mackialeagha M, Azadbakht B, Samadyar H. Assessment of Environmental and Health Risks of the Chemical Industry by Applying Fuzzy Logic: A Case Study in South Tehran, Iran. jhehp 2022; 8 (3) :144-153
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-530-en.html
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-530-en.html
1- Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Rudehen Branch, Rudehen, Iran.
2- Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Rudehen Branch, Rudehen, Iran.
2- Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Rudehen Branch, Rudehen, Iran.
Abstract: (4356 Views)
Background: Chemical industries in southern Tehran are one of the largest ones in Iran, requiring organized environmental risk management. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) can effectively decrease the risk of failure in industrial systems and processes. This case study aimed to apply the fuzzy logic approach for assessing environmental risks in chemical industries.
Methods: The present cross-sectional analytical study formed an assessment team to use their expert opinion collected as Z number. Each identified risk factor (severity, occurrence, detection) was weighted using the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process and prioritized the failure modes.
Results: Based on the results, 52.94 % of the identified environmental risks were moderate, 35.29 % were high-level, and 11.76 % were low-level risks. The main risks were occupational, health, safety, and environmental, leading to a decrease in the quality of environmental parameters, including air, water, and soil.
Conclusion: The proposed fuzzy and FMEA methods removed the problem of homogeneity of risk factor weights, data uncertainty, and prioritization of failure modes, which had a higher potential in prioritizing risks compared to the conventional FMEA methods. Additionally, the proposed model can identify risks and their roots, leading to accurate risk control tools.
Methods: The present cross-sectional analytical study formed an assessment team to use their expert opinion collected as Z number. Each identified risk factor (severity, occurrence, detection) was weighted using the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process and prioritized the failure modes.
Results: Based on the results, 52.94 % of the identified environmental risks were moderate, 35.29 % were high-level, and 11.76 % were low-level risks. The main risks were occupational, health, safety, and environmental, leading to a decrease in the quality of environmental parameters, including air, water, and soil.
Conclusion: The proposed fuzzy and FMEA methods removed the problem of homogeneity of risk factor weights, data uncertainty, and prioritization of failure modes, which had a higher potential in prioritizing risks compared to the conventional FMEA methods. Additionally, the proposed model can identify risks and their roots, leading to accurate risk control tools.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Occupational and Industrial Health
Received: 2022/06/27 | Accepted: 2022/08/24 | Published: 2022/09/19
Received: 2022/06/27 | Accepted: 2022/08/24 | Published: 2022/09/19
References
1. Chen X, Duo Y. Researches on Safety Capacity of Chemical Industrial Park. Journal of Safety Science and Technology. 2009; 5(2): 10-3.
2. Abdulhamidzadeh B, Hashemi V, Rashtchian D. Numerical Analysis of the Risk of Damage to the Specialization Tower of Ethylene Oxide Unit of Arak Petrochemical Complex Due to Excessive Pressure Increase. 10th National Congress of Chemical Engineering, University of Sistan & Baluchestan. 2005: 15-7.
3. Ashna Y, Mohammadfam I, Mohammadizadeh M. Risk Assessment and Management of Environmental Aspects of Larestan Cement Company (in Terms of Air Pollution) Using William Fine and TOPSI Methods. The Third Environmental Planning and Management Conference. Tehran, Iran. 2013.
4. Cheraghi M, Karbassi A, Monavari S, Baghvand A. Environmental Risk Management Associated with the Development one of Oil Fields in Southwestern Iran Using AHP and FMEA Methods. Anthropogenic Pollution. 2018; 2(2): 41-54. Available from: URL: 10.22034/Ap.2018.573557.1025.
