Reconstruction of historical exposures in the US nickel alloy industry and the implications for carcinogenic hazard and risk assessments

2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna J. Sivulka ◽  
Steven K. Seilkop
2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine von Stackelberg ◽  
Donna Vorhees ◽  
Dwayne Moore ◽  
Jerome Cura ◽  
Todd Bridges

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 1441-1464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell A. Green ◽  
Julian J. Bommer

Probabilistic assessments of the potential impact of earthquakes on infrastructure entails the consideration of smaller magnitude events than those generally considered in deterministic hazard and risk assessments. In this context, it is useful to establish if there is a magnitude threshold below which the possibility of triggering liquefaction can be discounted because such a lower bound is required for probabilistic liquefaction hazard analyses. Based on field observations and a simple parametric study, we conclude that earthquakes as small as moment magnitude 4.5 can trigger liquefaction in extremely susceptible soil deposits. However, for soil profiles that are suitable for building structures, the minimum earthquake magnitude for the triggering of liquefaction is about 5. We therefore propose that in liquefaction hazard assessments of building sites, magnitude 5.0 be adopted as the minimum earthquake size considered, while magnitudes as low as 4.5 may be appropriate for some other types of infrastructure.


Author(s):  
Moness Rizkalla ◽  
R. S. (Rod) Read

Undertaking a systematic pipeline geohazard assessment may be driven by the design and regulatory permitting needs for proposed new pipelines or as an input to the integrity management of operating pipeline assets. Yet the leading international pipeline codes do not provide explicit direction on undertaking such assessments, rather providing considerable latitude in the guidance to do so which in turn provides several options. The methods for identifying and assessing the potential likelihood and severity of geohazards vary significantly, from purely expert judgment-based approaches relying largely on visual observations of geomorphology to analytically-intensive methods incorporating phenomenological and/or mechanistic models and route, pipeline properties and, where applicable, operational monitoring data. Each of these methods can be used to assess hazard and risk associated with specific geohazards in terms of qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative approaches provided that associated underlying assumptions are clearly understood. Some of these methods are better suited to provide a continuous contiguous geohazard risk assessment for a pipeline system while others are better suited for localized site-specific risk assessments. Following a brief review of pipeline codes, this paper provides an overview of the range of pipeline geohazard assessment approaches and explores the “fitness for purpose” strategy that allows for continuing improvement during design stages and into operations.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Puleo ◽  
Steven E. Kozlowski

PurposeAmid growing attention from investors, regulators and advisory firms in recent years, this study assesses whether managers exploit private information to time share-pledge transactions and extract personal benefits while avoiding unintended market scrutiny.Design/methodology/approachWe use hand-collected pledging data for a random sample of S&P 1500 firms to examine whether private information influences insider share-pledging activity using Heckman selection and two-part hurdle models of the pledge decision. We also conduct an event study analysis of announcement returns to measure market reactions to pledging news and determine whether share-pledge disclosures affect investor risk assessments.FindingsConsistent with insiders timing pledges prior to anticipated performance declines, both the likelihood and level of pledging increase significantly with negative earnings surprises. New share-pledges precede significant decreases in abnormal returns, and public announcement of new pledging corresponds with significant negative cumulative abnormal returns. The evidence suggests that insiders exploit private information to time pledges, and that investors update risk assessments and value estimates based on information conveyed by these transactions.Practical implicationsOur findings hold important implications for governance and regulation of pledged shares, indicating that permissive reporting requirements in the US facilitate informed pledging and may undermine incentive alignment between managers and shareholders. The analysis promotes transaction-specific disclosures and transparent corporate policies for insider share-pledging.Originality/valueOurs is among the first empirical analyses of share-pledging in US firms and the first to examine the role of private information in pledging decisions. We offer novel evidence on the opportunistic use of pledged shares and provide insight to predictors of share-pledging behavior.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Eberenz ◽  
Samuel Lüthi ◽  
David N. Bresch

<p>Spatially explicit weather and climate risk assessments utilize impact functions (IFs) to translate hazard intensity into economic impact. However, global scale risk assessments are often lacking regionally calibrated IFs. In the case of tropical cyclones (TCs), IFs calibrated for the US have thus so far been applied for assessments of direct economic risk in other parts of the world. For example, in industrialized East Asian countries, where many TCs make landfall, these IFs lead to modelled damages orders of magnitude larger than reported. To improve the global representation of TC vulnerability, we calibrate regional IFs in a risk modelling framework with TC hazard intensity represented by high resolution maximum sustained wind speed. The calibration is based on track data and reported economic damages for 424 TCs making landfall on 62 countries worldwide, accounting for 76% of normalized reported damages from 1980 to 2017.</p><p>With our calibration we identify idealized IFs for eight world regions. These eight idealized IFs are based on two complementary optimization functions, one focusing on the deviation per event and the other on total damage per region. The IFs from the two approaches agree well for North America but deviate for other world regions. This reflects large uncertainties in model setup and input data. Sources of these uncertainties can be (i) ocean basin specific TC characteristics, (ii) the simplified representation of TC hazard intensity by wind speed alone, (iii) the assumed inventory of asset exposure per country, (iv) adaptation and development of the built environment over time, and (v) large uncertainties and biases in the reported damage data. In addition to the optimization, we computed best fitting IF steepness for each single TC event. Best fitting IF steepness shows a wide spread within each region, illustrating the model setup’s limitations when it comes to simulating the precise impact of single events. The spread in IF steepness can thus be used to inform probabilistic TC impact modelling beyond the use of a single deterministic IF, implicitly accounting for the uncertainties in model and input data.</p><p>Despite their limitations, the regionally calibrated IFs represent an improvement compared to globally applying IFs calibrated for the US, allowing for global scale TC risk assessments. The entire model setup is based on open data and made publicly available as part of TC module of the free, open-source natural catastrophe impact modelling project CLIMADA (https://github.com/CLIMADA-project/climada_python).</p><p>Future research should focus on a more adequate representation of TC hazard as a combination of wind, storm surge and torrential rain. In order to render this successful, it would be greatly beneficial for future reporting to contain information about this split, too. In addition, research on the reasons behind the large inter-regional differences in calibrated IF steepness would further improve our understanding on global TC vulnerabilities.</p>


2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
B D Beck

A full presentation of relevant information, including both non–adverse and beneficial effects, of chemicals is important to developing sound and balanced risk assessments. Such considerations are not new. For example, the American Thoracic Society has developed criteria for defining adverse and non–adverse pulmonary effects. Failing to allow risk assessors to even consider non–adverse and beneficial effects will discourage the use of information from developing technologies, such as genomics, and from new understandings of dose–response relationships, as reflected in the hormetic model. Failing to provide such information to risk managers potentially provides a biased perspective on risk


2007 ◽  
Vol preprint (2007) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Katherine von Stackelberg ◽  
Donna Vorhees ◽  
Dwayne Moore ◽  
Jerome Cura ◽  
Todd Bridges

Eos ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 84 (23) ◽  
pp. 213 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Zimbelman ◽  
Robert J. Watters ◽  
Steve Bowman ◽  
Ian Firth

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document