# A Method for Evaluating the Spatial Layout of Fire Stations in Chemical Industrial Parks
## 2 Methods
### Fire Risk Assessment  
The first step in evaluating the spatial layout of the fire station in a chemical industrial park is to conduct a fire risk assessment of the PTBR. The fire risk levels of PTBRs in the chemical industrial park are influenced by various factors, including the basic characteristicsof the park, production processes, hazardous substances, and meteorological factors. These factors collectively contribute to the fire risk. The fire risk assessment should utilize appropriate indicators. In this article, the purpose of the fire risk assessment is to evaluate the effectiveness of the fire station layout. This study aims to characterize the inherent fire risks of PTBRs at the regional level, thus providing a basis for evaluating the layout of fire stations. Therefore, it is essential to use the existing risk indicators in chemical industrial parks to assess fire risks. Distinct from previous studies that quantify major hazards and domino effects, this article uses three indicators for fire risk assessment, as shown in Table 2. These indicators are derived from the lists published by the China State Administration of Work Safety [42; 43] and the national standard regulation [44]. The China State Administration of Work Safety conducted an analysis of chemical fire and explosion accidents that occurred in China around 2008. The study revealed that a majority of these accidents were associated with hazardous processes such as nitrification, oxidation, sulfonation, chlorination, fluorination, or diazotization reactions. Based on these findings, the Catalog of Key Supervised Hazardous Chemical Processes was proposed [42]. Additionally, a comprehensive screening of chemicals responsible for accidents in China between 2002 and 2010, as well as internationally significant accidents over the past 40 years, was conducted. This resulted in the development of the List of Key Supervised Hazardous Chemicals [43]. [PERSON] et al. [45] compiled data on approximately 600 hazardous chemical accidents that occurred in China from 1951 to 2020. Their analysis revealed that the production process was the primary cause of the most severe accidents and casualties. It is worth noting that a majority of these processes are included in the Catalogue of Key Supervised Hazardous Chemical Processes. Furthermore, the study found that the accidents were directly caused by chemicals, all of which are listed in the List of Key Supervised Hazardous Chemicals. These findings provide the basic reason for the utilization of the three indicators in this study. It should be noted that these three indicators were specifically selected for Park X in this study. Other types of chemical industrial parks should consider practical indicators based on their specific process hazard characteristics. The indicators presented in Table 2 represent the factors that influence the fire risks of PTBRs. The weights of these indicators reflect their significance in ensuring fire safety. The determination of indicator weights can be carried out using empirical methods, the analytic hierarchy process, expert scoring methods, or other suitable approaches, depending on the specific requirements. Empirical methods and expert scoring methods are adopted and compared, resulting in the weights assigned to the indicators for Park X, as shown in Table 3. For each indicator, its scoring standard is also provided in Table 3. To illustrate the scoring process, let us consider the indicator \"Major hazard installations of hazardous chemicals\". If a specific PTBR has a major hazard installation of hazardous chemicals with the highest hazardous level of III, this indicator will be assigned a score of 75.