ISSN (Online): 2321-3418
server-injected
Chemistry and Environmental Engineering
Open Access

Transforming Process Safety and Accident Prevention in Heavy Industries with Inherently Safer Design and Innovative HSSEQ Technologies

, ,
DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v13i06.c02· Pages: 280-289· Vol. 13, No. 06, (2025)· Published: June 2, 2025
PDF
Views: 732 PDF downloads: 429

Abstract

The scenario of industrial safety has been shifting significantly within the last 50 years, with the meaning of which is the transition to the design that is inherently safe (ISD) as the most effective tool for preventing hazards. It has been stated statistically that industrial accidents can be reduced by as much as 85 percent through the systematic delivery of the principles of ISD, which are referred to as minimization, substitution, moderation, and simplification. In this paper, we are taking a historical look at the development of ISD since the post-Flixborough period, its integration into the contemporary regulation, and the interaction of technology, human factors, and safety performance. There is a focus on measurable performance indicators, financial value, and life-cycle principles of implementation, through the facility life stages. High technologies, including digital twins, real-time monitoring systems, and predictive analytics, are mentioned as the factors contributing to a more rapid adoption of ISD, whereas human factors engineering is mentioned as one of the key factors ensuring sustained operations safety. In the findings, it was confirmed that the ISD actually enhances the implementation of process safety and regulatory compliance, besides bringing huge savings, lower insurance premiums, and enhancing the emergency process both in terms of cost and time. This study highlights the timelessness of the mission to eradicate hazards at the source as the only foolproof method of ensuring industrial processes are not jeopardised in the age of Industry 4.0 and beyond.

Keywords

Inherently Safer DesignIndustrial SafetyHazard MinimizationProcess Safety ManagementPredictive AnalyticsDigital TwinIndustry 4.0Human Factors EngineeringRisk ManagementAccident Prevention. 1. Introduction

