Bhopal Disaster Revisited [updated] 810
On December 3, 1984, a chemical plant run by Union Carbide and located in Bhopal, India
released about 40 tons of a toxic gas which was an intermediate chemical used in creating pesticides. (That is, the plant was in the business of creating chemicals deadly to life.) Safety at the plant had not been a concern of management; numerous safety systems were offline or non-functional. The gas cloud drifted over the city and killed thousands of people, and inflicted permanent injury to hundreds of thousands more. It was the worst industrial accident to date. Today, the site remains a contaminated wasteland, unusable and never cleaned up. The survivors have been minimally compensated, but as time passes, enough of them have died that compensation may now be in the works. Update: 12/03 15:51 GMT by M : Whoops, just kidding, the Reuters story linked there is wrong; the BBC was apparently hoaxed into putting a Dow spokesman on TV who wasn't actually a Dow spokesman. Dow has no plans to clean up the facility and no plans to compensate the survivors. Hope this clears things up.
Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
When you hear shit like "the terrorists hate our freedom," think of Bhopal. Around 3k people died on 9/11. In Bhopal, the lasting death toll is somewhere around 15,000. I wonder if Anderson would have been allowed to settle if 15,000 Americans had died.
Mod me down if you want, I have karma to burn. But I'd sure like to see some magnetic yellow ribbons to support the victims of US multinational homicide. Mox
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
This is true, but it does not absolve Union Carbide and its executives of responsibility. On 9/11, the deaths were the result of a deliberate attempt to kill. In Bhopal, the deaths were a foreseeable result of reckless neglect of safety and concern only for money. In the United States, that would be roughly the difference between first- and second-degree murder*.
If a similar accident took place on U.S. soil, the press, the public, and the politicians would be screaming for blood. Do you think that Dow Chemical could 'accidentally' release a few tons of (say) chlorine, kill a couple thousand people, and then close the book on it with a million or two in settlements and a mea culpa?
*Yes, yes. IANAL.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Informative)
Quite correct. The technical term I was grasping for--but couldn't quite reach, this morning--was "depraved indifference". Deaths as a consequence of depraved indifference qualify as second-degree murder in New York state; in other jurisdictions your mileage may vary. (Here's the PDF [nycourts.gov] of the standard directions to a New York jury for a depraved indifference second deg
Blame the Indian Government. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Blame the Indian Government. (Score:4, Insightful)
BUT... blame for the tragedy is primarily on UCC.
> That business in India could have easily been located in the United States,
Not so "easily" when it was selling the factory's output to India itself. Take off your outsourcing goggles please!
> If you want to prevent Bhopals, insist that foreign
> governments have rules to make companies paying the same wages
> and same safety standards as their western counterparts.
Same standards, sure, by all means. As for equivalent wages, would you like to impose them on Americans workers _exporting_ to Bangladesh?
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
If you continue your line of thought, you could say that the terrorists of 11/9 only wanted to do material damage, but human lives was lost by accident.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not compare?
Osama believes the lives of thousands of innocent Americans are less important than his insane plans for Islam.
The US believes the lives of thousands of innocent Indians are less important than avoiding a precedent of holding corporations and their executives accountable for mass slaughter.
Our position on corporate negligence is no less despicable than Osama's on terrorism, and at least as deadly.
BTW, an accident is only an accident if you shoulder responsiblity for it. If you shirk it, then it becomes something worse.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to pick nits or anything, but the single largest failure of US security agencies would probably be Pearl Harbor. We were actually reading the Japanese communications at the time.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, I do agree that more head should have rolled though, particularly in the CIA...
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
Those 15,000 Indians were not killed for any such passionate reasons - they simply weren't worth enough to bother protecting. They were killed for money, for the price of a few intelligent safety measures. The perpetrators of that crime not only didn't die in its commission, they haven't been punished.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
9/11 was a direct attack. Bhopal was an accident. Analogies are dangerous when missused.
Blatant disregard for safety procedures and lax management make accidents? If I blatantly disregard the law and fail to secure my child in a seat belt, then get into an accident, I am criminally liable for his injuries. If I oversaw a chemical plant, failed to ensure safety systems were online and safety precautions were taken by my workers, and an "accident" occurred, I should be liable.
