=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2534/60_short_paper
|storemode=property
|title=The Differentiated Approach to Assessment Individual risk of Emergency
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2534/60_short_paper.pdf
|volume=Vol-2534
|authors=Ulyana S. Ivanova,Daria A. Chernykh,Olga V. Taseiko,Tatiana N. Nikulina
}}
==The Differentiated Approach to Assessment Individual risk of Emergency==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2534/60_short_paper.pdf
The Differentiated Approach to Assessment
Individual Risk of Emergency
Ulyana S. Ivanova1,2, Daria A. Chernykh1,3, Olga V. Taseiko1,3, Tatiana N. Nikulina2
1 Institute of computational technological SB RAS, Krasnoyarsk, Russia, krasn@ict.nsc.ru
2 Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia, office@sfu-kras.ru
3
Siberian State Aerospace University named after academician M.F. Reshetnev, Krasnoyarsk, Russia, info@sibsau.ru
Abstract. The problem of sustainable development of industrial areas on the basis of
risk-based approach is considered. The purpose of the work is the analysis of
methodological recommendations for the assessment of individual risk of emergencies.
The relevance is determined by the need to implement the national safety strategy at the
regional level on the basis development methods of technogenic safety analysis. In the
conditions of the existing risk and negative consequences the organization and
modernization of the territorial risk management system is necessary. The result is a
ranking of Krasnoyarsk territories the level of technological risk (high, borderline, safe)
with the use of a differentiated coefficient.
Keywords: safety, sustainable development, risk level, individual risks of emergencies
1 Introduction
To assess territory safety development and using of measures and methods of the risk analysis are prioritized.
Support of people’s life and society is given the most attention. At the present time scientific and organizational
activities are being carried out to lower risk of accident and reduce the loss in emergencies as well [1-4]. The purpose
of the work is to analyse of methodical recommendations to assess individual risk of emergencies.
Relevance is determined by the necessity for realize national safety strategy on regional level using methods of
technogenic risk analysis.
There are the following tasks:
─ calculation and analysis of individual risks of technogenic emergencies, using Krasnoyarsk territory as an
example as within approved methodology;
─ introduce differentiated coefficient to assess risk into the methodology;
─ recalculation individual risk of emergencies.
2 The analysis assessment individual risk emergencies method
The official methodology to assess individual risk of emergencies is “The methodological recommendation for
development, check, assessment and correction of territory electronic passport (object)” (Validate by Ministry of
Emergency Russia 15.07.2016 № 2-4-71-40).
While identifying the risk of emergencies initial data is:
─ general information about subject of Russian Federation (municipality);
─ number and density population;
─ character of area;
─ information about assessment possible emergencies consequence.
The statistical indicators for risk are considered. Expected influence of risk is assessed on considered territory or
object of economy.
Individual risk calculation is made to determine real level of risk (acceptable risk R < 10 -5) to identify necessary
activites to rule and lower it. Individual risk of emergencies within the formule:
Copyright © 2019 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0
International (CC BY 4.0).
𝑁п (1)
𝑅=
𝑁н
where 𝑁п – mean of fatality (within year) in specific type of emergency on considered territory;
𝑁н – the number of population living there.
The individual risk of emergencies calculation has been made on example of Krasnoyarsk territory using
statistical information official data Ministry of Emergency Russia and the methodological recommendations [5]. The
Krasnoyarsk territory is industrial developed subject in Russia in Siberia Federal district, which is exposed to
technogenic dangers:
─ radioactive substances emission;
─ chemical emission;
─ destroying hydrotechnical construction and flooding;
─ large industrial accident and fires;
─ large car, rail and air accidents;
─ disasters (forest fires, floods, earthquake) and other.
There are the following administrative units in Krasnoyarsk territory: 13 cities, 3 closed administrative-territorial
entities (CATE), 44 municipalities and 1 urban-type locality (utl) [6]. The ranging of Krasnoyarsk territory (along
individual risk level) has been presented on figure 1 (mean within 20 years). The value diapason (from 0 to 2·10 -4)
has been gotten for municipalities from technogenic emergencies. Bogotolskij, Bolsheulujskij, Kozulskij, Manskij,
Turuhanskij and Evenkijskij rigions of Krasnoyarsk territory are the most dangerous (individual risk values are higher
than acceptable more then 10 time).
Figure 1. Ranging of municipalities along risk level.
The calculation values show 14 municipalities, which not higher than acceptable ones. It is mainly associated with
lower number population on consideration area. So, the differentiation approach to assess individual risk is necessary,
by introduction coefficient k. The acceptable level risk equals 1·10-5 that compered fatality one human at one hundred
thousand population. However, there are territories where the number of population is lower or a lot time higher this
value. The introduced coefficient k will allow the more exact to identify and analyze dangerous level of territory
more.
