HAL-INERIS
Not a member yet
8807 research outputs found
Sort by
A step toward lifting the fog off mist explosions: Comparative study of three fuels
No full textInternational audienceGases, vapors, and dusts are all potential explosion threats; however, mists should also be taken into account. Indeed, dozens of accidents involving hydrocarbon mists were identified in incident surveys. Mist explosions continue to occur, highlighting the need to evaluate and assess the validity of present approaches for assessing mist ATEX risks and to establish reliable standardized safety parameters for fuel mists. In a modified apparatus based on the 20 L explosion sphere, three fluids of industrial interest were investigated. A new siphon injection system comprising a Venturi junction was installed, offering a wide range of dispersion performances. This system was controlled by a specifically developed program, ensuring the apparatus's versatility and adaptability to various tested liquids. It enables precise control of the gas carrier flow, liquid flow, and injection and ignition durations, allowing modification of the dilution rate of a particular droplet size distribution (DSD). The mist cloud dispersed in the 20 L sphere was characterized by determining its DSD using an in-situ laser diffraction sensor and by performing Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV). Mists of kerosene, diesel and ethanol were then subjected to tests to assess their lower explosive limit (LELmist), minimum ignition energy (MIE), maximum explosion pressure (Pmax), and rate of pressure rise (dP/dtmax). For instance, it was found that the LELmist of ethanol, kerosene Jet A1, and diesel fuel for a DSD averaged at 8–10 μm reach 77, 94, and 93 g/m3 respectively. This LELmist was also shown to increase with increasing DSD in the case of Jet A1 mists. A sensitivity study was also performed to emphasize the impact of parameters such as the fuel type, the DSD, and the mist temperature. Findings showed that the explosion severity is strongly influenced by the chemical nature and the volatility of the dispersed fuel. Moreover, controlling the sphere temperature was proven to be a crucial step when using such apparatus for the evaluation of the explosibility of mists. An evaporation model based on the d2 law was also developed to visualize the vapor-liquid ratio before ignition. These findings have already led to the development of a new procedure for determining safety standards for hydrocarbon mists, as well as tools to assess mist explosion risks. They have proven that it is possible to evaluate the ignition sensitivity and explosion severity of fuel mists using a single well-known apparatus
Une revue des différentes méthodologies existantes pratiquées en France permettant d’évaluer l’impact des polluants chimiques et radiologiques sur la santé de l’homme
No full textInternational audienceL’impact avéré des activités anthropiques sur l’environnement et sur la santé humaine est apparu au grand jour lors de catastrophes sanitaires dans les années 1970-1980. Le 1er outil mis en place dans les années 1980, et toujours utilisé à ce jour pour évaluer l’impact sur la santé des polluants chimiques, est l’évaluation (quantitative) des risques sanitaires (EQRS). Depuis une vingtaine d’années, d’autres méthodologies sont apparues. Parmi celles-ci, six types d’études ont été approfondis avec des praticiens au sein de la section « Méthodologies d’évaluation des risques et des impacts sanitaires » de la Société francophone de santé et environnement (SFSE), de manière à mieux comprendre leurs différences et points communs et à voir comment et dans quels contextes elles peuvent être mobilisées : l’EQRS, l’évaluation quantitative d’impact sanitaire (EQIS), les analyses de type socio-économique, l’évaluation d’impact sur la santé (EIS) selon le consensus de Göteborg, l’interprétation de l’état des milieux (IEM) et l’évaluation des risques radiologiques. Le fruit de ces échanges a été synthétisé. Certains de ces outils apportent des éléments de réponse supplémentaires autour du risque sanitaire en termes de santé publique (EQIS), de santé au sens élargi de bien-être (EIS), de coût financier ou de risques radiologiques.Ces méthodologies faisant souvent l’objet de confusions, tant sur la terminologie que sur leurs objectifs, une clarification s’avère nécessaire afin d’aider les parties prenantes à choisir l’outil le plus adapté
Installation, Organisation, Régulation et Gouvernance des risques industriels et cyber : une comparaison
No full textInternational audienceLe but de cette communication est de proposée une première comparaison des domaines des risques industriels et de la cybersécurité. La méthode suivie est celle d'une mise à plat de ce qui est appelé dans cette communication, d'un côté, les installations et organisations à risques (IOR) et de l'autre leurs régimes de régulation et de gouvernance des risques (RRGR), tout en indiquant leur articulation. Cette mise à plat, graphique, permet à des experts en SHS (sciences humaines et sociales) et SPI (sciences pour l'ingénieur) des domaines des risques industriels et de la cybersécurité de produire une vision 'macro' permettant la mise en évidence des spécificités des deux domaines. Cette comparaison montre les similitudes et différences, de l'externalisation en passant par l'expertise, la normalisation et une notion comme celle de territoire. Mots-clef
Modeling the atmospheric concentrations of pesticides with an air quality model: toward the determination of population exposure at a regional/national scale
No full textInternational audiencePresentation on how the air quality model CHIMERE could be applied to the determination of the atmospheric concentrations of pesticides
Physical modelling of underground excavations in a random fractured rock mass
