1 / 28

Industrial risk / Accident in Toulouse : And now, what consequences ?

Industrial risk / Accident in Toulouse : And now, what consequences ?. Certu. Kick-Off Conference, 24 th & 25 th February 2005, Certu, Bernard Guézo. Accident in TOULOUSE. September, the 21 st , 2001.

jael
Download Presentation

Industrial risk / Accident in Toulouse : And now, what consequences ?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Industrial risk / Accident in Toulouse :And now, what consequences ? Certu Kick-Off Conference, 24th & 25th February 2005, Certu, Bernard Guézo

  2. AccidentinTOULOUSE September, the 21st, 2001 Presentation with the help of Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development, BARPI (Governmental office) and INERIS. SETRIC Kick-Off Conference, 24th & 25th February 2005, Certu, Bernard Guézo

  3. 1/ THE ACCIDENT The plant, its surrounding, …the accident.

  4. AZF, Toulouse September 21th after the explosion

  5. THE PLANT • General data :- 470 employees ; created in 1924 (ONIA) • Production : •  Fertilizers section : • ammonia, nitric acid, urea, Ammonium nitrates (industrial : 400t/j ; • granulated fertilizers : 850 t/j)... •  Chemical products : • - melamine (70 t/j), chloroderivatives, glue,… • Raw materials : • - Natural gas, - chlorine • Operator :Grande Paroisse • Geographic data : • - Located North part of the • town of Toulouse • - Covering a 70 ha-area • 3 km from the centre of the town, • On the left bank of Garonne river. • Classified Seveso site for : • - Chlorine storage (56 t x2), - Ammonia storages (5000+1000+315 t),- Ammonium nitrate storages

  6. THE PLANT and its surrounding By-pass way and railway Closest houses and stores S.N.P.E. Town’s bus warehouse Workshop where the explosion occurred Garonne River

  7. THE PLANT inside the built-up area

  8. The surroundings of the site : Other industrial plants : chemical industries or specialized chemistry Public buildings : - Schools, stores and department stores, hospitals Main roads : motorway junction, bypass, High density of population in the neighbourhood Controlled perimeters : Adopted in 1989 Land use planning concerning 1 130 people The area near the plant

  9. Warehouse involved  Located : North part of the plant  Dedicated to storage of “out of standard materials”  Licensed for 500 t AN : 21th September, about 300 to 400 t of AN were stored.  Workshop operatedby shipping department using sub-contractors.

  10. The accident itself… •  Very violent detonation  Equivalent to 3.4 on Richter scale  Equivalent to 20 to 40 t TNT (estimation INERIS) and 60 to 126 tons (estimation judicial experts) • Elliptic crater 60x50m 10 m-depth

  11. Which causes ? Judicial experts’ hypothesis (report dated the 5th of June, 2002 – First conclusions) 3 kind of hypotheses :  Terrorist attack or Arson : hypothesis not adopted.  External accidents (meteorite, part of plane ; electric arc ; electric defect inside the site… Theory not adopted.  Chemical cause :AN not pure ; soil covered by polluted crust ; if particular chemical product, violent reaction possible with AN (confirmed by laboratory tests). Probable cause.

  12. 2/ CONSEQUENCES AND MEASURES TAKEN Human, material, economical.

  13. Human consequences… Human losses - 30 fatalities  8 people out of the site including 1 sec.school pupil 22 employees (including 1 employee of a neighbour industrial site) - A lot of irreversible injuries

  14. Human consequences… People injured : About 2500 people officially registered and 5000 who declaresomatic or psychological effects  780 people sent to hospital amongst whom 30 in critical conditions  Estimated 3500 people affected (according to emergency services) Main effects :  Somatic effects due to the blast :traumas, fractures, injuries, pulmonary affections or ear, nose and throat, eye affections, …)  Psychological effects : Numerouspost-traumasyndromes, States of depression, due to deterioration of living/working conditions

