Dipartimento di Ingegneria Chimica, Mineraria e delle Tecnologie Ambientali, Alma Mater Studiorum, Universitá di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Risk Anal. 2012 Feb;32(2):200-19; discussion 220-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01654.x. Epub 2011 Jul 18.
The cost-benefit evaluation of passive fire protection adoption in the road transport of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) was investigated. In a previous study, mathematical simulations of real scale fire scenarios proved the effectiveness of passive fire protections in preventing the "fired" boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE), thus providing a significant risk reduction. In the present study the economical aspects of the adoption of fire protections are analyzed and an approach to cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is proposed. The CBA model is based on the comparison of the risk reduction due to fire protections (expressed in monetary terms by the value of a statistical life) and the cost of the application of fire protections to a fleet of tankers. Different types of fire protections were considered, as well as the possibility to apply protections to the entire fleet or only to a part of it. The application of the proposed model to a real-life case study is presented and discussed. Results demonstrate that the adoption of passive fire protections on road tankers, though not compulsory in Europe, can be economically feasible, thus representing a concrete measure to achieve control of the "major hazard accidents" cited by the European legislation.
对在道路运输液化石油气（LPG）中采用被动防火保护的成本效益进行了评估。在之前的研究中，对真实规模火灾场景的数学模拟证明了被动防火保护在防止“着火”沸腾液体膨胀蒸汽爆炸（BLEVE）方面的有效性，从而显著降低了风险。在本研究中，分析了采用防火保护的经济方面，并提出了一种成本效益分析（CBA）方法。CBA 模型基于因防火保护而降低的风险（以统计生命价值的货币形式表示）与将防火保护应用于油轮车队的成本之间的比较。考虑了不同类型的防火保护，以及将保护措施应用于整个车队或仅应用于车队一部分的可能性。介绍并讨论了将所提出的模型应用于实际案例研究的结果。结果表明，尽管在欧洲并非强制性要求，但在道路罐车上采用被动防火保护在经济上是可行的，因此代表了实现欧洲法规所引用的“重大危险事故”控制的具体措施。
