Hazard Identification in a Combined Cycle Power Plant

Hazard Identification in a Combined Cycle Power Plant Fire and Explosion Hazard Identification in a Combined Cycle Power Plant ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Fire and Explosion are the most prevalent accidents at chemical and process industries which can cause serious damage to properties and loss of productions. Fire and explosion hazards are considered as the first and second major hazards in chemical industries [1]. Besides that, release of toxic materials are prevalent accidents in process industries too. Among these three, fire is the most common but explosion is more significant in terms of its damage potential, often leading to fatalities and damage to property [2]. Also, fire can cause human fatalities, serious injuries, financial losses due to damage of equipment and disruption of productive activity, loss of employment and sometimes irreparable damage to the environment and also other costs such as insurance premiums would increase. Hence, identification of danger factors and the ways of controlling fire and explosion accidents in such these industries are very important [3]. In this paper, the hazard of fire and explosion accid ents at processing sections of a combined cycle power plant using one of the well-known hazard index which is called Dow fire and explosion index, has been estimated. The under studying power plant is comprised process unites and facilities such as gas units, vapor units and hydrocarbon storage site. Natural gas and Gasoline are the main chemical materials that are used and stored in these facilities which consume in Turbine units as fuel to produce electrical energy. The Dow Fire and Explosion Index (hereafter called the DOW Index) is a common hazard index [4]. Hazard indices using the numerical values to classify the various sections of process industries in the terms of fire and explosion and identify process areas with a high risk and estimate the losses due to fire and explosion. However quantify risks in different sectors of the industry make it easy to interpret the results [5-7]. The Dow index has been used in many researches across the world. Among those are the studies of Gupta et al. (1997), Roy et al. (2003), Bernatik and Libisova (2004), and Suardin et al. (2007) [8-12]. These researches showed that this index has been used for different purposes such as rating and classifying the danger, determining the economic impacts, and designing safe processing industries too. Suardin et al. concluded that by applying the (FEI) index, it is possible to design safer and more economical reactor and distillation system [13]. This index has been also used in a number of studies in Iran, especially in the chemical industries. The research of Atrkar Roshan et al. (2013), Jafari et al. (2012) and also Ahmadi et al. (2008 2012) are some examples [13-16]. In this study, the fire and explosion hazards of some process units at a combined cycle power plant using Dow index has been estimated. MATERIALS AND METHODS Process Unit Selection The fire and explosion risk analysis system is a step-by-step objective evaluation of the realistic fire, explosion and reactivity potential of process equipment and its contents. The quantitative measurements used in the analysis are based on historic loss data, the energy potential of the material under study and the extent to which loss prevention practices are currently applied [5]. Dow index was developed by the Dow Chemical Company in the 1960s as a tool for plant engineers to give relative value to the risk of individual process unit losses due to fires and explosions and to communicate these risk to management in terms easily understood, i.e., potential of financial losses due to lost production and damage to plant facilities [17]. In fact, Dow index rates the potential occurrence of fire and explosion hazards in a process unit and estimates the costs in money due to fire and explosion accidents in chemical and/or process units. The latest version of Dow fire and explosion in dex guideline published in 1994 was applied to calculate the fire and explosion index at Turbine processes and Gasoline storage site. The general procedure of Dow index calculation is shown in Figure.1 Figure.1: Dow Index Procedure (Dow’s Guideline, 1994) Process Unit Hazards Factor The Dow FEI is calculated from equation (1): Equation (1): FEI = MF Ãâ€" F1 Ãâ€" F2 = MF Ãâ€" F3 Where MF (Material Factor) is a measure of the potential energy released from the fire or explosion produced by combustion or chemical reactions. It is determined by considering the flammability and reactivity of the materials that are exist at process unit and has a range of 1 ±40 [4, 5]. F1 (General process hazard factor) is a measure of reaction and process unit characteristics such as exothermic or endothermic reactions, handling or transfer of chemical materials, outdoor or indoor units, access condition in emergency situations, drainage and spill control at process unit. F2 (Special process hazard) is a measure of chemical material and operations specifications such as toxicity, amount of flammable materials in process or storage unit, use and distance to fired equipment, dust explosion, extreme pressure or sub-atmospheric pressure, equipment’s corrosion and erosion, leakage-joints and