Bhopal Gas Disaster Issues - Report Example

Industrial Accidents Name: University: Date: Table of Contents Industrial Accidents 1 Table of Contents 2 Abstract 2 Introduction 4 Overview of the Bhopal Gas Disaster 5 Causes 5 Ethical Implications and Behaviour 6 Unethical Behaviour 7 Engineering ethics 8 Predicting/Preventing Industrial Accidents 9 Acceptable Accidents that we have To Live With 10 Learning through Mistakes 11 Engineers Making the World Safer 12 Conclusion 13 References 14 Appendices 16 Abstract In the last few years, there has been an increasing awareness concerning the mounting consequences as well as risks of industrial accidents. This has been reflected in media reports, official statistics, and the creation of public institutions that try to solve the issue. The increasing number of companies for industrial accident prevention and the growing of literature on risk assessment are additional manifestations of the industrial accidents. In this case, the report seeks to provide an insight why and how industrial accidents take place, and if an engineer can predict or prevent them. Furthermore, the will explain if some industrial accidents are acceptable and if engineers can make the world safer. Using Bhopal disaster as the case study, the report will evidence how industrial accidents are severe disasters that give rise to deaths and injuries as well as damage to the environment and property. Industrial Accidents Introduction Industrial accidents are disasters that lead to loss of property as well as life, and are prevalent in the contemporary society. Industrial accidents as it will be evidenced in the report are not merely safety issues which must be resolved, rather they as well have broader consequence since they offer essential chances to study about the "goodness of fit" between the environment, technology, and society and concerning how the fit may be fortified or enfeebled by unforeseen events (Mitchell, 2008). This without a doubt is the type of information which is priceless to civilisation during a period of far-reaching and deep environmental as well as societal change. Still, if such opportunities are to be used ideally, then there will be need to change the way people think about industrial accidents. Basically, industrial accidents can be lessened, but cannot be completely eliminated. Industrial accidents occur because of faulty machinery and equipment, or carelessness attributed by human activities. Appropriate safety measures may help in reducing the accidents. As indicated by Berenguer, Grall, and Soares (2011), there are always various causes that lead to industrial accidents, and these accidents occur mostly while working on the equipment as well as machinery. Every industrial operation heightens the likelihood of accidents. So, adequate knowledge as well as training must be offered concerning the risks of accidents. As stated by Berenguer, Grall, and Soares (2011), some industrial accident takes place because of the workers’ faults. They may be neglectful, not interested in jobs or under the influence of intoxicants resulting to lots of accidents. Even though instrumental hazards lie completely in the human control domain, controlling, preventing, or reducing them have never been easy. The report will talk about industrial accidents by using Bhopal disaster as the reference point. Overview of the Bhopal Gas Disaster On 3rd December 1984, over forty tonnes of methyl isocyanate gas (MIG) leaked from Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) a pesticide plant located in Bhopal, India, instantly killing almost 3,800 people as well as resulting in significant premature and morbidity death for thousands of others. UCIL as a result tried to immediately separate itself from legal responsibility, and it ultimately agreed a settlement with the government of India through arbitration of India’s Supreme Court and agreed to the moral responsibility of the tragedy (Broughton, 2005). In consequence, UCIL paid 433 million Euros as compensation, which according to Broughton (2005) was somewhat a lesser amount considering the noteworthy underestimations of the enduring exposure effects to the health and the large number of person exposed. The tragedy pointed out a need for implementable international standards for preventative strategies, industrial disaster preparedness as well as environmental safety so as to escape similar accidents in the future. From the time of disaster, a rapid industrialisation has been experienced in the country while numerous positive government policy changes as well as conduct of some industries have happened; however, major environmental threats from poorly regulated as well as rapid industrial growth is still existent (Broughton, 2005). Causes The causes of Bhopal gas disaster are rooted in two main assertions; corporate negligence as well as worker sabotage. With regard to corporate negligence, it is argued that the tragedy was caused by a compelling combination of decaying as well as under-maintained facilities, a feeble approach towards safety, as well as poorly trained workers. This culminated in the actions of the worker that accidentally allowed water penetrate into methyl isocyanate gas tanks without appropriate working protections (Eckerman, 2001). On the other hand, the worker sabotage argument arise from the fact that water cannot physically possible enter the MIC tank deprived of resolute human effort, and so that far-reaching evidence and engineering examination results in the assumption that water entered into the MIC tank when a scoundrel worker directly hooked a water hose into an empty valve on the MIC tank. This perspective further claims that the government of India took broad steps to conceal this possibility so as to direct blame to Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). Based on corporate negligence argument, it is argued that the UCC management and partially the local government poorly invested on safety and tolerated an unsafe working environment (Eckerman, 2004). This can be evidence by factors such as