  15. Material consequences… Outside the site :  About 30 000 houses or flats destroyed or seriously damaged  1800 families re-housed  Most of the windows broken in a 7 km radiusSeveral educational establishments were closed temporarily(11 colleges and 2 schools, 79 primary schools / 185 in Toulouse, universities, …)

  16. Economical consequences On the site :  North part of the plant destroyed  Significant damage on chemical plants in the neighbourhood Other economic impacts : 6 factories of the chemical platform shutdown (including La Grande Paroisse, definitively stopped) 1 000 companies affected in various ways(20 000 jobs, 100 000 m² damaged area …)

  17. Main measures taken for population  Emergency fund (>18 M€) raised from regions, Government, departments, cities, public companies population - 44 000 files registered  Peoplefollow-up committee for : Compensations, rights of victims, psychological support  Epidemiological follow-up : Sanitary Vigilance was instituted through scientific and institutional committees

  18. Epidemiological and environmental follow-up • Two directions for investigations : • A particular medical survey was made on : - Employees (chemical platform and other sectors of the town) and safety people) 50.000- Pupils and teachers of the different schools about 3700 • Other population (general survey). • An environmental survey was made on : - air, water, soil.

  19. Epidemiological follow-up Main first results •  Psychological troubles were major impact : • Estimation : 5000 people consulted a doctor for stress symptoms). •  hearing symptoms : • - Detection of hearing problems was necessary amongst people in a radius of 1,7 km-area at the moment of the explosion

  20. 1/ THE EFFECTS FOR THE FUTURE New laws in France, a greater governance, a greater implication for local authorities in risk management.

  21. First new law :30th July 2003 To reduce risk, by 1/Solving most difficult situations both in terms of hazard and urban neighbourhood, 2/Controling future To develop public information and participation. To increase participation of employers and subcontractors To improve the financial compensation for the victims. Second new law : 13 August 2004 Public safety Government requires local authorities with major risk (natural or industrial) to prepared an emergency plan 2 laws in a short time :

  22. On the Seveso sites : Reduction of hazard: Ex : to decrease the volume of dangerous substances storages Reduction of probabilityof a potential accidentby physical or non-physical protective barriers: ex : to improve the maintenance of equipments, to confine ammonia tanks… On the territory :  Restriction of urban development Improving the situation for existing residents or activities Public Information and consultation : Creation of local Committees,public meeting organised during processes of authorizations, more detailed information by the sellers of a property. To reduce the risk :

  23. Multi-layer risk prevention and mitigation EXTERNAL EMERGENCY PLAN INTERNAL EMERGENCY PLAN EMERGENCY STOP AUTOMATISMS REGULATION AND CONTROL SYSTEMS WORKERS DESIGN BUILDING TRAINING OF WORKEERS MAINTENANCE INSPECTION SAFETY ALARMS INTERVENTION OF OPERATORS ULTIMATE SAFETY SYSTEMS

  24. TRPP (Technological Risk Prevention Plan) Measures are correlated to the intensity of the risk To decrease the risk Expropriation Renunciation Pre-emption Constructive Measures

  25. Try to find a better governance(Industrials, Government, Local Authorities)  By a financial share consequences of the risk reduction •  By the analysis of the best balance between hazard reduction and land planning possibilities •  By increasing discussion between whole partners during the administrative process

  26. And for Local Authorities ?  How to be prepared to face an accident with its consequences for : population, activities, city management ?

  27. BIBLIOGRAPHY Environment general inspection report : Available on the web-site of MEDD http:// www. environnement. gouv.fr /publications Commission of the French parliament Report : Available on the web-site of the “assemblée nationale” http:// www. assemblee-nationale.fr/rapport d’enquête Intermediate report of the Sanitary Vigilance Institute : Available at the following address http:// www. invs. sante.fr List of significant accidents which involved AN Available on the BARPI web-site : http:// www. aria . environnement. gouv. fr Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable development http:// www. prim.net

  28. THE END Thank you for your attention SETRIC Kick-Off Conference, 24th & 25th February 2005, Certu, Bernard Guézo

More Related