packing, rotating equipment and etc. Each item is represented in terms of â€Å"pen alties† and â€Å"credit factors† [14]. F3 (Process unit hazard factor) is derived from the multiplying the F1 and F2 values. According to the value of the calculated index, the fire and explosion hazard of a pertinent process unit is rated as light, moderate, intermediate, heavy or severe which are shown in Table.1 [5]. Table 1: Degree of Hazard for FEI (Dow’s Guideline, 1994) Degree of Hazard for FEI FEI Range Degree of Hazard 1-60 Light 61-96 Moderate 97-127 Intermediate 128-158 Heavy 159-up Severe After the calculation of Dow index, FEI will be able to determine the radius and area of exposure to fire and explosion incidents using equations (2) and (3): Equation (2): Radius of Exposure = 0.84 Ãâ€" Dow FEI Equation (3): Area of Exposure Where, R is the radius of exposure [5]. Loss Control Credit Factors The preventive and protective measures that have been incorporated in the process design to reduce the fire and explosion hazard are taken into account in the form of Loss Control Credit Factors (LCCF). There are three categories of loss control features including; C1 (process control) which is derived from the multiplying by factors such as emergency power, cooling, explosion control, emergency shutdown, computer control, inert gas, operation instructions and procedures, reactive chemical review and other process hazard analysis. C2 (material isolation) is comprised from remote control valves, dump / blowdown, drainage and interlock items and C3 (fire protection) which accounts for leak detection (alarm and shutdown), fireproofing for structural steel, fire water supply, special systems, sprinkler systems, water curtains, foam, portable fire extinguishers / fire monitors and cable fire protection (instrumentation and electrical cables) [5, 17, 18]. Loss control credit factor is calc ulated using equation (4): Equation (4): LCCF: C1Ãâ€"C2Ãâ€"C3 Loss Control features should be selected for the contribution they will actually make to reducing or controlling the unit hazards being evaluated [5]. As well as the Damage Factor is determined from the Process Unit Hazards Factor (F3) and the Material Factor (MF) and referring to Figure 2. Damage Factor represents the overall effect of fire and blast damage resulting from a release of fuel or reactive energy from a Process Unit [5]. MPPD and BI Calculations The replacement value of the equipment within the exposed area in combination with damage factor can be used to derive the Base maximum probable property damage (Base MPPD) [4]. The actual maximum probable property damage (Actual MPPD) is then calculated by multiplying the Base MPPD by loss credit control factor which is shown in equation (5). The Actual MPPD is used to predict the maximum number of days which is the time required to rebuild the plant to its original capacity, the Maximum probable days outage (MPDO). The MPDO is used to estimate the financial loss due to the lost production: the Business interruption (BI) [18]. BI is the lost profit to the company due to an incident and is calculated by the equation (6): Equation (5): Actual MPPD = Base MPPD Ãâ€" loss control credit factor Equation (6): BI ($US) = Ãâ€" VPM Ãâ€" 0.7 Where VPM is the value of production per month. Figure 2: Damage Factor Determination (Dow’s Guideline, 1994) RESULTS The results of Dow index calculations for under studying units are illustrated in Table 2. For all under studying units, radius of exposure, area of exposure, value of area of exposure, damage factor, Base maximum probable property damage (MPPD), loss control credit factor, Actual MPPD, Days outage and BI loss in terms of US dollar has been calculated which are shown in Table 2. Turbine Unit (Methane) Methane as fuel in Turbine unit with the material factor of 21 had a highest material factor among chemical materials that were presented in process units and subsequently based on the result of Dow index value of 321, it can be indicated that Turbine unit with Methane as fuel, had the highest degree of fire and explosion risk (as mentioned in Table 3 which is considered severe). For Turbine unit with Methane fuel, radius exposure and area of exposure were calculated which are 82.2 m and 21227 m2, respectively. Also for this unit, value of area of exposure was estimated 13.8 US million dollars and damage factor is gained 0.83. After that, Base MPPD by multiplying the value of area of exposure and damage factor is derived which is 11.45 US million dollars. Loss control credit factor is estimated 0.36 which by multiplying it into Base MPPD, Actual MMPD is derived 4.12 US million dollars. Maximum probable days outage for this unit is estimated 50 days and finally the loss due to unit pa uses (BI) is calculated 3.03 US million dollars. Turbine Unit (Gasoline) After that, when Turbine unit uses gasoline as fuel has the second risk ranking with Dow index value of 236 and Gasoline Storage Site Gasoline storage site with Dow index value of 56.8 was the least which is ranked as light fire and explosion risk. Table 2: Results of Dow Fire and Explosion Index Calculation Process Unit Turbine Unit Turbine Unit Storage Vessels Major Material Methane[1] Gasoline Gasoline Material Factor 21 16 16 FEI Index 321 236 56.8 Exposure Radius (m) 82.2 60.42 14.5 Area of Exposure (m2) 21227 11468 