[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    ICAF

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad.Saim
    The integrity of a gas processing facility's central control building is at high risk from external fires. Two options were proposed to reduce this risk: active fire protection (AFP), which requires more installation time and has higher costs but provides greater risk reduction over a longer lifespan; and passive fire protection (PFP), which has lower installation time and costs but provides less risk reduction and a shorter lifespan. The document requests calculation of the incremental cost of averting a fraction (ICAF) for each option and a recommendation for which, if any, option to select.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    ICAF

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad.Saim
    40 views2 pages
    The integrity of a gas processing facility's central control building is at high risk from external fires. Two options were proposed to reduce this risk: active fire protection (AFP), which requires more installation time and has higher costs but provides greater risk reduction over a longer lifespan; and passive fire protection (PFP), which has lower installation time and costs but provides less risk reduction and a shorter lifespan. The document requests calculation of the incremental cost of averting a fraction (ICAF) for each option and a recommendation for which, if any, option to select.

    Original Description:

    ICAF

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The integrity of a gas processing facility's central control building is at high risk from external fires. Two options were proposed to reduce this risk: active fire protection (AFP), which requires more installation time and has higher costs but provides greater risk reduction over a longer lifespan; and passive fire protection (PFP), which has lower installation time and costs but provides less risk reduction and a shorter lifespan. The document requests calculation of the incremental cost of averting a fraction (ICAF) for each option and a recommendation for which, if any, option to select.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    40 views2 pages

    ICAF

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad.Saim
    The integrity of a gas processing facility's central control building is at high risk from external fires. Two options were proposed to reduce this risk: active fire protection (AFP), which requires more installation time and has higher costs but provides greater risk reduction over a longer lifespan; and passive fire protection (PFP), which has lower installation time and costs but provides less risk reduction and a shorter lifespan. The document requests calculation of the incremental cost of averting a fraction (ICAF) for each option and a recommendation for which, if any, option to select.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    The integrity of the central control building of an onshore gas processing facility is at high risk of external

    fires. Two options have been proposed to reduce the risk:


    1. Active Fire Protection (AFP)

     1600 man-hours to install at $20/manhour


     Labour costs = $32,000
     Capital cost = $1 million
     Reduce PLL by 2.5 x 10-2/year
     Design life = 25 years
    1. Passive Fire Protection (PFP)

     400 man-hours to install at $15 / manhour


     Labour costs = $6,000
     Capital cost = $250,000
     Reduce PLL by 1.75x10-2/year
     Design life = 5 years

    What is the ICAF and proportion factor?


    Which option should be selected (if any)?
    1.1 Exercise Task 3 - Answers

    You might also like