7.3 Do Not Call Unforeseeable What Indeed Is Foreseeable
85
the fact that they were allowed to exist within the TRF needs to be examined from a
number of perspectives as described below. Oftentimes the first reactions are to call
any failure a “unforeseeable event”, “unheard of”, “impossible to predict because of
the uncertainties, complexities”, etc.
There a consensus driven definition of what represents an “incredible” event.
At this point it becomes necessary to go back to basic definitions
and to state what an “incredible” failure may be (Oboni and Oboni
2018). It is an important addition to the discussion when the concepts of negligence, often used in the aftermath of a disaster and come
into play (https://www.riskope.com/2010/03/17/force-majeure-clauses-in-contractsshould-be-optimized-to-reduce-costs-and-litigation-potential/). As stated earlier,
using a general consensus from various horizons of the hazmat industry we will
consider that the threshold of credibility lies at around 10
−5 –10
−6 and that any event
with probabilities of that order or lower can be considered “incredible”, or an “Act
of God”.
7.4 Do Not Forget Uncertainties and Latencies
In this section we will discuss tailings risks from the point of view of the
metaphors for public perception of risks developed by German researchers Renn
and Klinke (2004), developed a series of metaphors to describe public perception of risks and establish a classification for some categories of tailings dams.
More details are available in the specialized literature and we have written on this
subject (https://www.riskope.com/2014/10/02/metaphoric-description-of-risks-andtheir-perception-are-they-useful-or-just-wordplays/).
Although quite theoretical and apparently abstract, the classification of Renn and
Klinke has the merit of explicitly using the level of uncertainties on probability and/or
consequences for the definition of risks as well as the concept of latency.
Here is a summary of Renn and Klinke’s metaphors describing public perception of
risks:
Sword of Damocles has a very high disaster potential, with the probability oftentimes
extremely low. Extremely well designed, built and managed tailings dams with high
consequences belong to this category.
In the risk class Cyclops the probability of occurrence is largely uncertain whereas
the maximum damage can be estimated.
85
the fact that they were allowed to exist within the TRF needs to be examined from a
number of perspectives as described below. Oftentimes the first reactions are to call
any failure a “unforeseeable event”, “unheard of”, “impossible to predict because of
the uncertainties, complexities”, etc.
There a consensus driven definition of what represents an “incredible” event.
At this point it becomes necessary to go back to basic definitions
and to state what an “incredible” failure may be (Oboni and Oboni
2018). It is an important addition to the discussion when the concepts of negligence, often used in the aftermath of a disaster and come
into play (https://www.riskope.com/2010/03/17/force-majeure-clauses-in-contractsshould-be-optimized-to-reduce-costs-and-litigation-potential/). As stated earlier,
using a general consensus from various horizons of the hazmat industry we will
consider that the threshold of credibility lies at around 10
−5 –10
−6 and that any event
with probabilities of that order or lower can be considered “incredible”, or an “Act
of God”.
7.4 Do Not Forget Uncertainties and Latencies
In this section we will discuss tailings risks from the point of view of the
metaphors for public perception of risks developed by German researchers Renn
and Klinke (2004), developed a series of metaphors to describe public perception of risks and establish a classification for some categories of tailings dams.
More details are available in the specialized literature and we have written on this
subject (https://www.riskope.com/2014/10/02/metaphoric-description-of-risks-andtheir-perception-are-they-useful-or-just-wordplays/).
Although quite theoretical and apparently abstract, the classification of Renn and
Klinke has the merit of explicitly using the level of uncertainties on probability and/or
consequences for the definition of risks as well as the concept of latency.
Here is a summary of Renn and Klinke’s metaphors describing public perception of
risks:
Sword of Damocles has a very high disaster potential, with the probability oftentimes
extremely low. Extremely well designed, built and managed tailings dams with high
consequences belong to this category.
In the risk class Cyclops the probability of occurrence is largely uncertain whereas
the maximum damage can be estimated.