Modeling the Consequences of Benzene Leakage from Tanks Using PHAST Software in a Process Industry

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Occupational Health Engineering and Safety at Work, Faculty of Public Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

2 Student Research Committee, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

10.34172/jhad.1167

Abstract

Background: Benzene is a highly toxic and flammable chemical widely used in industrial processes, with a substantial risk of accidental release, fire, and explosion. This study aimed to model the potential consequences of benzene leakage from storage tanks in one process industry using PHAST software.
Methods: In this study, two scenarios were modeled with PHAST software: (1) a 100-mm leakage from a benzene tank and (2) a tank explosion. Modeling parameters included the type and quantity of material, tank temperature and pressure, and worst-case atmospheric conditions (unstable atmosphere). The consequences of fire, explosion, and toxicity were assessed.
Results: The modeling results showed that from the point of view of toxicity, the benzene cloud, with a concentration of 6000 ppm, advances to a distance of approximately 163 meters from the tank. In the benzene tank scenarios in prevailing weather conditions, the minimum dangerous distance was 18.3 meters, and the maximum dangerous distance was 132.8 meters. Also, the results showed that in the event of a benzene tank explosion, it can cause destruction of walls and indirect human casualties up to a distance of 171.9 meters.
Conclusion: The findings of the study indicate that the area around the benzene tanks should be declared free of personnel up to a radius of at least 18.3 meters, and a safe assembly point should be designated at a distance greater than 132.8 meters so that the personnel are protected from possible injuries.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Jafari MJ, Nourai F, Pouyakian M, Torabi SA, Rafiee Miandashti M, Mohammadi H. Barriers to adopting inherently safer design philosophy in Iran. Process Saf Prog. 2018;37(2):221-9. doi: 1002/prs.11927.
  2. Lees F. Lees’ Loss Prevention in the Process Industries: Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2012.
  3. Lees F. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Vol 2. Oxford: Butterworth- Heinemann; 2005.
  4. Salari Far B, Rezaei K, Chenani A, Mazdian Fard MR, Hashmipour SM. Analysis and modeling of the consequences of the pentane tank in the pentane unit of Kermanshah refinery using PHAST software. 2015. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/857220/fa.
  5. Torfi Alivi A, Shahraki F, Sardashti Birjandi MR, Khalilipour Langerudi MM. Consequences modeling and determining of safe distance in the natural gas pressure reduction station using PHAST software (case study: Borumi station in Ahvaz). Occup Med. 2023;15(1):37-57. doi: 18502/tkj.v15i1.12978.
  6. Fu W, Zhang K, Wu J. Flammability limits of benzene, toluene, xylenes from 373 K to 473 K and flame-retardant effect of steam on benzene series. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2020;137:328-39. doi: 1016/j.psep.2020.02.027.
  7. Kasemy ZA, Kamel GM, Abdel-Rasoul GM, Ismail AA. Environmental and health effects of benzene exposure among Egyptian taxi drivers. J Environ Public Health. 2019;2019:7078024. doi: 1155/2019/7078024.
  8. Chiavarini M, Rosignoli P, Sorbara B, Giacchetta I, Fabiani R. Benzene exposure and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of human studies. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024;21(2):205. doi: 3390/ijerph21020205.
  9. Ferrero A, Íñiguez C, Esplugues A, Estarlich M, Ballester F. Benzene exposure and respiratory health in children: a systematic review of epidemiologic evidences. Journal of Pollution Effects & Control. 2014;2(2):114. doi: 4172/2375-4397.1000114.
  10. Cozzarin J. The Effects of Hydroquinone and Benzoquinone on the Transcription Factors PU. 1, AML-1, C/EBP, c-Myb and GATA-2 in HL-60 Cells [dissertation]. Canada: Queen’s University; 2017.
  11. Shahpari A, Aminsharei F, Ghashang M. Application of PHAST software in methane emission factor for startup process of gas compressors (case study: Iran gas transmission operation district 2). J Air Pollut Health. 2019;4(1):27-32. doi: 18502/japh.v4i1.601.
  12. Beheshti MH, Farhang Dehghan S, Hajizadeh R, Jafari SM, Koohpaei A. Modelling the consequences of explosion, fire and gas leakage in domestic cylinders containing LPG. Ann Med Health Sci. 2018;8(1):83-8.
  13. Jafarinejad G, Davazdah Emami S, Velayatzadeh M. Individual and collective risk assessment of leakage in South Pars Refinery based on estimation of reproducibility of connections and PHAST software modeling. J Environ Res Technol. 2022;7(12):45-63.
  14. Meysemi H, Ebadi T, Mainour M, Azazipour A, Zahdi Rad H. Accident Event Simulation Using the PHAST Software and Based on the WORSTCASE principle, Process Engineering Conference in Oil, Gas, Petrochemical and Energy Industries. 2013.Availbaler from: https://elmnet.ir/doc/20086380-26188
  15. Biglerzadeh A, Shekarian E, Shokohi Y. Investigation of the Immediate Release of the Krosen Storage farm Tank by PHAST Software. 2013. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/815233/fa.
  16. Cheraghi H, Soltanzadeh A, Ghiyasi S. Consequence modeling of the ethylene oxide storage tanks explosion using the PHAST software (a case study in a petrochemical industry). Iran J Health Environ. 2018;11(2):261-70.
  17. Shojaee Barjoee S, Azizi M, Kouhkan M, Alipourfard I, Bayat A, Heydari Shahbaz Y, et al. The impacts and analysis of individual and social risks of the stochastic emission of benzene from floating-roof tanks using response surface analysis and MPACT model. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2023;84(3):347-67. doi: 1007/s00244-023-00990-7.
  18. Jahedshahraki H, Esfandiari N. Simulation the fire consequence for a gas pipeline using PHAST software. Iran Chem Eng J. 2022;20(119):22-30. doi: 22034/ijche.2021.276516.1095.
  19. Karimi S R, Isarnia H. Modeling fire and explosion scenarios in monomethylhydrazine tank with PHAST software. Research in Safety, Health and Environment. 2023;1(3):1-2.
  20. Abdolhamidzadeh B, Abbasi T, Rashtchian D, Abbasi SA. Domino effect in process-industry accidents–an inventory of past events and identification of some patterns. J Loss Prev Process Ind. 2011;24(5):575-93. doi: 1016/j.jlp.2010.06.013.
  21. López-Molina A, Vázquez-Román R, Mannan MS, Félix-Flores MG. An approach for domino effect reduction based on optimal layouts. J Loss Prev Process Ind. 2013;26(5):887-94. doi: 1016/j.jlp.2012.11.001.
  22. Shojaee Barjoee S, Nikbakht M, Malverdi E, Zarei Mahmoud Abadi S, Naghdi MR. Modeling the consequences of benzene leakage from tank using ALOHA in tar refining industrial of Kerman, Iran. Pollution. 2021;7(1):217-30. doi: 22059/poll.2020.309283.887.
  23. Shojaee Barjoee S, Elmi MR, Talebi Varaoon V, Keykhosravi SS, Karimi F. Hazards of toluene storage tanks in a petrochemical plant: modeling effects, consequence analysis, and comparison of two modeling programs. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2022;29(3):4587-615. doi: 1007/s11356-021-15864-5.
Health and Development Journal
Volume 14, Issue 1
May 2025
Pages 1-8

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 19 November 2024
  • Revise Date: 08 September 2025
  • Accept Date: 13 September 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics