Bhopal disaster Totally Explained

Everything about Bhopal Disaster totally explained

The Bhopal disaster was an industrial disaster that occurred in Bhopal, India, resulting in the death of more than 3,000 people, according to the Indian Supreme Court. A more probable figure is that 8,000 died within two weeks, and it's estimated that the same number have since died from gas related diseases. However, testimonies from doctors who provided medical assistance during the tragedy claim over 15,000 were dead in the first month alone.
The incident took place in the early hours of the morning of December 3 1984, in the heart of the city of Bhopal in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh. A Union Carbide subsidiary pesticide plant released 40 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas, killing approximately 3,800 people. Bhopal disaster is frequently cited as one of the world's worst industrial disasters. The International Medical Commission on Bhopal was established in 1993 to respond to the disasters.
Today, more than 100,000 people have permanent injuries, light or severe. The groundwater around the plant area is contaminated, and the question of cleaning up the area is still unsolved.

Background and causes, summary

The Union Carbide India, Limited (UCIL) plant was established in 1969. 51% was owned by Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and 49% by Indian authorities. It produced the pesticide carbaryl (trade mark Sevin). Methyl isocyanate (MIC), an intermediate in carbaryl manufacture, was used instead of less toxic but more expensive materials. In 1979, a plant for producing MIC was added. UCC was responsible for all technique and design. The plant was located close to a densely populated area, instead of on the other side of the town where UCIL was offered an area. MIC was stored in a few large tanks instead of several small tanks. The safety systems were inadequate from the start. The alarms didn't direct the inhabitants.
   The management soon deteriorated in order to cut down expenses, ordered by UCC. The staff was reduced; educated personnel replaced by uneducated. The plant wasn't maintained appropriately.
   There were many warnings. In 1974, cows died from drinking poisonous water from an adjacent well. In 1978, the trade unions wrote a letter to the managers and the MP government about the risks in the plant. In 1978, there was a large fire at the plant. Between 1981 and 1984 there were several releases of different kinds. Workers were injured, one even died. Many articles were published. In 1984, UCIL received the safety audit made by UCC in 1982.
   In November 1984, most of the safety systems were not functioning. Many valves and lines were in poor condition. Tank 610 contained 42 tonnes of MIC, much more than allowed according to safety rules.
   During the nights of 2-3 December, large amounts of water entered tank 610. The resulting reaction generated a major increase in the temperature of liquid inside the tank (to over 200°C). The MIC holding tank then gave off a large volume of toxic gas, forcing the emergency release of pressure. The reaction was sped up by the presence of iron from corroding non-stainless steel pipelines.
   There have been several theories on the reason to the water entering the tank. The workers claim that, because of the bad maintenance with leaking valves etc, it was possible for the water to climb from the point where the pipeline washing was performed to the tank 610. UCC maintains that this wasn't possible, and that a "disgruntled worker" made sabotage through entering water directly into the tank. Sabotage would have been improbable if maintenance had been good, the safety systems had been working and the saboteur would have wanted to save his own life and health.
   However, considering the magnitude of the disaster, the debate over whether or not sabotage was the immediate cause of the disaster is far less significant than the safety lapses allowed it to happen in the first place. The factors deciding the outcome were the plant design (location near a densely populated area, using hazardous chemicals instead of less dangerous, storing in large tanks, corroding material in pipelines etc), the defective management because of the economic pressure from UCC (poor education of operators, safety systems not functioning etc), and, in the aftermath, negligence of the governments of India and Madhya Pradesh as well as of UCC.

Time line, summary

At the plant ť 21.00 Water cleaning of pipes start.

   22.00 Water enters 610. Reaction starts. ť 22.30 Gases coming out from the VGS-tower.

   00.30 The large siren sounds and is turned off. ť 00.50 The siren is heard within the plant area. The workers escape.

Outside ť 22.30 First sensations. Suffocation, cough, eyes, vomiting.

   1.00 Police alerted. People escaped. UC-director denied. ť 2.00 The first people reached Hamidia hospital. Half blind, gasping for air, frothing at the mouth, vomiting.

   2.10 The alarm was heard. ť 4.00 The gases reduced.

   6.00 The police's loudspeaker: "Everything is normal". ť Morning: Thousands of dead bodies and hundreds of dead cattle lying on the streets.