References

  1. Amyotte, P. R., & Khan, F. I. (2021). The role of inherently safer design in process safety. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 99(4), 853–871. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.23987DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  2. Attaran, M., & Celik, B. G. (2023). Digital Twin: Benefits, use cases, challenges, and opportunities. Decision Analytics Journal, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2023.100165DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  3. Aven, T. (2016, August 16). Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation. European Journal of Operational Research. Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  4. Broby, D. (2022, November 1). The use of predictive analytics in finance. Journal of Finance and Data Science. KeAi Communications Co. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfds.2022.05.003DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  5. Brown, K. R., VanBerkel, P., Khan, F. I., & Amyotte, P. R. (2021). Application of bow tie analysis and inherently safer design to the novel coronavirus hazard. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 152, 701–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2021.06.046DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  6. Choi, G. H., & Loh, B. G. (2017). Control of Industrial Safety Based on Dynamic Characteristics of a Safety Budget-Industrial Accident Rate Model in Republic of Korea. Safety and Health at Work, 8(2), 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2016.11.002DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  7. Dhital, Y. P., & Tang, Q. (2015). Soil bioengineering application for flood hazard minimization in the foothills of Siwaliks, Nepal. Ecological Engineering, 74, 458–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.11.020DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  8. J., González-Gaya, C., & Rosales-Prieto, V. F. (2020). An approach to health and safety assessment in industrial parks. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093646DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  9. Fu, G., Xie, X., Jia, Q., Tong, W., & Ge, Y. (2020). Accidents analysis and prevention of coal and gas outburst: Understanding human errors in accidents. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 134, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.11.026DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  10. Goode, S. R. (2021). Using a Case Study to Teach Hazard Analysis and Risk Minimization. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(1), 183–185. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00127DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  11. Glasauer, C. (2023). The PREVENT-Model: Human and Organizational Factors Fostering Engineering of Safe and Secure Robotic Systems. Journal of Systems and Software, 195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2022.111548DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  12. Gurtu, A., & Johny, J. (2021). Supply chain risk management: Literature review. Risks. MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9010016DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  13. Habel, J., Alavi, S., & Heinitz, N. (2023). A theory of predictive sales analytics adoption. AMS Review, 13(1–2), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-022-00252-0DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  14. Huang, R., Liu, H., Ma, H., Qiang, Y., Pan, K., Gou, X., … Glowacz, A. (2022). Accident Prevention Analysis: Exploring the Intellectual Structure of a Research Field. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148784DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  15. Janošovský, J., Rosa, I., Vincent, G., Šulgan, B., Variny, M., Labovská, Z., … Jelemenský, Ľ. (2022). Methodology for selection of inherently safer process design alternatives based on safety indices. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 160, 513–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.02.043DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  16. Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Suman, R., & Gonzalez, E. S. (2022). Understanding the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies in improving environmental sustainability. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.01.008DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  17. Jones, D., Snider, C., Nassehi, A., Yon, J., & Hicks, B. (2020). Characterising the Digital Twin: A systematic literature review. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 29, 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2020.02.002DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  18. Khan, A., Sattari, F., Lefsrud, L., & Tufail, M. (2021). Enhancing regional process safety management. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2021.104444DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  19. Kletz, T. A. (2003). Inherently safer design - its scope and future. Process Safety and Environmental Protection: Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part B, 81(6), 401–405. https://doi.org/10.1205/095758203770866566DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  20. Leggett, D. J. (2012). Identifying hazards in the chemical research laboratory. Process Safety Progress, 31(4), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.11518DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  21. Mechhoud, E. A., Rouainia, M., & Rodriguez, M. (2016). A new tool for risk analysis and assessment in petrochemical plants. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 55(3), 2919–2931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.05.013DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  22. Nwankwo, C. D., Theophilus, S. C., & Arewa, A. O. (2020). A comparative analysis of process safety management (PSM) systems in the process industry. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104171DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  23. Pylianidis, C., Osinga, S., & Athanasiadis, I. N. (2021). Introducing digital twins to agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105942DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  24. Rivera, A. J., & Karsh, B. T. (2008). Human Factors and Systems Engineering Approach to Patient Safety for Radiotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 71(1 SUPPL.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.088DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  25. Roblek, V., Meško, M., & Krapež, A. (2016). A Complex View of Industry 4.0. SAGE Open, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016653987DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  26. Rusli, R., Shariff, A. M., & Khan, F. I. (2013). Evaluating hazard conflicts using inherently safer design concept. Safety Science, 53, 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.09.002DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  27. Singh, M., Fuenmayor, E., Hinchy, E. P., Qiao, Y., Murray, N., & Devine, D. (2021). Digital twin: Origin to future. Applied System Innovation. MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi4020036DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  28. Sun, X., Houssin, R., Renaud, J., & Gardoni, M. (2019). A review of methodologies for integrating human factors and ergonomics in engineering design. International Journal of Production Research. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1492161DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  29. Svertoka, E., Saafi, S., Rusu-Casandra, A., Burget, R., Marghescu, I., Hosek, J., & Ometov, A. (2021, June 1). Wearables for industrial work safety: A survey. Sensors. MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21113844DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  30. Tao, F., Xiao, B., Qi, Q., Cheng, J., & Ji, P. (2022, July 1). Digital twin modeling. Journal of Manufacturing Systems. Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2022.06.015DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  31. Van Calster, B., McLernon, D. J., Van Smeden, M., Wynants, L., Steyerberg, E. W., Bossuyt, P., … Vickers, A. J. (2019). Calibration: The Achilles heel of predictive analytics. BMC Medicine, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1466-7DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  32. Waqar, A., Othman, I., Falqi, I. I., Almujibah, H. R., Alshehri, A. M., Alsulamy, S. H., & Benjeddou, O. (2023). Assessment of Barriers to Robotics Process Automation (RPA) Implementation in Safety Management of Tall Buildings. Buildings, 13(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071663DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  33. Xu, L. D., Xu, E. L., & Li, L. (2018). Industry 4.0: State of the art and future trends. International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2941–2962. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  34. Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.96DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
Author details
Zeynep Bahar
MSc, Department of Environmental Engineering, Mersin Univesity
✉ Corresponding Author
👤 View Profile →
Duygu Bilgen Havva
Department of Environmental Engineering, Mersin Univesity
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Sarioguz Orcun
MSc, Department of Business Administration, Anadolu University
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication