(66a) The Human Factors behind Inherently Safer Design of LNG Liquefaction Terminals

Natural gas is a major source of
energy for many across the globe.  With
increased use in rapidly expanding markets such as Asia and Latin America,
energy providers are striving to export natural gas through liquefaction
terminals in the United States.  At the
forefront of the discussion is incorporating liquefaction trains into already
existing import terminals and/or construction of new facilities.  With FERC approval a requisite goal, numerous
terminals are vying to be first to market in the global export business.  Central to FERC approval is the impact such a
facility would have on the surrounding community and environment. Many
facilities destined for liquefaction are currently import terminals that will
be modified to begin exporting LNG via maritime routes. The very nature of LNG
is a cold dense vapor that has the potential to travel large distances and
potentially impact off-site targets beyond property boundaries. These vapor
clouds may lead to flash fires, explosions and nauseous vapors impacting the
local community or neighboring facilities.

Many preventative and mitigative
measures are employed in and around these facilities to reduce the extent of
the impact posed by an accidental release. The rub is a human factor problem of
avoiding an inherently safer design approach to a facility. A standard protocol
is to mitigate consequences rather than put forth a superior design for
engineering the facility. This saves money on engineering and design at the
expense of only providing a single possible prevention/mitigation technique.
Historically, even with the best mitigation techniques, errors occur that
produce disastrous results.

This paper will explore the human
factors decision process that leads the industry to circumvent the desire to
design and engineer a facility that is safe by its very nature. The trials and
tribulations of outcomes that transpire from such decisions and attendant extensive
work necessary to be performed will be explored. An evaluation to eliminate the
process hazard in the design stage and using mitigation techniques as a last
savior will be discussed.