Objective: To ensure industrial safety for autogas filling stations operated in town, analyzing the current status of the issue and identifying accident causes are performed. Methods: It is shown that most motor vehicles are not designed to use liquefied gas as a fuel and consequently converted to fit gas cylinders for using liquefied petroleum gases (LPG) making the hazard to people much higher and contributing to autogas filling station chain growth. As the filling station process involves highly flammable gases, such facilities may be referred to as fire and explosion hazardous. Results: Making a selection of a typical autogas filling station based on systems analysis methods and also approved methods, an emergency is simulated with a gas-air mixture explosion in implementing a worst-case scenario (LPG escape resulting from a destroyed tank truck forming a primary gas-vapor cloud with the gas-air mixture exploding): injurious effects and potential impact are assessed. It is identified that within a 50 m radius there is a risk that people may be affected and also that buildings and structures placed in close vicinity to it be damaged, which causes a special threat if located close to other autogas filling stations. As one of the primary goals for safe operation of autogas filling stations is keeping rated operating conditions for process equipment components, a number of early preventive measures has to be taken, which would allow avoiding any emergencies. Practical importance: Following the patent study, a dusty cloud generation device based on an explosion overpressure triggering mechanism for explosion containment is contemplated and proposed and its location and operating conditions are recommended, which will make the facility better protected from fire and explosion hazards.

Objective: Performing a multiple factor analysis of the existing risk assessment methods based on the developed applicability characteristics for a given method at risk assessment phases. To ensure both industrial and environmental safety, a risk-based approach has become specifically relevant as one of the efficient instruments used in crisis management. Methods: When a risk analysis for hazardous industrial facilities is performed for potential emergencies, such analysis should be done along two primary lines – identifying the risk for preventive protection and insurance measures to be correctly arranged and implemented, as well as forecasting how the consequences of risks actualized will evolve for immediate protective measures to be arranged and planned in good time. At the same time, there are now scores of risk assessment methods, approaches and methodical guidelines for calculation that are notionally divided into five primary groups: observation methods, supplementary methods, scenario analysis, functional analysis, statistical methods. Each risk assessment method has its own specifics, field of use, relevant parameters and qualitative and quantitative characteristics expressed. Results: maintenance and toxicological risk assessment are excluded from the risk assessment methods, the most efficient methods being identified as follows: Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA), maintenance focused on reliability assurance, Human reliability analysis (HRA), Event tree analysis (ETA), Layer of protection analysis (LOPA), Structured what if technique (SWIFT). Practical importance: For making a reasonable choice between the methods, benchmarking for the above methods has been performed on which basis the most acceptable approaches are identified. The resulting risk assessment method comparison table has a practical relevance for design and research work performed in forecasting and analyzing industrial and environmental hazards.