660 Value of Area of Exposure ($MM) 13.8 7.45 13.58 Damage Factor 0.83 0.68 0.42 Base MPPD ($MM) 11.45 5.07 5.70 Loss Control Credit Factors 0.36 0.36 0.65 Actual MPPD ($MM) 4.12 1.82 3.70 Days Outage (MPDO) 50 30 25 BI Loss ($MM) 3.03 1.82 8.26 Table 3: The Fire and Explosion Index Ranking at Under Studying Units Process Unit FEI Index Degree of Hazard for FEI Light Moderate Intermediate Heavy Severe Turbine Unit (Methane) 321 Turbine Unit (Gasoline) 236 Storage Vessels 56.8   Discussion According to the results of this study, Turbine unit with Methane fuel has the highest degree of fire and explosion risk. Therefore appropriate control and protective measures should be establish to reduce the fire and explosion risks in this unit. In the other hand, according to the gotten results, Turbine units have the sever ranking of fire and explosion risk and in spite of gasoline storage site is considered as lowest risk of fire and explosion, this unit constrains most losses in money due to business interruption. The reason of this matter is related to the great amount of gasoline fuel which is deposited in 4 vessels and it is about 17 million liters. Conclusion In the present study, the Dow FEI in process units of a combined cycle power plant were calculated. Based on the results, Turbine unit that uses Methane as fuel with Dow index value of 321 has the highest degree of fire and explosion risk. Another Turbine unit with gasoline fuel is ranked second with Dow index value of 236 and severe fire and explosion risk and finally, gasoline storage unit is recognized the least unit in consideration of fire and explosion risk. The findings of this study can be used to estimate the loss due to fire and explosion and also can be used as insurance premium. References 1.Ahmadi, S., J. Adl, and M. Ghalehnovi, Relative ranking of fire and explosion in a petrochemical industry by fire and explosion index. THE JOURNAL OF QAZVIN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2011. 2.Khan, F.I. and S. Abbasi, Major accidents in process industries and an analysis of causes and consequences. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1999. 12: p. 361-378. 3.Mahoney, D.G., Large property damage losses in the hydrocarbon-chemical industries: A thirty-year review. 1997: M M Protection Consultants. 4.Khan, F., T. Husain, and S. Abbasi, Safety Weighted Hazard Index (SWeHI): A New, User-friendly Tool for Swift yet Comprehensive Hazard Identification and Safety Evaluation in Chemical Process Industrie. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2001. 79(2): p. 65-80. 5.Chemicals, D., Dow’s fire explosion index hazard classification guide. AIChE Technical Manual, 1994. 6.Etowa, C., et al., Quantification of inherent safety aspects of the Dow indices. Journal of Loss Prevention in the process Industries, 2002. 15(6): p. 477-487. 7.Khan, F.I., R. Sadiq, and P.R. Amyotte, Evaluation of available indices for inherently safer design options. Process Safety Progress, 2003. 22(2): p. 83-97. 8.Gupta, J.P., Application of DOWs fire and explosion index hazard classification guide to process plants in the developing countries. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1997. 10(1): p. 7-15. 9.Roy, P.K., A. Bhatt, and C. Rajagopal, Quantitative risk assessment for accidental release of titanium tetrachloride in a titanium sponge production plant. Journal of hazardous materials, 2003. 102(2): p. 167-186. 10.Bernatik, A. and M. Libisova, Loss prevention in heavy industry: risk assessment of large gasholders. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2004. 17(4): p. 271-278. 11.Suardin, J., M. Sam Mannan, and M. El-Halwagi, The integration of Dows fire and explosion index (FEI) into process design and optimization to achieve inherently safer design. Journal of loss prevention in the process industries, 2007. 20(1): p. 79-90. 12.Suardin, J., The Integration of Dow’s Fire and Explosion Index into Process Design and Optimization to Achieve an Inherently Safer Design. 2005, Texas AM University. 13.Roshan, S.A. and M.J. Gharedagh, Economic Consequence Analysis of Fire and Explosion in Petrochemical Feed and Product Pipelines Network. 2013. 14.Jafari, M.J., M. Zarei, and M. Movahhedi, The Credit of Fire and Explosion Index for Risk Assessment of Iso-Max Unit in an Oil Refinery. International Journal of Occupational Hygiene, 2012. 4(1): p. 10-16. 15.Ahmadi, S., et al., Determination of fire and explosion loss in a chemical industry by fire and explosion index. The Journal of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, 2012. 15(4): p. 68-76. 16.Ahmadi, S., J. Adl, and S. Varmazyar, Risk Quantitative Determination of Fire and Explosion in a Process Unit By Dow’s Fire and Explosion Index. Iran Occupational Health Journal, 2008. 5(1): p. 39-46. 17.Jensen, N. and S.B. Jà ¸rgensen, Taking credit for loss control measures in the plant with the likely loss fire and explosion index (LL-FEI). Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2007. 85(1): p. 51-58. 18.Sinnott, R., Coulson Richardsons chemical engineering. 1996: Butterworth-Heinemann. [1] Methane is the major component by more than 96 % Concentration of Natural Gas which is consumed as fuel at Turbine Unit in hot seasons of year, alternatively. Hence the MF of natural gas was determined from Methane which has the highest MF value.