5. Si H, Ji H, Zeng X. Quantitative Risk Assessment Model of Hazardous Chemicals Leakage and Application. Safetly Science. 2012; 50(7): 1452-61. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
6. Nejad PJ, Fataei E. Assessing the Environmental Risk in Using Wastewater of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant in Agricultural Irrigation. Biological Forum. 2015: 112-21. [Google Scholar]
7. Sekhavati E, Jalilzadeh R. Optimizing the Risk of Building Environments Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making. Anthropogenic Pollution. 2022; 6(1): 1-7. Available from: URL: 10.22034/Ap.2022.1942672.1121. [Google Scholar]
8. Roselló MJ, Martinez JM, Navarro BA. Vulnerability of Human Environment to Risk: Case of Groundwater Contamination Risk. Environment International. 2009; 35: 325-35. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
9. Nakhjavni HR, Fataei E. The Evaluation of the Risk of Quality of Underground Wells of Ardabil Plain to Heavy Metals. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences. 2015; 7(1): 326-37. [Google Scholar]
10. Fataei E. The Assessment of Environmental and Health Risks in Sabalan Dam Basin Using WRASTIC Model. Journal of Health. 2020; 11(4): 555-73. (In Persian). [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
11. Ardeshir A, Amiri M, Mohajeri M. Safety Risk Assessment in Mass Housing Projects Using Combination of Fuzzy FMEA, Fuzzy FTA and AHP-DEA. Iran Occupational Health. 2014; 10(6): 78-91. (In Persian). [Google Scholar]
12. Hassanpour Kourandeh H, Fataei E. Risk assessment of pollution accidents in dam reservoirs, Using WRASTIC Model (Case study: Shafarood Dam, Guilan, Iran). Journal of Environmental Geology. 2013; 7(25): 19-36. (In Persian).
13. Maraghi F, Monir Abbasi A. Identification and Qualitative Risks Analysis of Project Tehran Sewerage Network by ANP Method and Comparison with FUZZY VIKOR Method. Journal of Water and Wastewater. 2021; 32(4): 34-46. Available from: URL: 10.22093/Wwj.2021.260344.3089. (In Persian). [Article]
14. Bahrami S, Sotoudeh A, Jamshidi N, Elmi MR. Environmental Risk Assessment of Kermanshah Petrochemical Complex Using FMEA Method. Environmental Sciences. 2018; 16(3): 1-24. (In Persian). [Google Scholar]
15. Shahriar A, Sadiq R, Tesfamariam S. Risk Analysis for Oil & Gas Pipelines: a Sustainability Assessment Approach Using Fuzzy Based Bow-Tie Analysis. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2012; 25: 505-23. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
16. Bozdag E, Asan U, Soyer A, Serdarasan S. Risk Prioritization in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Using Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Sets. Expert Systems with Applications. 2015; 42(8): 4000-15. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
17. Ping Chow T, Keith C. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Through Knowledge Modeling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 2004; 153: 253-60. Available from: URL: 10.1016/J.Jmatprotec.2004.04.298. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
18. Zhang Z, Chu X. Risk Prioritization in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Under Uncertainty. Expert Systems with Applications. 2011; 38: 206-14. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
19. Omidvar M, Nirumand F. Risk Assessment Using FMEA Method and on the Basis of MCDM, Fuzzy Logic and Grey Theory: A Case Study of Overhead Cranes. Journal of Health and Safety at Work. 2017; 1(7): 63-77. [Google Scholar]
20. Shao C, Yang J, Tian X, Ju M, Huang L. Integrated Environmental Risk Assessment and Whole-Process Management System in Chemical Industry Parks. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013; 10: 1609-30. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
21. Shariati Sh. Underground Mine Risk Assessment by Using FMEA in the Presence of Uncertainty. Decision Science Letters. 2014; 3: 295- 304. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
22. Jozi SA, Goleiji N, Mohammadfam I. Environmental Risk Assessment and Management of the Olefin Plant in Arya Sasol Petrochemical Complex Using EFMEA Method. Journal of Sciences and Techniques in Natural Resources. 2011; 6(4): 147-59.
