Abstract
Detailed examination of the criticisms of the J-value put forward by Jones-Lee and Chilton shows their points to be without merit. However, the exercise of refuting their critique has brought out a number of J-value implications of potential interest and value to engineering professionals seeking to find the objectively reasonable amount that ought to be spent on a safety system. The paper applies the J-value to the example of a long-term protection system on a notional major-hazard process plant, where a severe accident would otherwise pose a risk of death to the general public either immediately or in the short term. Equations are developed for the improvement in life expectancy produced by averting such an industrial hazard over a prolonged period. The opportunity is taken to review the developments in the J-value that have taken place over the 12 years since the first paper on the method appeared in Process Safety and Environmental Protection.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 309-328 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Process Safety and Environmental Protection |
| Volume | 126 |
| Early online date | 30 Apr 2019 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2019 |
Keywords
- J-value
- Risk
- Immediate hazard
- VPF
- Safety
- Safety fallacies
Access to Document
- Full-text PDF (accepted author manuscript)
This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Elsevier at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582019301806 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
- Full-text PDF (final published version)
This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Elsevier at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582019301806 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.