Should a fertiliser factory make a defective start?

At least four major glitches are most likely to impede production from the very moment the factory begins its operation

It is often said that the beginning is the most important part of any work, but if there are identified potential errors in the beginning of a big-scale task, it is better to rethink many times before beginning it. And it is not happening in the case of launching of Sylhet’s Shahjalal Fertiliser Factory. Based on reliable sources, at least four major glitches are most likely to impede production from the very moment the factory begins its operation. 
First, the trial production phase was reportedly disrupted in mid-August after a slip-up was detected in the methane attar cooler section of the factory and somewhat bafflingly the factory was also supposed to begin its operations from the month of August. It, however, didn’t happen due to political unrest. We fail to understand why wasn’t the trial phase conducted at least a couple of months prior to its launching?   
Second, why weren’t the four latest allegations regarding the lack of technical experts, weak pressure in gas supply, the missing provision of a bypass line and the option for supply steam appropriately addressed during the planning and construction of the factory?
Understandably, all of the above allegations are technical and, according to the general rule of thumb, they should have been included as pre-conditions in the factory’s feasibility study. We are here not to assume that the factory would be built by violating its feasibility report. Moreover, the apprehension is turning even graver, as a recent study discovered that the factory’s vessel and pipeline insulation is not properly constructed. The latest errors have now also added a problematic dry-gas-sealing system. 
It is expected that the Bangladesh Chemical Industries Corporation (BCIC) and industry experts and an investigation team to look into the details of all allegations. The committee should specifically explain the technical issues before it submits its findings. It’s urgent and imperative, since the project director has ruled out all allegations. Though he reportedly agreed on the shortfalls regarding the lack of spare parts and an inadequate place for storing Urea and other raw materials but the two could have been easily avoided if both issues were rigorously monitored as per the needs of a proper business plan and structural feasibility study.
However, now that the faults are piling up the government’s concerned authority for dealing with these problems should immediately sit together in order to prevent potential industrial disasters. Lastly, BCIC must draw important lessons from the recent Ammonia tank explosions in one of its factories in Chittagong barely a week ago where 50 workers reportedly fell sick. This disaster too was preventable.
The bottom line is: a well-planned delayed start is preferable to an erroneous quick start.

 

Should a fertiliser factory make a defective start?

At least four major glitches are most likely to impede production from the very moment the factory begins its operation

It is often said that the beginning is the most important part of any work, but if there are identified potential errors in the beginning of a big-scale task, it is better to rethink many times before beginning it. And it is not happening in the case of launching of Sylhets Shahjalal Fertiliser Factory. Based on reliable sources, at least four major glitches are most likely to impede production from the very moment the factory begins its operation. First, the trial production phase was reportedly disrupted in mid-August after a slip-up was detected in the methane attar cooler section of the factory and somewhat bafflingly the factory was also supposed to begin its operations from the month of August. It, however, didnt happen due to political unrest. We fail to understand why wasnt the trial phase conducted at least a couple of months prior to its launching? Second, why werent the four latest allegations regarding the lack of technical experts, weak pressure in gas supply, the missing provision of a bypass line and the option for supply steam appropriately addressed during the planning and construction of the factory? Understandably, all of the above allegations are technical and, according to the general rule of thumb, they should have been included as pre-conditions in the factorys feasibility study. We are here not to assume that the factory would be built by violating its feasibility report. Moreover, the apprehension is turning even graver, as a recent study discovered that the factorys vessel and pipeline insulation is not properly constructed. The latest errors have now also added a problematic dry-gas-sealing system. It is expected that the Bangladesh Chemical Industries Corporation (BCIC) and industry experts and an investigation team to look into the details of all allegations. The committee should specifically explain the technical issues before it submits its findings. Its urgent and imperative, since the project director has ruled out all allegations. Though he reportedly agreed on the shortfalls regarding the lack of spare parts and an inadequate place for storing Urea and other raw materials but the two could have been easily avoided if both issues were rigorously monitored as per the needs of a proper business plan and structural feasibility study. However, now that the faults are piling up the governments concerned authority for dealing with these problems should immediately sit together in order to prevent potential industrial disasters. Lastly, BCIC must draw important lessons from the recent Ammonia tank explosions in one of its factories in Chittagong barely a week ago where 50 workers reportedly fell sick. This disaster too was preventable. The bottom line is: a well-planned delayed start is preferable to an erroneous quick start.