Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Living With Legacy Risk – the Limits of Practicalities?

Version 1 : Received: 24 February 2021 / Approved: 25 February 2021 / Online: 25 February 2021 (16:59:44 CET)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Ale, B.J.M.; Hartford, D.N.D.; Slater, D.H. Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities? Sustainability 2021, 13, 3004. Ale, B.J.M.; Hartford, D.N.D.; Slater, D.H. Living with Legacy Risk—The Limits of Practicalities? Sustainability 2021, 13, 3004.

Abstract

Legacy risks from infrastructures and industrial installations often reveal themselves when a potential for failure has been discovered much later than at the stage of the design and construction of a structure. In which case, there might already be a problem with the legacy installation, or even a crisis, without having had an accident. When the hazard cannot be taken away, the question arises as to how much effort, if any, should be spent on improving the situation. The usefulness of the three archetypical approaches to this problem: setting a standard, the As Low As Reasonably Practicable approach and a case-by-case discourse approach are discussed for their applicability for these legacy risks. Although it would be desirable to retrofit legacy risks to previously set legal requirements as is the case when acceptability limits are set in law or demonstration of ALARP is demanded, it may be impossible to reduce the residual risk to an otherwise acceptable level without taking away or replacing the infrastructure, which is not acceptable either. Therefor in conclusion the only available solution to persistent legacy risk problems seems to be to have a thorough discussion with all relevant stakeholders until an agreement is in some way found.

Keywords

ALARP; Discourse; Cost Benefit Analysis

Subject

Engineering, Automotive Engineering

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.