23. Bolhasani P, Esmaili Dooki A, Fallah M. Risk Assessment and Grading Equipment with Integrated Approaches Fuzzy AHP and FMEA Case Study (Arak Set Azarab). Journal of Decisions and Operations Research. 2017; 2(1): 59-72. [Google Scholar]
24. Halvani G, Mohammadnia M, Zare Mehrjardi M, Kesht varz M. Risk Assessment with Intervention of Gas Pipelines Repair Using FMEA Method and Determination of Safety Performance Monitoring: a Case for a Gas and Oil Operating Company in 2012-13. Journal of Tibbi- i- kar. 2020; 12 (2): 59-68. Available from: URL: http://tkj.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-1099-fa.html. [Article] [Crossref]
25. Liu H-C, Liu L, Liu N. Risk Evaluation Approaches in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: A Literature Review. Expert Systems with Applications. 2013; 40(2): 828-38. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
26. Khasha RM, Sepehri M, Khatibi T, Soroush AR. Fuzzy FMEA Application to Improve Workflow in Operating Rooms. Journal of Advances in Industrial Engineering. 2013; 47(2): 135-47. [Article]
27. Tay KM, Lim CP. Fuzzy FMEA With a Guided Rules Reduction System for Prioritization of Failures. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 2006; 23(8): 1047-66. Available from: URL: 10.1108/02656710610688202. [Article] [Crossref]
28. Mirza S, Omidvari M, Lavasani SMRM. The Application of Fuzzy Logic to Determine the Failure Probability in Fault Tree Risk Analysis. Safety Promotion and Injury Prevention. 2014; 2(2): 113-23. [Google Scholar]
29. Johari Z, Cheraghi M, Ardakani S. Environmental Risk Assessment of Ilam Petrochemical Company Using Analytical Network Analysis and the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution Methods in 2016. Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences. 2019; 26 (5): 79-88. Available from: URL: http://Sjimu.Medilam.ac.ir/Article-1-4791-Fa.html. [Article] [Crossref]
30. Fatemi F, Ardalan A, Mansouri N, Aguirre B, Mohammdfam I. Industrial Chemical Accidents: a Growing Health Hazard in the Islamic Republic of Iran. East Mediterr Health. 2019; 25(1). [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
31. Soltanzadeh A, Heidari H, Mohammad H, Mohammadbeigi A, Sarsangi V, Darakhshan Jazari M. Comprehensive Causal Analysis of Occupational Accidents’ Severity in the Chemical Industries; A Field Study Based on Feature Selection and Multiple Linear Regression Techniques. J Health Saf Work. 2019; 9(4): 298-310. Available from: URL: http://Jhsw.Tums.ac.ir/article-1-6217-Fa.html. [Google Scholar]
32. Jozi SA, MirJalili NE, Joibari R, Faraji S. Assessment and Management of Environmental Risk in the Distillation Unit of Zagros Petrochemical Company Using the EFMEA Technique. 5th Conference and Exhibition on Environmental Engineering. Tehran, Iran. 2013.
33. Bandarja M, Jozi SA. Health, Safety, and Environmental Risk Assessment for Hydrocracker Unit of Bandar Abbas in Refinement of Oil Company by EFMEA Method. Journal of Environmental Studies. 2014; 39(4(4)): 105-24. Available from: URL: https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=245633. [Article]
34. Rezayan S, Jozi SA, Moradi Majd N. Presentation of Occupational Health and Safety Risk Management Program in Mihan Noor Company’s Paint and Paint Salon. Environmental Researches. 2016; 7(13): 127-38.
35. Takdestan A, Janadele H, Kordani M, Hosseini Panah E. Investigating the Most Important Environmental Pollutants of the Plastic Industry and the Technologies Used to Reduce it. 1st National Conference on Maintenance of Environment, Water and Natural Resources. 2015: 1-11. Available from: URL: https://civilica.com/doc/392070.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
© 2024 The Author(s)