The coefficient is identified in two ways: The coefficient is identified: when 𝑁 ≤ 100000 and 𝑁 > 100000. The
values for first one are presented in table 1. For second event, the coefficient calculated along formula:
𝑁 (2)
𝑘= ,
100000
where N – number of population on looking territory higher 100000.
The source values and recalculated values of risk have presented in table 2 as well as it has done ranging across
dangerous levels.
Table 1. The value of coefficient within number population lower 100000
Number population Coefficient k
1-20000 0,1
20000-30000 0,2
30000-40000 0,3
40000-50000 0,4
50000-60000 0,5
60000-70000 0,6
70000-80000 0,7
80000-90000 0,8
90000-100000 0,9
Table 2. The differenced ranging of Krasnoyarsk territory
Recalculated Ранжирование
Number Acceptable
Rigion Individual risk (R) k values of risk
population [7] risk территорий
(R')
Abanskij rigion 3,5·10-5 19951 0,1 3,5·10-6 safety
Achinskiy rigion 1·10-4 15213 0,1 1·10-5 safety
Balahtinskij rigion 1·10-4 18664 0,1 1·10-5 safety
Berezovskij rigion 1·10-4 41727 0,4 4·10-5 border line
Birilyusskij rigion 5,4·10-5 9649 0,1 5,4·10-6 safety
Bogotolskij rigion 1,3·10-4 9751 0,1 1,3·10-5 safety
Boguchanskij rigion 3,9·10-5 45525 0,4 1,6·10-5 border line
Bolshemurtinskij rigion 1·10-4 18243 0,1 1·10-5 safety
Bolsheulujskij rigion 1,1·10-4 7525 0,1 1,1·10-5 safety
Achinsk 2,3·10-5 106531 1,06 2,4·10-5 border line
Bogotol 2,5·10-5 20020 0,2 5·10-6 safety
1·10-5
Borodino 1,2·10-5 16127 0,1 1,2·10-6 safety
Divnogorsk 7·10-6 33490 0,3 2,1·10-6 safety
Enisejsk 4,1·10-5 17826 0,1 4,1·10-6 safety
Kansk 2,1·10-5 89508 0,8 1,7·10-5 border line
Krasnoyarsk 1,2·10-5 1091634 10,9 1,3·10-4 dangerous
Lesosibirsk 1,3·10-5 64323 0,6 7,8·10-6 safety
Minusinsk 2,2·10-5 70910 0,7 1,5·10-5 border line
Nazarovo 1,5·10-5 49991 0,4 6·10-6 safety
Norilsk 1,8·10-5 180239 1,8 3,2·10-5 border line
Sosnovoborsk 0 40128 0,4 0 safety
Sharypovo 9·10-6 46603 0,4 3,6·10-6 safety
Dzerzhinskij rigion 3,5·10-5 13254 0,1 3,5·10-6 safety
-5 -5
Emelyanovskij rigion 3,6·10 50799 0,5 1,8·10 border line
Enisejskij rigion 1·10-4 22828 0,2 2·10-5 border line
Ermakovskij rigion 5,1·10-5 19334 0,1 5,1·10-6 safety
CATE safety
0 92851 0,9 0
Zheleznogorsk
CATE safety
0 62245 0,6 0
Zelenogorsk
CATE safety
0 9950 0,1 0
Solnechnyj
Idrinskij rigion 1,2·10-5 11183 0,1 1,2·10-6 safety
Ilanskij rigion 3,5·10-5 23806 0,2 7·10-6 safety
Irbejskij rigion 3,7·10-5 15 468 0,1 3,7·10-6 safety
Kazachenskij safety
1·10-4 9643 0,1 1·10-5
rigion
Kanskij rigion 3,4·10-5 25316 0,2 6,8·10-6 safety
Karatuzckij rigion 5,5·10-5 14950 0,1 5,5·10-6 safety
Kezhemskij rigion 5,4·10-5 20674 0,2 1,1·10-5 safety
Kozulskij rigion 2·10-4 16246 0,1 2·10-5 border line
Krasnoturanskij safety
1·10-4 14067 0,1 1·10-5
rigion 1·10 -5
-5 -5
Kuraginskij rigion 2,7·10 44977 0,4 1,1·10 safety
Manskij rigion 1,7·10-4 15668 0,1 1,7·10-5 border line
Minusinskij rigion 1·10-4 25944 0,2 2·10-5 border line
Motyginskij rigion 2,2·10-5 13891 0,1 2,2·10-6 safety
Nazarovskij rigion 1·10-4 22063 0,2 2·10-5 border line
Nizhneingashskij safety
5,5·10-5 29422 0,2 1,1·10-5
rigion
Novoselovskij safety
1,6·10-5 12969 0,1 1,6·10-6
rigion
utl Kedrovyj 0 5450 0,1 0 safety
Partizanskij rigion 4·10-5 9283 0,1 4·10-6 safety
Pirovskij rigion 0 6867 0,1 0 safety
Pybinskij rigion 1·10-4 30943 0,3 3,1·10-5 border line
Sayanskij rigion 5·10-5 10746 0,1 5·10-6 safety
Severo-Enisejskij safety
0 11090 0,1 0
rigion
Suhobuzimskij border line
1·10-4 20064 0,2 2·10-5
rigion
Tajmyrskij rigion 1·10-4 31762 0,3 3·10-5 border line