No full textInternational audienc
Assessment of advantages and limitations of installing PV on abandoned dumps
No full textInternational audienc
Read-across and new approach methodologies applied in a 10-step framework for cosmetics safety assessment – A case study with parabens
No full textAuteurs : Cosmetics EuropeInternational audienceParabens are esters of para-hydroxybenzoic acid that have been used as preservatives in many types of products for decades including agrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, food and cosmetics. This illustrative case study with propylparaben (PP) demonstrates a 10-step read-across (RAX) framework in practice. It aims at establishing a proof-of-concept for the value added by new approach methodologies (NAMs) in read-across (RAX) for use in a next-generation risk assessment (NGRA) in order to assess consumer safety after exposure to PP-containing cosmetics. In addition to structural and physico-chemical properties, in silico information, toxicogenomics, in vitro toxicodynamic, toxicokinetic data from PBK models, and bioactivity data are used to provide evidence of the chemical and biological similarity of PP and analogues and to establish potency trends for observed effects in vitro. The chemical category under consideration is short (C1–C4) linear chain n-alkyl parabens: methylparaben, ethylparaben, propylparaben and butylparaben. The goal of this case study is to illustrate how a practical framework for RAX can be used to fill a hypothetical data gap for reproductive toxicity of the target chemical PP
The NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE): facilitating European and worldwide collaboration on suspect screening in high resolution mass spectrometry
No full textInternational audienceBackgroundThe NORMAN Association (https://www.norman-network.com/) initiated the NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE; https://www.norman-network.com/nds/SLE/) in 2015, following the NORMAN collaborative trial on non-target screening of environmental water samples by mass spectrometry. Since then, this exchange of information on chemicals that are expected to occur in the environment, along with the accompanying expert knowledge and references, has become a valuable knowledge base for “suspect screening” lists. The NORMAN-SLE now serves as a FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) chemical information resource worldwide.ResultsThe NORMAN-SLE contains 99 separate suspect list collections (as of May 2022) from over 70 contributors around the world, totalling over 100,000 unique substances. The substance classes include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), pharmaceuticals, pesticides, natural toxins, high production volume substances covered under the European REACH regulation (EC: 1272/2008), priority contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and regulatory lists from NORMAN partners. Several lists focus on transformation products (TPs) and complex features detected in the environment with various levels of provenance and structural information. Each list is available for separate download. The merged, curated collection is also available as the NORMAN Substance Database (NORMAN SusDat). Both the NORMAN-SLE and NORMAN SusDat are integrated within the NORMAN Database System (NDS). The individual NORMAN-SLE lists receive digital object identifiers (DOIs) and traceable versioning via a Zenodo community (https://zenodo.org/communities/norman-sle), with a total of > 40,000 unique views, > 50,000 unique downloads and 40 citations (May 2022). NORMAN-SLE content is progressively integrated into large open chemical databases such as PubChem (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and the US EPA’s CompTox Chemicals Dashboard (https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/), enabling further access to these lists, along with the additional functionality and calculated properties these resources offer. PubChem has also integrated significant annotation content from the NORMAN-SLE, including a classification browser (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/classification/#hid=101).ConclusionsThe NORMAN-SLE offers a specialized service for hosting suspect screening lists of relevance for the environmental community in an open, FAIR manner that allows integration with other major chemical resources. These efforts foster the exchange of information between scientists and regulators, supporting the paradigm shift to the “one substance, one assessment” approach. New submissions are welcome via the contacts provided on the NORMAN-SLE website (https://www.norman-network.com/nds/SLE/)
State of the Art of Triad-Based Ecological Risk Assessment: Current Limitations and Needed Implementations in the Case of Soil Diffuse Contamination
No full textInternational audienceSoils can be sinks of pollutant mixtures, whose effects on terrestrial ecosystems are not of obvious interpretation. Risk assessment is rather codified and many approaches can be used. Nevertheless, there are still uncertainties remaining when dealing with diffuse pollution, including chronic inputs of low, sublethal, concentrations of mixtures of micropollutants. In this paper, we reviewed through a comprehensive literature analysis one of the latest promising methodologies, the triad approach, in order to understand its area of application in terrestrial ecosystems, the ways of applicability and the reported actual usage. In the case of diffuse pollution, where all the criteria of the triad approach can differ in their indication, we show that some improvements have to be made in either the chemical, ecological or ecotoxicological approaches to be able to clearly identify the risk and to address the uncertainties linked to the low, sublethal contents of contaminants