RSK80003 Risk Perception and Analysis Assignment
18 Pages4708 Words56 Views
Risk Perception and Analysis (RSK80003)
Added on 2020-05-04
RSK80003 Risk Perception and Analysis Assignment
Risk Perception and Analysis (RSK80003)
Added on 2020-05-04
ShareRelated Documents
Risk and Perception Analysis 1RISK AND PERCEPTION ANALYSISStudent’s NameProfessor’s NameUniversityCityDate
Risk and Perception Analysis 2Risk and Perception AnalysisPart A Question 1The case presents an environmental risk where the hazardous chemicals have the potential ofharming the people, property, and the environment through pollution. There are two types of coalmine explosions where it includes methane gas explosion and coal dust explosions. Methaneexplosion occurs when a build up of methane gas comes into contact with a source of heat. Oncemethane explodes, it lights up a coal dust explosion leading to worse occurrences (Wang, Pan, Li,Huang, Dong, Ai, Liu, Wu and Xing 2018). The mining process had the possibility of penetratinginto the hydrocarbon gas thus causing the explosion. To prevent the same, there needs to be properstorage of chemicals and adequate fire precaution equipments at site to reduce the level of damage.Proper handling procedures should be taught to the workers to assist in saving the situation. Question 2 The act of the airline hitting the power line led to the reduced speed, which led to the plane hittingthe road. However, the flame was sparked by the petroleum impact at the moment the plane hit theground thus leading to the mishap (Aven 2016). Petrol has the ability to explode whenever it hitshard on the ground especially in the case of an aeroplane. The form of energy in the case remainspetroleum in the aircraft which led to the explosion that occurred once the individuals had alighted.Question 3 The threat in the case resulted from the action of transfer which saw the lady apparently fall into thecold water. Since the death of the lady was largely attributed to the exposure in the cold water, itthen becomes the non-energy source responsible for the death of the sick woman. Thus it is a utilityrisk that occurred leading to the unprecedented event of death. Question 4The case presents a property and equipment risk as occasioned by the failure of the cables to handle the bridge. The deaths were caused by the failure in the cables leading to the fall into the river. The case presents a non-energy source mishap caused by the cables.
Risk and Perception Analysis 3
Question 5The case of the cliff falling off was a natural disaster and hence the non-energy source that led to the death. In this case, it can be defined as a property risk which occurred dueto act of nature (Olson and Wu 2017).Question 6The collapse of the building can be attributed as a property risk which led to the collapseof the building. The people killed suffered the damage from the non-energy source in the factory due to the building collapse (Elazegui, Rola and Allis 2016).Question 7The case presents a pandemic risk occasioned by the poisoning of the food by an employee. The effects of the poisoning were felt by the consumers of the product. The factory is to be held to task as its insurance against any pandemic would be forced to cover the compensation of the affected parties (Dover, Kirwin, Hernandez-Ceron and Nelson 2016).Question 8The primary cause of the fire was the arsonist action of lighting up the nearby forest andbush. The fire affected the nearby mine leading to the burn up that spoiled the air qualityof the region. However, the plant owner’s action of removing the water pipesaccelerated the case leading to the build up of fire that would have been prevented werethe pipes available at the time of fire (Haddow, Bullock and Coppola 2017). A cover forproperty and fire would assist the company in overcoming the aftermath of the event.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Risk Perception and Analysislg...
|11
|2349
|107