Taseevskij rigion 1·10-4 11508 0,1 1·10-5 safety
0.00014
Turuhanskij rigion 1,5·10-4 15971 0,1 1,5·10-5 border line
0.00012
Tyuhtetskij
0.0001rigion 1·10-4 8077 0,1 1·10-5 safety
Uzhurskij rigion
0.00008 4·10-5 31408 0,3 1,2·10-5 safety
-5
0.00006
Uyarskij rigion 1·10-4 20715 0,2 2·10-5 1·10 border line
0.00004
Sharypovskij safety
1·10-4 14176 0,1 1·10-5
Individual risk
rigion
0.00002
Acceptable risk
0
Shushenskij rigion 1,4·10-5 32164 0,3 4,2·10-6 safety
Turuhanskij rigion
Norilsk
Kansk
Enisejskij rigion
Uyarskij rigion
Manskij rigion
Emelyanovskij rigion
Minusinskij rigion
Boguchanskij rigion
Kozulskij rigion
Suhobuzimskij rigion
Berezovskij rigion
Nazarovskij rigion
Tajmyrskij rigion
Minusinsk
Achinsk
Krasnoyarsk
-4 -5
Evenkijskij rigion 1,1·10 15147 0,1 1,1·10 safety
The values range of individual risk by technogenic emergencies have been gotten by recalculating within from 0
to 1,3·10-4. The Municipalities have been presented on figure 2 in which values of individual risk are higher
acceptable ones. Krasnoyarsk city has the highest of individual risk which equals 1,3·10-4. This indicator is
conditioned large quantities of potentially hazardous objects, critical and strategically infrastructure.
Figure 2. The municipalities of Krasnoyarsk territory with higher level individual risk.
Conclusion. To control anthropogenic safety is connected with predicting probable risks and develop in models
and methods of technogenic risk analyses and assessment. There are the following results of this work:
- analysis of methodological recommendation for the assessment of individual risk of emergencies is done;
- calculation and the analysis of individual risk of emergencies for the Krasnoyarsk territory are made;
- individual risk recalculation is made (with the use of differentiated coefficient).
The analysis of territory technogenic hazard shows the large cities with developed infrastructure and dangerous
object are exposed to the risk the most.
The reported study was funded by Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Government of Krasnoyarsk Territory,
Krasnoyarsk Regional Fund of Science, to the research project No 18-47-240006: «Methods and information
technologies for risk assessment of the development of socio-natural-technogenic systems in an industrial region».
References
[1] Makhutov N.A., Gadenin M.M. Environmental safety and environmental heritage in national security issues //
Ecology and industry of Russia. 2016. Vol. 20. №3. P. 47-51.
[2] Safety of Russia. Legal, socio-economic, scientific and technical aspects. Regional safety issues. Krasnoyarsk
territory, Moscow: Znanie, 2001. – 576 p.
[3] Moskvichev V. V., Bychkov, I. V., Potapov V. P., Taseiko O. V., Shokin Yu. I. Information system for
territorial risk management development and safety // Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2017. № 8.
P. 696-705.
[4] Safety of Russia. Legal, socio-economic, scientific and technical aspects. System studies of emergency
situations. Moscow. "Knowledge", 2015. – 864 p.
[5] The methodological recommendation for development, check, assessment and correction of territory electronic
passport (object) (Validate by Ministry of Emergency Russia 15.07.2016 № 2-4-71-40).
[6] On the protection state of population and territories for Krasnoyarsk territory from natural and man-made
emergencies: State report. – Moscow: Ministry of Emergency Russia, 1996-2016 years.
[7] http://www.krskstate.ru/msu/terdel [Electronic resource] (accessed 18.06.2009).