Art Values Essay -- essays research papers

People from all eras have communicated what they value through art, architecture and style. This statement is obvious. The first example I will discuss is that of the ancient Egyptian society. Their society was one that was based upon death. Everything in their lives revolved around preparing themselves for the afterlife. Included in that is their paintings; they contained the entire figure of the human, making sure their was no limb left unseen, for fear that it would not be their in the after life. Another example of how the ancient Egyptian’s values were expressed through art was the lavish funerary complexes built for their pharaohs. They were monstrous, and intended entirely to help propel the deceased pharaoh into the next life. Ancient Greece was a society of self-perceived beauty. They loved to look at themselves, especially if they were male. They male gender was perceived as perfection in that time period, and as such it should be portrayed in all of its glory, hence the no clothing policy. They sculpted, painted and created in what they believed to be perfection. They created all buildings in perfect rectangles, since they believed that rectangles were the epitome of perfection, the â€Å"golden section† if you will. Greek art was a portrayal of their ideals, which is why most people call this period the idealistic stage in Art history. The Romans were very much like their Greek counter parts. Romans, as a whole, loved Greek art. They enjoyed looking at it and even t...

Case Study †AES Corporation Essay

Dennis Bakke, the CEO of AES, a company that develops, builds and operates electric power plants, sat in his office late in 1996 and thought about the question that was perennially posed to him: could AES, soon to have some 25,000 people located literally all over the world following a recent purchase of power plants in Kazakhstan, continue to operate with virtually no staff functions and, specifically, without any human resource staff anywhere in the corporation? The absence of centralized staff — or, for that matter, much staff at all — had been one of the themes guiding the design and operation of the corporation since its founding. The company, in addition to having no personnel department, had no public relations, legal, environmental, or strategic planning departments. Its chief financial officer, Barry Sharp, saw his job not so much as running a centralized finance function but rather as helping all the AES employees as they made important decisions about financi ng and investments in a very capital intensive business. But the company was becoming much larger and increasingly geographically dispersed. Perhaps those early decisions needed to be rethought. Could what worked for so long continue to work as the corporation grew and operated increasingly on a global basis? Could the advantages of flexibility and having virtually every employee feel responsible for almost all aspects of the corporation’s operations continue to outweigh the costs of an absence of specialization and the need to have people always learning new tasks and new things? Was this continuous learning of new things really a disadvantage at all, or as Bakke thought, how one created a real â€Å"learning organization?† What Bakke recognized was that AES was different from most other corporations. How different should and could it remain? And if it remained different, how should it deal with the strains that growth and geographic differentiation would inevitably place on an organization that had always been managed by a strong set of values and a shared culture? This case was  prepared by Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer as a basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. Support for this case was provided by the Human Resources Initiative of the Graduate School of Business. The author would also like to acknowledge Robert Waterman for his introduction to the company. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY AES (originally called Applied Energy Services) was founded in 1981 by Roger Sant and Dennis Bakke. Originally supplying consulting services to the energy industry, the company began operating its first power plant in Houston in 1986 and went public as AES in 1991. By the end of its 1995 fiscal year, AES was selling electricity to customers in the United States, England, Northern Ireland, Argentina, and China, and had plants under construction in Pakistan. A list of AES operating facilities, their size, and fuel source, is provided in Exhibit 1. The company saw itself as â€Å"the global power company† and had as its mission â€Å"supplying electricity to customers world-wide in a socially responsible way.