Carbon Monoxide Detection in Steel Manufacturing: Why Odorization Is Not a Substitute for CO Monitoring

Steel manufacturing can involve carbon monoxide from combustion and process-gas systems. CO is colorless, odorless and toxic, so workers cannot rely on smell for warning. Dedicated carbon-monoxide monitoring, ventilation, alarms and facility-specific safety procedures are required to evaluate the hazard.

Carbon monoxide requires dedicated detection

Odorization changes the smell of a selected gas stream; it does not measure carbon-monoxide concentration. An odor may indicate that an odorized gas is present, but it cannot establish the CO level, exposure duration, alarm threshold or whether an atmosphere is safe.

Odorization must never be presented as a substitute for fixed or portable CO detectors, direct-reading instruments, ventilation, atmospheric testing, industrial-hygiene review, emergency procedures or an approved facility safety program.

What odorization can and cannot do

For a compatible combustible fuel-gas stream, an operator may evaluate odorization as a supplemental leak-awareness measure. That decision requires review of gas composition, odorant compatibility, process conditions, equipment, injection and sampling locations, environmental effects and alarm-response procedures.

Odorization cannot:

• detect or quantify carbon monoxide;

• prove that an atmosphere is below an occupational exposure limit;

• replace calibrated CO alarms or direct-reading instruments;

• identify every process-gas leak;

• guarantee that every person will perceive an odor; or

• establish compliance with an occupational-safety requirement.

Controls steel facilities should prioritize

A facility-specific program may include source control, effective ventilation, fixed or portable CO detectors with alarms, instrument testing and calibration, controlled access, worker training, emergency response and documented investigation of alarms or exposures. Qualified safety, engineering and industrial-hygiene personnel should establish the required controls and alarm settings.

When supplemental odorization may be evaluated

If a facility is evaluating odorization for a compatible natural-gas or combustible fuel-gas network, the project team should define:

• the gas composition and operating envelope;

• the purpose of odorization;

• the selected odorant and compatibility basis;

• injection and verification locations;

• normal, minimum, intermittent and zero-flow conditions;

• interaction with existing CO and combustible-gas detection;

• alarm, response and documentation responsibilities; and

• startup, shutdown and abnormal-operation procedures.

The review must keep two questions separate: “Can personnel recognize a leak in this odorized gas system?” and “What is the carbon-monoxide concentration?” Only dedicated CO monitoring answers the second question.

Operational boundary

Burgess Pipeline Services provides natural-gas odorization planning, temporary odorization, field verification and project documentation. BPS does not represent odorization as carbon-monoxide detection or as a replacement for a facility’s occupational-safety program. Facility owners should use qualified industrial-hygiene and safety professionals to evaluate CO hazards and required controls.

Primary safety references

• NIOSH: Carbon Monoxide Hazards at Work

• OSHA: Carbon Monoxide Chemical Data

• OSHA: Protecting Workers from Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

Project support

For a technically reviewed natural-gas odorization application, review BPS Pipeline Operations & Maintenance or contact Burgess Pipeline Services about a project-specific scope.