In our country, due to historical and cognitive reasons, we still encounter many issues when selecting various testing instruments, specifically manifested as:
Detection of combustible gases is more critical than that of toxic gases.
b. Detection of gases that may cause acute poisoning is more critical than that of gases that may lead to chronic poisoning.
The tragic lessons learned from explosion accidents caused by numerous flammable gas leaks have led to a heightened emphasis on flammable gas detection. It can be said that in any oil refining or chemical plant, most hazardous environments use flammable gas detectors.
Equipping workers with combustible gas detectors alone is far from sufficient to truly protect their safety and health. While it is undeniable that most volatile hazardous gases are flammable, the catalytic combustion-type Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) detectors are not the best choice for all types of combustible gases. This is because the lower detection limit for combustible gases, excluding methane, is significantly higher than their permissible concentration.
For hazardous and toxic gases like benzene and ammonia, relying solely on flammable gas detectors is a highly dangerous approach. Benzene's lower explosive limit is 1.2%, and its calibration factor on a flammable gas detector is 2.51, meaning the concentration displayed by a detector calibrated with methane is only 40% of the actual concentration. Consequently, the minimum detectable alarm concentration for benzene using a flammable gas detector is 10% LEL, which equals 10% * 1.2% * 2.51 = 3.0 * 10^-3. This concentration is nearly 600 times higher than the allowable concentration of 5 * 10^-6. Similarly, the alarm concentration for ammonia detection using a flammable gas detector, which is 1.5 * 10^-2, is about 1000 times higher than its allowable concentration of 5 * 10^-5. Therefore, choosing a specific toxic gas detector based on the gas being tested is safer and more reliable than simply opting for a flammable gas detector.
Additionally, we currently place a strong emphasis on detecting gases that can cause acute poisoning, such as hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen cyanide. However, our attention to detecting gases that lead to chronic poisoning, like aromatic hydrocarbons and alcohols, is insufficient. The latter pose no less of a threat to worker health and safety than those causing acute poisoning. This is not only due to a lack of awareness, but also because, in the past, the market lacked detectors capable of detecting lower concentrations of these gases.
As technological advancements and health awareness grow, people no longer settle for "happy to come to work, safe to go home." Instead, they strive for high quality and conditions of living. People are not just concerned with their work today, but also with tomorrow — their retirement life. Therefore, it is essential to continuously introduce new ideas and approaches in industrial hygiene and safety to prevent future tragedies.
News Center Co., Ltd.