†Ã¢â‚¬Ëœ The electric power generation business has always been very competitive and the competition was increasing. Many subsidiaries of large oil and gas companies, organizations with substantial financial resources, were entering the business. The business was also complex. Building or purchasing existing power plants was a process that was heavily influenced by governmental decisions and actions, and often took two to four years at least to complete. AES owned and operated its plants under a number of different financial arrangements. Some plants were whollyowned by AES. Others were owned under various joint venture arrangements. For instance, the Medway plant in England was joint venture between AES and two privatized British utilities, Southern Electric and SEE-BOARD. The plant in San Nicolas, Argentina was owned by a partnership in which AES held 70% interest and Community Energy Alternatives, Inc. and the people at the plant held the rest. AES’s operations in China were conducted by a separate subsidiary, AES  China Generating Company Ltd., that was capitalized in February, 1994 with funds from AES and an initial public offering. The company was traded on the over-the-counter market, but recently AES had announced plans to purchase the interest in the subsidiary it did not own. Thus, financing and ownership arrangements were varied and often required protracted negotiations and the ability to work with a number of different partners. Most of the growth in demand for electricity, as well as most of the privatization opportunities, were occurring in developing or emerging economies and three-quarters of AES’s development people and financial resources were focused on those markets in 1996. AES saw as its competitive advantage against larger and better financed competitors its agility or speed and its ability to commit corporate equity and to arrange complex financial transactions. It also had some â€Å"disadvantages,† particularly its emphasis on integrity that precluded the company from doing some things to obtain business that not all of its competitors were as reluctant to do. The company’s two founders both had extensive experience in government prior to founding AES, and to some extent this helped steel their determination to avoid creating a bureaucratic organization resembling the government. Bakke, a 1970 MBA graduate from Harvard Business School, had worked following graduation at the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and then in the Office of Management and Budget before moving to the Mellon Institute’s Energy Productivity Center in Washington, D.C. There, he and Sant, another Harvard MBA who had headed the Ford administration’s energy conservation efforts, worked together and AES 1995 Annual Report, p. 1. wrote a book, Creating Abundance: America’s Least-Cost Energy Strategy. Out of the research for that book and their work on energy policy for the Ford and Carter administrations came the idea to start AES as a participant in the new independent power producer industry. Both Bakke and Sant are individuals with strong moral convictions and indeed both have a touch of the missionary in them. Bakke is very active in both charitable and  Christian church (Baptist) activities. This social conscience and sense of a higher purpose or calling has pervaded the operation and management of AES since its inception. For example, Bakke’s description of the purpose or mission of AES is â€Å"to steward resources to meet the needs of society.† 2 From the beginning, AES has had a strong set of core values and beliefs about people that it works hard to operationalize on a continuing basis. The four core values are: Integrity †¦ Integrity comes from the Latin word, `integra,’ which means `wholeness.’ By carefully weighing all factors–ethical concerns, stakeholder interests, and societal needs–AES strives to act with integrity in all of its activities. Fairness . . . the term `fairness’ means `justice.’ Often `fairness’ is confused with `sameness’ †¦ We don’t mean that. AES aspires to give everyone special treatment. Everyone is unique †¦ And the effects of treating people justly in corporate systems and organizations can be profound. Social responsibility. The most socially responsible thing a corporation can do is to do a superb job of meeting a need in society. Therefore, companies must carefully manage capital, employees and intellect to meet a societal need. For AES, the first step in this process is to ensure that every generating plant is operated in a clean, reliable, safe, and cost-effective manner. But we have chosen to go beyond these essentials †¦ That is why we plant millions of trees to offset carbon dioxide and build new schools and take numerous other steps to improve our environment and build communities. Fun †¦ For us, `fun’ means establishing an environment in which people can use their gifts and skills to make a difference in society without fear of being squelched. Creating a fun workplace environment requires a positive view of humanity that begins with the people who work in the corporation.3 AES also has a set. of core assumptions about people that it tries to use in design ing and managing its organization. These assumptions are that AES people: 1) Are creative, thinking individuals–capable of learning and making decisions, like to control their environment and can be trusted; 2) Are responsible–can be held accountable; An important element of AES is its commitment to four major â€Å"shared† values .. . AES believes that earning a fair profit is an important result of providing a quality product to its customers. However, if the Company perceives a conflict between these values and profits, the Company will try to adhere to its values–even though doing so might result in diminished profits or