Health effects

Apart from MIC the gas cloud may have contained phosgene, hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen chloride, nitrous oxides and carbon dioxide, either produced in the storage tank or in the atmosphere. All these gases, except carbon dioxide, are toxic.
   The gas cloud, composed mainly of materials more dense than air, stayed close to the ground and spread outwards through the surrounding community. The initial effects of gas exposure were coughing, vomiting, severe eye irritation and a feeling of suffocation. People awoken by these symptoms fled away from the plant, in the same direction as the toxic cloud. Those who ran inhaled more than those who had a vehicle. Those who were short (the children) inhaled a more concentrated mixture than those who were tall. Many people were trampled trying to escape.
   The next day, thousands of dead bodies were lying on the streets. The corpses were collected and dumped into Narmada river. There were mass funerals and mass cremations. 170,000 people were treated at hospitals and temporary dispensaries. 2,000 buffaloes, goats, and other animals had to be collected and buried. Within a few days, leaves on trees went yellow and fell off. Business stopped and food didn't get into town, as the farmers didn't dare to come close. Fishing was forbidden. There was contradictory information from the authorities.
   A total of 36 wards were marked by the authorities as being "gas affected", with a population of 520,000. Of these 200,000 were below 15 years of age and 3,000 were pregnant women. In 1991, 3,928 deaths had been certified. Independent organizations recorded 8,000 dead the first days. Other estimations vary between 10,000 and 20,000. Acute health effects
Air ways: cough, broncho constriction, bronchiolitis, pulmonary oedema etc.
Eyes: Severe irritation, blepharospasm, corneal ulcers.
Pregnancies: Miscarriages, death of fetus, increased infant death rate.
Autopsy: Oedema of brain. Kidneys swollen, necrotic.
   The majority of deaths and serious injuries were related to pulmonary edema, but the gas caused a wide variety of other ailments. Signs and symptoms of methyl isocyanate exposure normally include coughing, dyspnea, chest pain, lacrimation, eyelid edema, and unconsciousness. These effects tend to progress over 24 to 72 hours following exposure to include acute lung injury, cardiac arrest, and death. Long term health effects
The quality of the epidemiological and clinical research varies. However, the different reports support each other, and the findings are also supported by animal experiments. Reported and studied symptoms are eye problems, symptoms from the respiratory system, the immune system and the neurological system, cardiac failure secondary to lung injury, psychological effects, effect on women’s reproductive health, suspected genetic effects and general over-morbidity. Many other symptoms and diseases are often ascribed to the gas exposure, but there's no good research supporting this. References: "Chemical Industry and Public Health"
   Union Carbide produced their pesticide, Sevin (the name of carbaryl), using MIC as a intermediate. Until 1979, MIC was imported from USA. and Chouhan

Workers were forced to use English manuals, despite the fact that only a few had a grasp of the language.

By 1984, only six of the original twelve operators were still working with MIC and the number of supervisory personnel was also cut in half. No maintenance supervisor was placed on the night shift and instrument readings were taken every two hours, rather than the previous and required one-hour readings.

Equipment and safety regulations

Cost-cutting initiatives affected the quality of equipment and the effectiveness of safety regulations:

It emerged in 1998, during civil action suits in India, that, unlike Union Carbide plants in the USA, its Indian subsidiary plants were not prepared for problems. No action plans had been established to cope with incidents of this magnitude. This included not informing local authorities of the quantities or dangers of chemicals used and manufactured at Bhopal.

There was only one manual back-up system, not the four-stage system used in the USA.

To reduce energy costs, the refrigeration system, designed to inhibit the volatilization of MIC, had been left idle – the MIC was kept at 20 degrees Celsius, not the 4.5 degrees advised by the manual, and some of the coolant was being used elsewhere.

Doctors and hospitals were not informed of proper treatment methods for MIC gas inhalation. They were told to simply give cough medicine and eye-drops to their patients.

Investigation into possible sabotage

The company cites an investigation conducted by the engineering consulting firm Arthur D. Little, which concluded that a single employee secretly and deliberately introduced a large amount of water into the MIC tank by removing a meter and connecting a water hose directly to the tank through the metering port. Carbide claims such a large amount of water couldn't have found its way into the tank by accident, and safety systems were not designed to deal with intentional sabotage. UC says that the rest of the plant staff falsified numerous records to distance themselves from the incident, and that the Indian Government impeded its investigation and declined to prosecute the employee responsible, presumably because that would weaken its allegations of negligence against Union Carbide.
Union Carbide has never publicly named or identified the employee it claims sabotaged its Bhopal plant or attempted to prosecute. Nevertheless, on the company’s Bhopal Information Center website, Carbide claims that “the Indian authorities are well aware of the identity of the employee and the nature of the evidence against him”.

Safety and equipment issues

The corporation denies the claim that the valves on the tank were malfunctioning, claiming that “documented evidence gathered after the incident showed that the valve close to the plant's water-washing operation was closed and leak-tight. Furthermore, process safety systems – in place and operational – would have prevented water from entering the tank by accident”. Carbide states that the safety concerns identified in 1982 were all allayed before 1984 and “none of them had anything to do with the incident”.

Donating $5 million to the Indian Red Cross.

Legal action against Union Carbide

Legal issues began affecting Union Carbide, the US and Indian governments, the local authorities in Bhopal and the victims of the disaster immediately after the catastrophe.

