Demolition man

The difficult economic conditions of recent times have imposed unprecedented pressures on chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical and manufacturing companies. The number of production facilities being mothballed, rationalised or permanently closed down remains at a staggeringly high level.

Plant decommissioning, however, is often a step into the unknown for most organisations. The challenge is how to deal with the decommissioning of facilities safely - and, in many cases, the associated decontamination, dismantling and demolition - while working cost-efficiently and with minimal environmental impact.

Not many businesses are competent to proceed with these projects. Decommissioning is seldom a straightforward process. Neither is it a mere extension of normal operations or the reverse of commissioning and construction; nor should it be rushed in an attempt to achieve an accelerated exit.

Decommissioning is also an inherently hazardous activity, so should be managed by appropriately experienced professionals. The most important means of ensuring a project’s success is getting the team right from the start.

A specific set of skills and competencies is required to ensure the management of safety is fully catered for, with safety excellence at the top of the ’to-do’ list.

Specific skills and competencies are required to ensure the management of safety is fully catered for

Effective decommissioning is underpinned by a thorough preparatory and planning process, whereby assets, procedures, decontamination and isolation details are comprehensively documented.

An explosive demolition project, for instance, may take six months to prepare for, even though the resulting blowdown can last less than just 10 seconds. Now regarded an exact science, there remain very few experts in this field.

The careful use of an organisation’s own engineering and production staff from the outset is usually a good idea; no one will know plant-specific information better than the people who have been running it.

These projects, however, often lie beyond most companies’ usual remit, and there will be areas of expertise that cannot possibly be fulfilled in-house. A skilled production manager, for example, cannot become a qualified decommissioning engineer overnight.

External engineering consultants are, therefore, usually engaged to ensure that any given project - and its inherent risk - is competently managed.

By law, all UK demolition projects must be carried out in accordance with Construction Design Management (CDM) regulations. Revised in 2007, the regulations govern the planning, coordination and management to secure the health, safety and welfare of all involved.

A competent and relevantly experienced CDM coordinator must, therefore, be appointed to oversee the project, and ensure consistency of standards. Outside of the UK, while legislative terms and job titles may differ, the principles, roles and responsibilities remain the same - manage safety to the highest achievable standards.

Beyond this there is no such thing as a ’one-size-fits-all’ approach. Every project has to be assessed on its own merits to ensure that a suitably skilled project team - comprising demolition, explosives, chemical, structural and mechanical engineering experts, for example - is assembled for the job.

As the decommissioning is frequently due to site closure or corporate rationalisation, it is commonly viewed as an unwelcome event. Minimal resources are, therefore, often allocated to what is a very complex and high-risk activity. This can result in poor environmental, health and safety (EHS) performance, and, ultimately, commercial failure.

When money is tight, some companies will take shortcuts, but the global downturn doesn’t mean that hazards are any less onerous, or that legislation can be flaunted. Safety should always be a number-one priority.

Safety plans should be compiled in conjunction with other contractual documentation to ensure a cohesive output that does not conflict with risk management and the goal to achieve all necessary EHS requirements.

Review and revise
Independent auditing of sites and methodology further helps to ensure best practice, but operations should be reviewed and revised as site works progress because ’change of state’ can be rapid.

A feasibility and option study will provide a clear view as to the true liability, or indeed opportunity, of a decommissioning project. The findings and recommendations given by independent experts with an experienced ’demolition mindset’ can then provide companies with sufficient data and indeed confidence to pursue an innovative route that they perhaps previously hadn’t considered.

Sometimes, dismantling elements of a plant for scrap while mothballing remaining structures is the preferable route, whereas in other scenarios complete site clearance proves the safest and optimum financial solution.

Direct liabilities, such as hazardous material containment, security and maintenance costs, and local authority building rates, can be removed. It is sometimes even possible to generate sufficient funds from scrap materials to completely cover the cost of the project.

The recession has caused companies to postpone projects that will have to be tackled at a later date and, in most cases, at an increased cost

Clearly not all decommissioning work will be self-funding, but cost-effective solutions can be devised that will help to mitigate a financially difficult situation.

The recession has caused many companies to postpone decommissioning projects, as they simply deem them unaffordable. However, they will have to be tackled at a later date and, in most cases, at an increased cost.

The goal should always be to maximise return on assets where possible and when it is safe to do so. However, factors such as plant age, former process, recovery cost, testing, market forces and commercial competition will all shape the decision as to what should and should not be salvaged.

Sometimes it is efficient to recover individual items of plant for resale, while in other circumstances the dismantling of entire processes for re-installation elsewhere is possible.

Most importantly, organisations need an early project-cost indication, which can be used to compile sanction grade estimates, funding applications and even determine the programme and extent of a project.

Specialist expertise and commercial understanding is, again, important, as factors such as plant resale value, scrap and credit recovery, market conditions and the possible effect of legislative changes, need to be incorporated alongside the direct project costs. However, it is crucial that confidentiality, supply-chain independence and trust are assured from the outset, so as to protect the commercial security of those involved.

As increasingly larger and more sophisticated world-scale installations are reaching the end of their life - and because legislation and environmental pressures are getting more stringent - decommissioning is becoming evermore complex.

Yet advancing technology and improved knowledge does mean that project solutions are increasingly innovative, cost-effective and safe.

The use of explosives, for example, is now much more precise, and specifically designed equipment is now commonly used to access hazardous areas, where, previously, operatives may have been unavoidably placed at risk.