9/11 could be the same thing -- our government had information but failed to act on it. As far as I am concerned, our government is criminally liable for failing to do *anything* about 9/11 before it happened, even if just acknowledging the possibility and making a token gesture by alerting the FBI.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
However, if someone is flagrantly negligent, then its another story. For example, If I have a factory with a machine. Workers are paid to use this machine. I fail in my duties to maintain the machine and it explodes injuring workers. That is my fault because I failed to perform my duty to the best of my abilities.
What it comes down to is responsibility. UC had a responsibility to make the plant safer and not explode. They failed and are responsible for the effects. 9/11 they have a responsibility to protect the country. In order to hold anyone liable you have to examine each individuals personal responsibility and then evaluate how well they performed vs. how they could have performed and what the effects of their failures where. A much more complicated affair.
As for the grocery clerk, I'm not responsible for his security.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Insightful)
Monday morning quarterbacking (Score:3, Insightful)
I know it's quite popular to think of large organizations as having some sort of collective brain (like the Borg on ST:TNG), but this just isn't the case. In the 9/11 case, one person in the government had information that an attack was planned by Islamic terrorists, another person had information that Islamic flight school students were acting very suspiciously, but these two people never met. They never talked to each
Re:Monday morning quarterbacking (Score:3, Insightful)
That one person was George W. Bush, President of the United States of American and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. On August 6, 2001, he received an intelligence brief entitled Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States [gwu.edu] . On September 11, 2001, the President and the armed forces which he directly and absolutely commands had 1 hour's warning (from 8:40, when they first l
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Informative)
Unambiguously, yes. In addition to a reasonably well developed set of Health and Safety laws for a third world country, India has the usual common law system of damages for breach of duty of care, (the tort of negligence). It does not have US-style punitive or trebled damages, what is being sought here is merely the cost of putting people back into the position they were previously in, so far as the damage caused to them was forseeable by the company at the time.
The real problem here is with the corporate fashion for holding companies with large numbers of subsidiaries. As each subsidiary is nominally a separate legal person (notwithstanding, with 100% subsidiaries, the tendency for all to follow the topco's orders), the topco is able to avoid corporate responsibility.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Informative)
The real problem here is not knowing the details of the UC incident. The people at fault were the local managers, not the corporate head. Whereas there's no question that Dow does some scumbag things in third world countries, what caused the UC incident was a series of simple mechanical errors, including safety val
Re:Fine, Gather evidence and try him in the USA. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometime accidents just happen, but when 4000+ people are dead, we should probably find out how.
Re:Fine, Gather evidence and try him in the USA. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a question of where does the buck stop--with the probable perpetrators or incompetents who caused the accident, or with the regional VP, or with Indian government officials who exacerbated the problems, or with the president and chairman of the U.S. company that owned the plant. It's really not all that clear.
The Union Carbide Bhopal plant was operated and managed by Indians; it was an all-Indian staff. When the incident occurred that released toxic fumes, th
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Informative)
You asked, "should they pay rent?"
You do realize they own the fucking building, don't you? Perhaps you were refering to real estate taxes. But if you were, then you still don't know wtf you are talking about, because the land isn't part of the US it is international territory.
I'm guessing that you are just repeating from memory some lame rant from pick-you-favorite-reactionary-celebrity-oxycontin - dopehead. In which
I heard a history of this on the radio (Score:5, Informative)
The president (ceo?) of UC turned up in India immediately after the incident. He said that he was horrified and the company would do everything it could to make things better. The Indian government then arrested him. After that UC brought in the lawyers and the result is what you see today. Advice to the Indians: You get more flies with honey than with vinegar.
The reason the compensation for the victims is so pitiful is that it was done under Indian law. In Indian law, if you accidentally kill someone, the compensation is based on what they would have been worth at the end of their life. In most cases, that is pretty much zero. In American law, you get an amount that tries to reduce the consequences of the death. ie. If you are caring for your parents and are killed, the damages include an amount to replace that care. This produces much greater damages than the Indian case.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
A foreign company was responsible for large-scale devastation and deaths in thousands, and yet the management of the company get away scot-free.
Don't you think it's a little unfair? Swindling money and getting away with it (a la Enron) is one thing, but killing people and getting away with it is another.
Over 15,000 people were killed and thousands more have been scarred for life. The entire ecological system in that city is in ruins and there is no life or vegetation growing there.
There is something called responsibility for your actions. Just because you are a corporation does not excuse you from that. American or not.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:2)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Interesting)
Corporate greed is not a 100% American trait.
Where oh where in my post did I even mention America? I merely said that it should be the same for ALL companies, no matter what or where you're from.
We're not here to discuss corporations of other countries and their behaviors - I was talking about Dow Chemical and how the US is being quite unethical in not extraditing som
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
So, a company builds a plant and generates a whole bunch of binders full of safety procedures.
They then hire people who've got experience in chemical manufacturing and train them on the excepted way to run the plant (based off of the safety procedures).
Now, when these people don't follow procedures, don't keep equipment properly maintained and an accident (such as not closing a value so that when the system was flushed out with water, water would inavertently enter a tank full of a chemical that reacts explosively with water, whose fault is it?
Is it the fault of the operators of the plant?
Is it the fault of the company for not doing enough oversight?
I don't know enough about the Bhopal accident, but I'm suspecting it was probably a bit inbetween.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Interesting)
Untrue. Russia has, by far, the most Nuclear warheads. You can add up all the world's nuclear powers (US, Britian, France, China), and you still don't equal the number of warheads in Russia. US has 10,000, and Russia has 18,000, if memory serves.
I think this is a good example of the demonizing of America that is so popular these days. I'm an American in Europe, and here it is amazing how igorant the European media and populat
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as we continue to allow company officers to bear no responsibility for the actions of a company we will continue to see events like this. It makes no sense whatsoever that the offices should not be held accountable for the offenses of the company. They are in the position of responsibility. That word apparently doesn't mean what it used to, because they are seldom expected to actually take responsibility. They have all of the benefits and none of the drawbacks.
Personally I think that if we're not going to punish the company officers then we have only one other solution. If corporations want to be treated as a person (and in many ways they are) we should treat them as a person and accept them to assume the responsibility for their actions. Therefore if a company kills thousands of people it is a mass murderer and it should be destroyed or incarcerated permanently without chance of parole, its resources sold at auction to pay for the legal action... and maybe even to provide restitutions.
US$500M is nothing compared to even one human life lost in the pursuit of greed. Can there be any doubt that the safety measures were skimped on simply to save money? When people die due to someone's greed then the perpetrator should suffer more than a loss of money.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
If a person is head of a multi-national company with 150,000 employees, is that person personally criminally liable for the actions of every single employee?
He is responsible for having procedures in place that it does not happen.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are the Captain of the ship, you should go down with the ship.
"If a person is head of a multi-national company with 150,000 employees, is that person personally criminally liable for the actions of every single employee?"
If he's negligent in properly running the factory, yes. He is the boss. That's why he gets paid big dollars. If he's not doing his job then he should pay the price. If he can't handle the responsibility then he has no business being in that position. However, if the incident occurs due to the failure of a single workman, then sure he's off the hook. This disaster was due to gross negligence that took place undoubtedly at the behest of the senior executive staff of the company. They should pay. They should pay dearly.
Corporations and the people who work for those corporations need to be held responsible for their actions. This shit goes too damn far.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Insightful)
That's just hand-waving. Look at what India did over here! Ignore the man behind the curtain.
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Informative)
There is the concept of scapegoating at play here. Do you really thing that Anderson had anything personally to do with the actions that night? Even remotely indirectly it's a big reach.
Internal Union Carbide documents, released in the discovery phase of a civil lawsuit against the company, indicate that he and other executives had been warned by engineers of the poor safety mechanisms. A 1973 document, signed by Anderson himself, notes that the technology that would be used in the Bhopal factory was "u
Re:Dow-chem chairman Warren Anderson (Score:3, Interesting)
As CEO of the company Warren Anderson is the person in which these responsiblities rest.
To extend the analogy - who effectively is responsible for Abu Ghraib?
On Regulation (Score:5, Funny)
Without the monumental advances in overcoming human nature since these dark times, we wouldn't even be considering shifting regulatory responsibility from the government to the private sector. Yea, we are truly blessed to live in such an enlightened age.
fnord
Re:On Regulation (Score:2)
Which is the exact same reason why libertaniarism would work so well. Let's do away with government and let the free market punish the guilty party, as thy punished UC into bankruptcy (NOT!).
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know what scares me most... (Score:3, Insightful)
I shudder to think ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I shudder to think that this means that there are so few remaining survivors that a pay out is financially feasible for Union Carbide.
Re:I shudder to think ... (Score:2)
Well, it has been 20 years. I'd expect a fair number of them to have died in that period, accident or no. Remember, the affected area was a slum, full of poor people, with poor nutrition and healthcare.
As I recall, the management and engineers of the plant were Indian citizens: while corporate policy doubtless played a part, so did they.
Yes, it's unacceptable that Un
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I shudder to think ... (Score:3, Insightful)
The business of creating chemicals deadly to life (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The business of creating chemicals deadly to li (Score:2)
Leader with compassion to his followers to defend against the terrorist.
V.S.
Dictator merclessly kills the revalutionaries.
which one will be in the history books. Well it depends on what side writes it.
Sadly, the BBC was duped (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sadly, the BBC was duped (Score:3, Informative)
They knew about it too.
BBC caught out in Bhopal hoax [bbc.co.uk]
Re:Sadly, the BBC was duped (Score:2)
Just wait.. (Score:2)
Just wait a short while longer, and they won't have to pay anyone
gone bust (Score:2, Insightful)
I think governments should be responsible for the actions of companies that belong to them - which implies companies must belong to a government. After all, the government(s) will be profiting from illegal acts via taxation.
Re:gone bust (Score:2)
Re:gone bust (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, be a corporation. That's good for the banks, tax and writing cheques. But, full personal legal liability if you fark up. Pleasant side effect of stopping trusts and shelter companies from hiding assets.
Shareholders, workers and directors alike.
Would certainly make most people think twice about signing off on shonky practices. Someone must have made a decision to turn off, or cut maintenance
From memory (Score:4, Interesting)
Bullshit. (Score:4, Insightful)
Blaming the strikers is just stupid as management made the decision to keep the plant running.
I don't remember a strike (Score:3, Interesting)
and wikipedia [wikipedia.org] doesn't mention one either. And the amount of water involved was rather large, several hundred liters, so it did not just sneak in. It is unknown how and why the water got into the tank, but none of the possible reasons usually discussed (a misguided attempt to clean the tank, a wrongly connected nitrogen pipe, sabotage) makes Union Carbide look good.
And even if there was a strike: wouldn't you expect management to make sure that your plant doesn't blow up in case of a simple labor dispute?
Re:From memory (Score:4, Interesting)
Read on, it's pretty cool what you can do nowadays with a computer:
Legal battles and the "sabotage" defence
For Union Carbide, the legal battle with the Government of India was a major long-term effect of the Bhopal disaster. The company's legal defence was built around the claim that it was not liable for damages from the accident, because they were the result of "sabotage" by a disgruntled worker. UCC claimed it knew the saboteur's identity, and the firm of Arthur D. Little, Inc. was hired to verify and publicize this viewpoint (Kalelkar 1988). The company also circulated videos about the sabotage claim to the media and other interested observers.
How was sabotage supposed to have occurred? It was alleged that water could not have entered the MIC tanks during pipe-washing operations: pipes leading to the tanks were simply too long; passages were too complex and blocked with closed valves. These factors would have presented an insuperable physical barrier to water. The only way that so much water could get into the MIC storage tanks was through deliberate action by an individual. According to UCC, a disgruntled worker wanted to spoil the MIC in tank 610. The main evidence was a hose connected to a water main beside an open inlet pipe leading to the tank.
The UCC sabotage theory did not explain how several other simultaneous failures contributed to the accident. In addition to water entry, there were failures in four safety devices - the vent gas scrubber, the flare tower, the refrigeration system, and the water spray. There were failures in design, operating procedures, and staffing, as described earlier. The positive-pressure systems in the MIC tanks had failed, four to eight weeks before the accident.
Union Carbide's information about the sabotage came from interviews with unnamed witnesses conducted several years after the accident, in unreliable conditions. The interviews were held neither under oath nor in the presence of legal authorities or any independent (not paid by Union Carbide) observers. UCC did not reveal the name of the saboteur so that legal action could be initiated.
The sabotage claim did not explain why a disgruntled worker would want to destroy a batch of MIC. Far greater financial damage could have been inflicted on the company by smashing expensive equipment or pouring water on finished goods. Without convincing evidence, the sabotage claim remains just that - a claim.
The deliberate introduction of water into MIC storage tanks might have taken place without any intention to commit sabotage. A small quantity of water from pipe washing could have initiated the accident. Operators on duty might have been alarmed by the sight of a rumbling hot tank and could have introduced water to cool it. Such a scenario was hinted at by some witnesses and it accommodates most of the claims raised in the sabotage defence.
Re:From memory (Score:3, Informative)
Dow got off light.... (Score:3, Insightful)
So that's what a life is worth to a multinational corporation?
Re:Dow got off light.... (Score:2)
Re:Dow got off light.... (Score:2)
So that's what a life is worth to a multinational corporation?
In India? Yes...
(Not that I agree, I do not.)
Proof that capitalism is bad! (Score:3, Insightful)
-- Greg
Re:Proof that capitalism is bad! (Score:5, Insightful)
When you, through negligence, ignorance, or malice, are responsible for something so heinous as to cause massive death and suffering to a large number of people, refuse to stand up for your actions, and have a government immorally protecting you from just punishment, you are shit. Walking excrement.
It has nothing to do with hating progress, capitalism, democracy, freedom, America, and my god won't somebody finally think of the children? Nobody is suggesting gas bombing the homes of animal researchers, or not funding stem cell research because it kills innocent gobs of discarded embryos. Nor is anyone advocating communism, or returning back to the fucking trees.
The actions, or failure to take them, of a company killed a large number of people and crippled others, in addition to causing a serious environmental disaster. Those in that company required both ethically and, in many countries, legally to take responsibility for such an action have not only been too spineless to face the consequences of their faulty leadership, but have even refused to compensate those whose lives their actions destroyed.
What would you think if Dow sent a cloud of dioxin gas over Hoboken? If IG Farben contributed directly to the deaths of a few thousand measly Jews? There's a reason for government relations to PREVENT this sort of thing, not circumscribe your precious freedoms to drop hunks of plutonium in neighborhod rivers, god forbid.
Ever heard of the phrase "the buck stops here"? Look it up. Your malformed opinions piss me off.
Food for thought (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Food for thought (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Food for thought (Score:5, Insightful)
DEAD WRONG! (Score:4, Informative)
Straight from the horse's mouth: http://www.bhopal.com/facts.htm
FACT: The Bhopal plant was built, owned and operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL). Union Carbide held 51 percent of the shares in UCIL, the Indian government owned 26 percent, and some 24,000 private Indian citizens owned the balance.
FACT: Union Carbide never actually operated in India. Rather, Union Carbide India Ltd. (UCIL), a separate company 50.9% owned by Union Carbide, was controlling the operation of the Bhopal factory at the time of the tragedy. Following the tragedy, the Government of India ceased production at the plant and took complete control of the property.
Bhopal.com is run by Union Carbide so you can't question this source.
This is why outsourcing is bad for america (Score:2, Insightful)
However, this incident highlights that in America and the rest of the world where labor is given the respect and government protection that it deserves, companies that want to do business simply can't compete. How can any company who locates itself in a country with labor protections compete against companies that can simply *kill* their workforce by locating themselves in countries who turn a blind eye to such behavior.
The USA, and
Re:This is why outsourcing is bad for america (Score:3, Funny)
I know this was probably a rhetorical question, but the answer is that special interests (read: people or companies with lots and lots of money) control our government from the local to the federal. We allow this by allowing campaign (and other) contributions. If we make it so there are less and less ways corporate interests can manipulate government, we will see more and more moral activity on the
Re:This is why outsourcing is bad for america (Score:3, Informative)
Legacy (Score:2)
Up to 500,000 survivors still suffer symptoms such as paralysis, partial blindness and impaired immune systems.
Union Carbide accepted "moral responsibility" for the disaster. It later blamed sabotage by a disgruntled worker.
After a legal agreement the firm provided victims with compensation averaging $500 (£300).
Sabatoge (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sabatoge (Score:3, Informative)
Care to reference them? I haven't seen any such independent studies.
A BBC documentary [bbc.co.uk] (53 minutes in to the RM stream on the right)
says that an internal safety report on the Union Carbide MIC plant in the USA warned about the risk of a runaway reaction in MIC storage tanks just a few months before the Bhopal leak.
According to the BBC, the report was never sent to the Bhopal managers.
As bad as it was, it was good for india (Score:2, Insightful)
All we can do is hope that they take this tragedy and move towards standards of business and living that will move them towards a better life style.
Is it just me... (Score:2)
Question for you: how does the number killed in Bhopal compare with the number killed in 9/11 ?
Unoin Carbide claims (Score:2)
factually wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporations are not people (Score:4, Insightful)
- They exist because they are legally entitled to exist.
- They exist to make money.
Therefore, they will do nothing unless they are legally compelled to do it, or unless it will make them money, either now or in the future.See this movie. [thecorporation.tv]
Wow! +9000 Informative! (Score:5, Funny)
Wow. Thanks for that obscure factoid, Sparky. Pesticides kill things. Huh. Who knew?
I'm sure there's a clever comment to be had here about floods and dihydrogen monoxide here, but I'm far too weary.
Re:It isn't Dihydrogen monoxide (Score:3, Informative)
First of all, as another poster already pointed out, dihydrogen monoxide is the name most often used in parodies. Many compounds are known by more than one name.
Moreover, your reasoning is wrong IMHO, because HOH could represent a non-polar molecule if it were symmetric like this:
But as we both know, it has a V shape, with the oxygen at the bottom of
Tragedy of immense proportions, with no end (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a story of corruption, of not having any fail safe mechanisms or adequate safety measures, of negligence, of politicians willingly selling their souls and of those who they represent and of a system which failed to protect its own.
A thousand fingers could be pointed and in this horrible disaster, anywhere you point, you can find guilty who are still sheltered by the law, by the money they have willingly spent for their own defense and none for the people who suffered.
Union Carbide / Warren Anderson and Dow Chemical - Till now, they have chosen not to accept any form of responsibility and instead suggest sabotage. Union Carbide had spent a paltry sum before they agreed to pay 470 million of which hardly one third has been paid to its victims for the lack of any judicial oversight and sadly, corruption at the heart of the system. Even the 470 million that hopefully will be disbursed one day, hardly 2000 dollars will go to the families of those who died and 500$ to those who lost everything but their lives. Hardly a sum for the cost of a human life...
Union Carbide's response [bhopal.com] cleverly attempts to distance itself from the tragedy by calling the Bhopal plant owned by an indian firm. Clever, but it also serves to belittle the scope of this disaster and the lives that were snuffed out.
Would this be the same outcome if this had happened elsewhere, or in the developed world? And wouldnt a proper clean up in order or long completed if this were anywhere else.
Warren Anderson never saw the inside of a prison and still lives quite contently in Florida or NY and the US judicial system has done its part by denying the extradition requests by India. The Indian system on the other hand has comfortably chosen to neglect the cries for justice and has happily moved on..
Rediff.com [rediff.com] has a sombre look at the tragedy, its victims, those who were forgotten, and those who still suffer.
One more reason not to trust corporations..
Also no additional compensation is planned and Dow has not apologized or owned up to this tragedy as the last part of the slashdot post. It is a hoax and was unknowingly perpetrated by a BBC interview. Read the AP article first (it drips accountability which is the last thing Dow or any corporation would do)and the proof its a hoax [rediff.com]
Deadly to life... (Score:2)
Dangers of Chemical Plants due to Terrorism (Score:2)
I was listening to NPR yesterday when one of the guests suggested that chemical plants would be a likely soft target for terrorists and could result in an disaster like Bhopal. He claimed that security at these plants is very lax compared to, say, a nuclear plant, making them a soft target. Given the severity of the Bhopal incident, this seems to suggest this is a very serious concern, and it is something else to take into account when thinking about chemical plant safety. It's not all just about acciden
"Dow accepting full responsibility" was a hoax! (Score:5, Informative)
The story [smh.com.au]
Ah...the old Chem. Eng. joke (Score:3, Funny)
- Doctors kill in ones.
Perspective on Indian Legal system... (Score:3, Informative)
The Indian Legal system is notorious for the lack of speed with which the wheels of justice turn. Even for the smallest cases ten years from filing to final disposition is not unusual.
I recently read an article which discussed several cases from the 1950s that is still in the courts and still being fought.
Yours,
Jordan Dea-Mattson
30,000 lives (Score:2)
This just reminds me of a sad truth: large companies operating in the third world see the people there are disposable. A settlement of $300 million for something of this scale is just sick (way way too small).
interesting to note... (Score:2, Insightful)
But, you know, if Julia Roberts has twins...
to anyone who mentions DOW (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:to anyone who mentions DOW (Score:4, Informative)
As one of the resident up-PC posters... (Score:5, Informative)
Documentary and Discussion with Director (Score:3, Informative)
Dec 4th - San Francisco
Dec 5th - Stanford, 1:30 pm, Bechtel Intl Center
Screening and Discussion
with NADEEM UDDIN , Director
On December 3, 1984, the Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India leaked poisonous methyl isocyanate gas killing fifteen thousand helpless men, women and children. Hundreds of thousands more were permanently maimed. Bhopal was, and remains, the world's worst chemical industry disaster" http://ektaonline.org/events/bhopal/index.htm [ektaonline.org]
wrong, wrong, and wrong. (Score:3, Informative)
Dow Chemical is somehow responsable: Wrong. Dow chemical bought what was left of Union carbide in the late 80's / early 90's, long after the disaster settlements had been made. Holding Dow responsable for Bhopal would be like an AMX owner suing DiamlerChrysler 20 years after getting a settlement out of AMX.
Union Carbide ran an evil nasty horrible pit of dispair of a factory. Right. Sorta. The plant fell in line with many Indian safety standards, which at the time were no where near what our standards are. Of course inspections and safety take a back seat to giving people a job in developing countries. This is nothing new.
Bhopal was a horrifying disaster, but the impression I'm getting is that India is becoming a truly western society. The scummy lawyers are shooting out of the woodwork to go after the deepest pockets. UC's former chairman stil works for Dow, but once the courts on both sides get their heads out of their asses, he'll end up facing charges in India, it's just a matter of time
Only the worst non-communist world accident. (Score:5, Informative)
That wasn't due to an evil corporation though so it doesn't count.
Article [sjsu.edu]
As far as wastelands go, how about the area surrounding the 70 tons of superheated nuclear waste that blew up in 1957 in rural russia.Article [mindfully.org]
Re:Both sides? (Score:2)
Re:Both sides? (Score:3, Insightful)
I've read that the refrigerant safety system (meant to slow/stop the chemical reaction that takes place if water gets into the storage tank) had been shut down and the freon shipped TO ANOTHER PLANT. That wasn't the act of a disgruntled employee, that was management.
Lea
Re:"Yes Men" Possibly Responsible for Hoax (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:"Yes Men" Possibly Responsible for Hoax (Score:3, Informative)
It looks like their web site has been updated claiming responsibility for the hoax. There is now an article explaining how and what they did.
Re:New LOW for Slashdot.... (Score:3, Informative)
Hindus think of "lesser" animals as similar to humans since they could be relatives, though I don't.