foregone opportunities. Moreover, the Company seeks to adhere to these values not as a means to achieve economic success, but because adherence is a worthwhile goal in and of itself The Company intends to continue these policies after this offering.s To AES, simply maximizing profits is not the primary objective of the corporation. Dennis Bakke has written: Where do profits fit? Profits . . . are not any corporation’s main goal. Profits are to a corporation much like breathing is to life. Breathing is not the goal of life, but without breath, life ends. Similarly, without turning a profit, a corporation, too, will cease to exist. . . . At AES we strive not to make profits the ultimate driver of the corporation (although I admit we slip from time to time in this regard). My desire is that the principles to which we strive would take preeminence.6 AES operationalizes its values and its commitment to them in myriad operating policies and practices. An example, drawn from a common stock offering prospectus in 1993, helps to illustrate how the company turns its values into actions: Most of the Company’s plants operate without shift supervisors. The project subsidiaries are responsible for all major facility-specific business functions, including financing and capital expenditures†¦. Every AES person has been encouraged to participate  in strategic planning and new plant design for the Company. The Company has generally organized itself into multi-skilled teams to develop projects, rather than forming `staff’ groups †¦ to carry out specialized functions. Two examples illustrate these principles of decentralization and empowerment in action. Most financial decisions at this financially-leveraged company are not made by the chief financial officer, Barry Sharp, but rather by AES project teams comprised largely of people with no formal training in finance. For instance, â€Å"hard as it is to imagine, CFO Sharp has raised less than $300 million of the approximately $3.5 billion of funding for AES’s 10 power plants. The multidisciplinary project team working on each new plant is charged with that task, even if the team has little finance experience. Bankers phone Sharp expecting him to call the shots, but he demurs and instead gives the bankers a list of the team members so the bankers can call them directly. At the AES plant in Thames, Connecticut, a task force including front-line people invest the plant’s debt reserves, negotiating directly with investment bankers and, in the process, learning a lot about finance and fi nancial markets. Pam Strunk, the financial superintendent at the plant, said that it was important that â€Å"they have the fun and novelty of doing something that’s different from what they do all day. If we lose 100 basis points for a few days, then that’s the price we pay.† 8 Another example comes from a description of how the corporation built a $404 million project in Cumberland, Maryland. The project took ten years to put together and was handled by a team of 10 people who â€Å"secured 36 separate permit approvals involving two dozen regulatory agencies and arranged financing that involved tax-exempt bonds and 10 lenders. Normally, such projects require hundreds of workers, each with small specific tasks to perform within large corporations.†9 What is particularly noteworthy is the composition of the team. With two exceptions, they were all under 40 years old and many had little or no previous experience doing what they did on the project. Paul Burdick, a mechanical engineer with no MBA or any formal training in finance, handled the complex financing of the project. Ann Murtlow, the team leader, was a thirty-five year old chemical engineer who also did not have an MBA degree. The composition and operation of the team illustrates a core AES concept of allowing people to try new things. Although eschewing the pursuit of profits or maximizing shareholder value as the primary objective of the company and, in fact, doing numerous things to operate according to the four core values, the company has nonetheless been very financially successful. As seen in Exhibit 2 using data drawn from its 1995 Annual Report, the firm enjoyed a 105% growth in revenues between 1991 and 1995 and during that period grew its earnings per share more than 113% while its total assets grew almost 70% and its shareholders’ equity grew 289%. The annual report also illustrates some other unique things about the company and how it views itself. The document lists by name each of the 1,258 people who work for the company on pages 49-53. The discussion of operations in the letter to the shareholders has, as its first section, one on Shared Values/Principles. That section reported on the results of the annual employee survey and discussed both improvements (â€Å"there is less concern this year about an imbalance between shareholder and other stakeholder interests. There is also less fear that our principles will erode as we create businesses in many nations†) as well as problems (â€Å"Some of our people at Thames . In eight years, the value of a share of AES stock went from $2 to $250, and $10,000 invested in AES in 1982 would now be worth $10 million. In late 1996, the company’s shares were near an alltime high and were selling at a multiple of about 30 times earnings, indicating that Wall Street appreciated — even if it did not always fully understand — at least the financial aspects of the AES story. THE THAMES, CONNECTICUT PLANT Although no plant at AES is exactly like any other, in part because of the value placed on decentralization, the operation in Connecticut is typical of AES. The Thames plant is located in Uncasville, Connecticut, near New London, and about 45 minutes from Providence, Rhode Island. The plant is located on only seven acres and is in close proximity to neighboring houses. The plant cost $260 million to construct and uses coal for fuel. It began commercial operations in March, 1990, supplying 181 megawatts of electricity to Connecticut Light and Power and up to 100,000 pounds of steam per hour to Stone Container’s paper recycling plant that is adjacent to AESThames. The plant has operated on average at over 95 percent of capacity since it opened, compared to 83 percent for the industry as a whole. Consistent with the AES value of social responsibility, the plant strives to be a â€Å"good neighbor† to those living nearby. A visitor to the plant is immediately struck by its cleanliness, and the people who work in the plant are proud of its appearance. The walls of the plant exterior are very light colored (off-white), so that any dirt would be immediately visible. The color of the walls was intentionally chosen to encourage respect for the physical environment and cleanliness. The place where the coal is unloaded from the barges that bring it up the Connecticut River is also immaculate. The coal handling system is covered to  avoid excess dust or debris getting into the surroundings and the unloading dock and surrounding area is swept by a mechanical sweeper after the once a week delivery. There is no smell of sulfur in the air, and in fact, no odor at all. The attitude of cleanliness extends inside the plant as well. For instance, there are two â€Å"lunch rooms,† although both have stoves, and one has a microwave oven, cooktops, refrigerator, and   dishwasher as well, which makes them more than a typical plant eating area. Quite elaborate meals are cooked there. Both lunch rooms are clean with no dirty dishes sitting around. The cabinetry is of excellent quality and appearance as are the appliances. The turbine rooms are also imma culate. In keeping with AES’s social responsibility and concern for the environment, the AES Thames plant has funded a project to plant 52 million trees in Guatemala, designed to reduce the greenhouse effect produced by the burning of coal to produce power. The number of trees was selected based on estimates of the number required to absorb the entire amount of carbon dioxide produced in the plant during its anticipated 40-year life span. In the fall of 1996, Thames employed a total of 59 people, including five in adininistration, seven area superintendents, nine in maintenance, five in material handling and processing, eight instrument and electrical repair technicians, and 20 operations technicians. The full staffing level for the plant is 63 positions, and hiring was occurring at the time. A number of the plant’s employees had previously worked either for the Navy or General Dynamics at the nearby Groton, Connecticut shipyard. About 20% of the people in the plant have college degrees, including Associate’s degrees. Recall, these are the people that are handling the investment of the plant’s debt reserves of several millions of dollars and essentially making all of the decisions in a collaborative environment. There is very little emphasis on  formal credentials in the hiring process. And this is true throughout AES. The company has about twenty to thirty MBAs, many of whom have been in the company a while. Most have come from their home (non-U.S.) countries. At AES, no one gets hired into the company at a senior level, and the company tends not to use headhunters for jobs at any level. The company also has tried not to hire directly into project director (new development) positions. AES-Thames has an extremely low turnover rate, as does AES generally. One of the reasons for the low turnover is that AES is a different and special place and people know it and value that fact. To be written about in the Wall Street Journal and other publications, to receive many visits, reinforces the pride and feeling of uniqueness that AES people share. People do often move within the company. Out of perhaps 70 people who were in the Thames plant when it began, only 4-5 people have left the company in seven or eight years. The low turnover is also because, as one person put it, â€Å"we all have the ability to expand what we do.† The plant organization has three levels — the plant manager, the seven area superintendents, and the front-line people. Because the facility operates continuously, there is some shift work. After some experimentation, people now work three twelve-hour shifts and then have three days off. They then rotate between the night and day shifts. The first shift is from 6:30 in the morning until 6:30 at night, and the second shift is from 6:30 P.M. to 6:30 A.M. Maintenance has a standard 40 hour week but the individuals have pagers, and they rotate responsibility for off-hours coverage.