Legal proceedings leading to the settlement

On 14th December 1984, the Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, addressed the US Congress, stressing the company’s “commitment to safety” and promising to ensure that a similar accident “cannot happen again”. However, the Indian Government passed the Bhopal Gas Leak Act in March 1985, allowing the Government of India to act as the legal representative for victims of the disaster,
Throughout 1990, the Indian Supreme Court heard appeals against the settlement from “activist petitions”. Nonetheless, in October 1991, the Supreme Court upheld the original $470 million, dismissing any other outstanding petitions that challenged the original decision. The decision set aside a “portion of settlement that quashed criminal prosecutions that were pending at the time of settlement”. The Court ordered the Indian government “to purchase, out of settlement fund, a group medical insurance policy to cover 100,000 persons who may later develop symptoms” and cover any shortfall in the settlement fund. It also “requests” that Carbide and its subsidiary “voluntarily” fund a hospital in Bhopal, at an estimate $17 million, to specifically treat victims of the Bhopal disaster. The company agreed to this. The merger has gained criticism from the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, as it's apparently “contrary to established merger law” in that “Dow denies any responsibility for Carbide’s Bhopal liabilities”. According to the Bhopal Medical Appeal, Carbide “remains liable for the environmental devastation” as environmental damage wasn't included in the 1989 settlement, despite ongoing contamination issues., it was reported that the site is still contaminated with 'thousands' of metric tons of toxic chemicals, including benzene hexachloride and mercury, held in open containers or loose on the ground. Some areas are reportedly so polluted that anyone entering the area for more than ten minutes is likely to lose consciousness. Rainfall causes run-off, polluting local wells and boreholes, and the results of tests undertaken on behalf of the BBC by accredited water analysis laboratories in the United Kingdom reveal pollution levels in borehole water 500 times the legal maximum in that country. Statistical surveys of local residents, with a control population in a similarly poor area away from the plant, are reported to reveal higher levels of various diseases around the plant.

Criticisms of Clean-up Operations

Carbide states that “after the incident, UCIL began clean-up work at the site under the direction of Indian central and state government authorities”, which was continued after 1994 by the successor to UCIL, Eveready Industries, until 1998, when it was placed under the authority of the Madhya Pradesh Government. Critics of the clean-up undertaken by Carbide, such as the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, claim that “several internal studies” by the corporation, which evidenced “severe contamination”, were not made public; the Indian authorities were also refused access. They believe that Union Carbide “continued directing operations” in Bhopal until “at least 1995” through Hayaran, the US trained site manager, even after the sale of its UCIL stock. The successor, Eveready Industries, abruptly relinquished the site lease to one department of the State Government while being supervised by another department on an extensive clean up programme. Environmental problems resulting from lack of a proper clean-up persist today. The Madhya Pradesh authorities have announced that that'll “pursue both Dow and Eveready” to conduct the clean-up as joint tortfeasors.
The International Campaign view Carbide’s sale of UCIL in 1994 as a strategy “to escape the Indian courts, who threatened Carbide’s assets due to their non-appearance in the criminal case”. The successor, Eveready Industries India, Limited (EIIL), ended its 99 year lease in 1998 and turned over control of the site to the state government of the Madhya Pradesh. Currently, the Madhya Pradesh Government is trying to legally force Dow and EIIL to finance clean-up operations.

Additional Settlement Funds Hoax

On December 3, 2004, the twentieth anniversary of the disaster, a man claiming to be a Dow representative named Jude Finisterra was interviewed on the BBC. He claimed that the company had agreed to clean up the site and compensate those harmed in the incident. (video

) Immediately afterward, Dow's share price fell 4.2% in 23 minutes, for a loss of $2 billion in market value (External Link

). Dow quickly issued a statement saying that they'd no employee by that name — that he was an impostor, not affiliated with Dow, and that his claims were a hoax. BBC broadcast a correction and an apology. The statement was widely carried (External Link

).
"Jude Finisterra" was actually Andy Bichlbaum, a member of the activist prankster group The Yes Men. In 2002, The Yes Men issued a phony press release

explaining why Dow refused to take responsibility for the disaster and started up a website, DowEthics.com, designed to look like the Dow website but give what they felt was a more accurate cast on the events. In 2004, a producer for BBC News emailed them through the website requesting an interview, which they gladly obliged (External Link

).
Taking credit for the prank in an interview on Democracy Now!, Bichlbaum explains how his fake name was derived: "Jude is the patron saint of impossible causes and Finisterra means the end of the Earth". He explained that he settled on this approach (taking responsibility) because it would show people precisely how Dow could help the situation as well as likely garnering major media attention in the US, which had largely ignored the disaster's anniversaries, when Dow attempted to correct the statement (External Link

).
After the original interview was revealed as a hoax, Bichlbaum appeared in a follow-up interview on the United Kingdom's Channel 4 news (video

). During the interview he was repeatedly asked if he'd considered the emotions and reaction of the people of Bhopal when producing the hoax. According to the interviewer, "there were many people in tears" upon having learned of the hoax. Each time, Bichlbaum said that, in comparison, what distress he'd caused the people was minimal to that for which Dow was responsible.

Further Information

Get more info on 'Bhopal Disaster'.

External Link Exchanges

Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:

<a href="http://bhopal_disaster.totallyexplained.com">Bhopal disaster Totally Explained</a>

Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned.