Safety in Design (SiD) practices are continually evolving across the processing industry. SiD can include comprehensive risk assessments such as HAZID, HAZOP, QRA, LOPA, Bowtie Risk Assessment, Layout Reviews, and SFAIRP studies. The application of SiD depends on industry maturity, regulatory requirements, incident learnings, and the expertise of study leaders.
Hydrogen projects are commissioned by operators with varying experience and design standards. A balanced approach is essential to ensure risk is reduced SFAIRP without incurring unnecessary costs. This paper outlines challenges and recommendations for achieving fit-for-purpose SiD in hydrogen projects.
Challenges in SiD for hydrogen projects include:
-Vendor ‘Black Box’ Designs: Proprietary vendor equipment (e.g., electrolyser, compressor, storage packages) has confidentiality requirements and risk studies are not always shared with BOP designers, potentially resulting in inadequate safeguards.
-Overseas Equipment Suppliers: Equipment may be designed to standards acceptable in overseas operating environments but may not meet Australian Standards or tolerable risk targets. Initial contractual commitments can prevent necessary modifications during SiD studies due to cost and schedule impacts.
-Understanding Consequences: Outsourced consequence modelling may not be communicated effectively to designers. Early involvement of designers in these studies is crucial for informed layout decisions.
-Developing Australian Standards: Ongoing development of standards for hydrogen facilities can result in inconsistent approaches and designs between practitioners.
This paper shares GPA’s experiences across multiple hydrogen design projects, lessons learned, and best practices for integrating SiD. It emphasizes the importance of bridging gaps between safety in design, design, consequence modelling, and vendor package integration.