Reasons For Applying The Fourth Amendment - 2050 Words

Criminal Procedure Mid Term 1. Identify and describe the three possible alternatives for applying the Fourth Amendment to â€Å"stop and frisk† situations. Also, identify which alternative the U.S. Supreme Court adopted and explain why. The three alternatives or interpretations that can be used for applying the fourth amendment of â€Å"stop and frisk† are: 1. The fourth amendment applies only to full searches and arrests; so short of full arrest and searches, officers’ discretion controls their contacts with individuals in public places. 2. Even brief street detentions are arrests, and pat downs are searches, so the police can’t do anything unless they’ve got probable cause. 3. Stops and frisks are searches and seizures, so officers have to back them up with suspicious facts and circumstances. But, they’re â€Å"minor† ones, so they require fewer facts and circumstances than arrests and searches to back them up. (Samaha, 2015) They Supreme Court found that alternative 1 and 2 were unacceptable. Alternative 1 did not apply at all to street encounters and that people on the street are then subject to what and who ever any officer felt like. Alternative 2 was not in the best interest of the officer and if the officer could not take any action until they had probable cause their crime control would suffer and they may never see the suspects again. The U.S. Supreme Court adopted alternative 3. The court believed that the fourth amendment gave police enough power to â€Å"freeze† suspiciousShow MoreRelatedThe Exclusionary Rule 823 Words   |  4 Pagesthe caw of Wolf v. Colorado, 38 U.S. 25, 27-28, did the U.S. Supreme Court take the first step toward applying the exclusionary rule to the states by ruling that the Fourth Amendment was applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which states: the security of one’s privacy against arbitrary intrusion by the police-which is at the core of the Fourth Amendment- is basic to a free society. It is therefore implicit in the â€Å"concept of ordered liberty† and as suchRead MoreWelfare Drug Testing Should Not Be Allowed1416 Words   |  6 Pageswelfare, and it is expensive and ineffective . For all these reasons mandatory welfare drug testing should be stopped. Welfare drug testing is a complete and utter violation of the rights of people on welfare. The drug test is a violation of the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. One way that welfare drug testing breaks this amendment is because the amendment states that the government or any subsection of the governmentRead MoreDrug Testing Welfare Recipients Should Not Be Drug Tested911 Words   |  4 Pagesonline. This is not only negative, but its harmful because the first offensive for testing positive is to go to rehab or lose your benefits for a year. The second reason I believe that drug testing welfare recipients is ineffective is that it is discriminating, unconstitutional and it challenges everything against the Fourth Amendment which states the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,Read MoreThe Welfare Recipients Should Not Be Drug Tested907 Words   |  4 Pagesonline. This is not only negative, but its harmful because the first offensive for testing positive is to go to rehab or lose your benefits for a year. The second reason I believe that drug testing welfare recipients is ineffective is that it is discriminating, unconstitutional and it challenges everything against the Fourth Amendment which states the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,Read MoreThe Drug Of Drug Testing Welfare Recipients912 Words   |  4 Pagesonline. This is not only negative, but its harmful because the first offensive for testing positive is to go to rehab or lose your benefits for a year. The second reason I believe that drug testing welfare recipients is ineffective is that it is discriminating, unconstitutional and it challenges everything against the Fourth Amendment, which states the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violatedRead MoreName Of The Case: Katz V. The United States. 389 Us 3471203 Wo rds   |  5 Pagesarguing that the recordings violated his fourth amendment right to which the Court of Appeals rejected this point, noting the absence of a physical intrusion into the phone booth itself. The Court granted certiorari. Issue: Does the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require the police to obtain a search warrant in order to wiretap a public pay phone? Holding: Although the Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations andRead MoreWelfare Reform For Drug Test Recipients Essay1719 Words   |  7 Pagesrefuse to take drug test prior to receiving their welfare checks. Since 1996 there has been a call for welfare reform to drug test recipients prior to admission, but any attempts have been unsuccessful because they are viewed as a violation of the fourth amendment, more harmful for children, and an unnecessary expense. These common fallacies have been the main arguments leading the anti-drug testing campaign, but in the past few years many taxpayers have grown increasingly tired of their money being givenRead MoreThe Fourth Amendment1515 Words   |  7 PagesThe Fourth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights which was established in the seventeenth and eighteenth century English common law. Aside from the rest of the amendments in the Bill of Rights the Fourth Amendment can be traced back to a strong public reaction from some cases back in the 1760s. Two of these cases happened in England and one case happened in the colonies. These cases involved some pamphleteers who would pass out pamphlets to the public in order to spread their word around. TheseRead MoreThe Rights Of The United States V. Miller1244 Words   |  5 Pagesreveal a portrait of private life. However, current law gives little privacy protection to information about these activities, overstepping the First and Fourth Amendment safeguards that are guaranteed to individual freedoms. There are two cases to be discussed, Smith v. Maryland and United States v. Miller, two of the most important Fourth Amendment decisions of the 20th century. â€Å"In these two cases, the Court held that people are not entitled to an expectation of privacy in information they voluntarilyRead More Drug Testing Is Illegal Essay example943 Words   |  4 Pages Making a person take a drug test violates their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights under the constitution of the United States of America. Recently, there has been an increase in companies and schools using drug test. Some companies force their employees to submit to a drug test before being hired and randomly while employed. High school sport regulations require that all student athletes give consent to being randomly drug tested. Other schools are going as far as making all students give consent