filling MIC tanks past the required levels, inadequate maintenance subsequent to the stopping of MIC production late in 1984, since the safety systems were unfeasible because of poor maintenance, as well as turning off of safety systems so as to economise; this included the refrigeration system of the MIC tank that could have alleviated the severity of the disaster, and lack of disaster plans. Besides that, the plan was not adequately equipped to handle the extra gas generated by the unexpected water addition to the MIC tank. Still, the alarms of MIC tank had not been functioning for more than four years, and the plant had only one manual back-up system. Ethical Implications and Behaviour In Bhopal plant, ethical issues stem from the lack of maintenance procedures as well as safety standards as compared to its sister plant in U.S. Augmented risk presented by the creation of a unit for MIC production at Bhopal plant in 1980 in addition to the simultaneous slum colonies establishment nearby the plant were somehow ignored by both the Indian government and UCIL. Moreover, procedures for emergency response as well as community information for handling possible large-scale disasters were missing (Murphy-Medley, 2001). Several decades after the Bhopal disaster, people are still dying because of exposure associated diseases together with their complications. Harm to the respiratory system as mentioned by Murphy-Medley (2001) has resulted in the pulmonary (tuberculosis) prevalence, and which is over three times the national average. The disaster has also resulted in genetic deformity amongst infants. It is morally unethical for the government to allow a pesticide plant to be constructed in the middle of settlements that are densely populated. The conduct of UCIL to decide to produce and store deadly MIC, in a location where almost 120,000 people resided, is wanting. As indicated by Broughton (2005), the MIC plant was not intended for handling a runaway reaction, and so in that disastrous day, the flow of MIC through the scrubber was 200 times more than its intended capacity. Unethical Behaviour The unethical behaviour of the Indian Government concerning the Bhopal disaster started prior to the establishment of the Bhopal factory, when it sidestepped its own Foreign Exchange and Regulation law by giving UCC 50.99 per cent control of UCIL. According to the act, the foreign control limit was not to surpass 40 per cent of a company’s subsidies. In this case, the India Government had only 22 per cent stake in UCIL plant, and remaining percentage was divided amongst investors. Moreover, the government as well moved the overall project implementation responsibility to UCIL, who’s ‘Risk Assessment’ according to Rao and Krishna (2009) was designed for profit maximisation. To the Indian government worsened things by giving the safety audits responsibility to UCC engineers. Clearly, the ‘risks’ tangled in the plant had been taken too lightly when examining the consequences of the disaster that took place late in 1984. Other than the economic shortcomings, almost 3800 people lost their lives and more than 11000 are currently living with eternal disabilities brought about by the MIT spill. During the accident, the response to the emergency was ineffective, and lots of people could have been saved if the Indian government could have ethically played a higher role in caring for its citizen’s safety. Engineering ethics A shortage in engineering ethics has severally resulted in engineering failure. Professionally, an engineer has a responsibility to their employer or client, to the general public, and their occupation, to carry out their duties conscientiously. An ethical engineer is a person who circumvents conflicts of interest, tries not to falsify their knowledge in order to receive jobs beyond their expertise field, acts in support of the environment and society, professionally and thoroughly fulfils the agreements and contracts terms, and supports the learning of upcoming engineers in their field. As mentioned by Baura (2006), it is imperative for engineers maintain a principled reputation in their engineering career. The key values that engineers must work for is to ensure health, safety, as well as well-being of the public, carry out services only in their competence area, act as truthful trustees or agents for their employers or clients, shun deceiving acts, and behave conscientiously, honourably, lawfully, and ethically to improve the honour, repute, and worthiness of engineering. It is the responsibility of the engineers to maintain their position completely in considering everything prior to making crucial decision so as to avoid or reduce industrial accidents (Whitbeck, 2011). Presently the world is shaped by technology, so engineers have a moral responsibility in considering their choices’ consequences. To reduce the number of industrial accidents attributed by human errors, engineers must utilise clear judgment when safety is at risk, particularly in disaster recovery. Predicting/Preventing Industrial Accidents The failure to predict, expect or prevent industrial accident is attributed by the fact that accidents are stochastic in their happening. Great crashes of the supersonic Concorde as well as Space Shuttle, or daily happenings such as car accidents, are attributed by unforeseen, unanticipated or unpredicted combination of technological system as well as human failures, collaborating in completely invisible ways (Duffey, 2005). This can be evidenced by the 2003 great Power Blackout in both Canada and USA that literally left millions in the dark. Safety and health engineers as well examine industrial accidents, work-related diseases, or injuries to find their causes as well as to establish whether the occurrences were preventable or can currently be prevented. In this case, they interview workers and employers so as to gain knowledge about work incidents as well as environments that result in injuries or accidents. Engineers also assess the alterations that were performed in the past industrial accidents to help prevent such accidents from reoccurring. Engineers assist employees as well as employers in comprehending the risks, and improve working practices as well as working conditions. For instance, they may consider the level of noise in the factory harmful to employees' hearing suggest means of reducing the level of noise through modifications to the building, decreasing time for exposure, or by making employees wear appropriate protection for hearing. Having said that, engineers can without doubt predict some hazards that can result in industrial accidents, and using available measures they can prevent them from taking place, but not in totality. A number of ways that engineers can control and prevent industrial accidents are: thoroughly and frequently maintaining equipment and machinery in the factories (Saari, 2002). They should as well make certain that the procedures for hazard correction are implemented and also ensure every person in the factor understand how to utilise and maintain protective equipment. After identifying, all present and possible hazards, engineers have to ensure such hazards are prevented, controlled or corrected. In this case, systems that engineers can use to control as well as prevent hazards include: Engineering Controls, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), medical programs, emergency preparation, Preventive Maintenance Systems, and others. Acceptable Accidents that we have To Live With The methodology for determining the acceptable accidents is rooted in what is tolerable to the population. That is to say, an accident is acceptable when to the population is acceptable. In egalitarian cultures, the population views are crucial when defining what is as well as what is not acceptable risk. Accidents that are naturally caused such as earthquakes, famine, and floods are considered acceptable risk. As mentioned by Knief (1991), the criteria for acceptable risk definition to the population stemming from natural hazards exposure are founded in majority of nations on the characteristics as well as frequency of industrial accidents, for instance, nuclear power plants. Still, past records show that the occurrences of natural disasters are more as compared to industrial hazards, and their effects are more superior. In the present risk criteria framework, Khaleghy Rad, Evans, Nadim, and Lacasse (2009) established that the natural hazards risks are not acceptable, that is to say, they are not acceptable risk in regard to the criteria for acceptable risk rooted in the consequences as well as frequency of industrial accidents. According to risk definition, there is the probability of the hazard occurrence and the hazard consequence. The industrial accident occurrence may largely be controlled as compared to the natural hazards events (Khaleghy Rad, Evans, Nadim, & Lacasse, 2009). While industrial accidents are caused by mistakes, the natural accidents are beyond human ability and so may be considered acceptable. Furthermore, other accidents such as small plane crashes are seen as insignificant in the society, and scores of people consider it acceptable since the level of damage is insignificant. Learning through Mistakes Engineers’ role is to respond to a situation by creating or building something within a particular set of specifications or guidelines that carries out a certain function. Vitally, that creation, plan, or device must carry out its function devoid of failing. However, sooner or later everything has to fail so as to carry out its tasks with a preferred performance level. Therefore, all engineers have to struggle to design in a manner that escapes failure, especially disastrous failure that may lead to loss of life or property and environmental damage. Through studies as well as analyses of engineering catastrophes, contemporary designers in the engineering field can learn does and don’ts and ways to make designs with less probability of failure. Through past failures and mistakes, engineers can learn a lot. According to Saari (2002), the engineering profession together with the engineers have a responsibility or duty to learn from the past mistakes, even though this obligation is not at all times interpreted in engineering ethics codes. Professional ethics is therefore developed from deliberations as well as discussions amongst engineers, and so any revisions in codes of ethics reveal those ongoing exchanges. Occasionally determining on where to .draw the line’ requires efforts on the part of the profession, so this may assist engineers understand their position on certain issues. Consistent with their codes ethics, engineers are responsible of the public welfare, health and safety. Therefore, learning from previous mistakes can help them to fulfil their responsibilities to the public. The Bhopal event is a good lesson that engineers must learn from. The disaster proved that intensifying industrial development in developing economies devoid of simultaneous safety regulations evolution may lead to disastrous consequences (Broughton, 2005). The tragedy apparently proved that local issues on toxic pollution and industrial hazards are every so often related to the dynamics of the global market. Moreover, lack of technical and industrial expertise in responding sufficiently to such industrial accidents may further aggravate the problem. Engineers Making the World Safer Thanks to engineers the world has reliable energy, clean water, secure transport systems, life-saving medical equipment, fast communications, as well as food. Their contribution has made the world more comfortable, safer, and electrifying place to live. From the contemporary inventors to Phoenician craftsman, and others, engineers are the dynamic force behind improving the standards of living globally. Daily, new medications are developed capable of curing different forms of disease; techniques are created to restructure bridges as well as buildings so as to make them safer; and thanks to software engineers performing daily tasks has become easier. Engineers both directly and indirectly influence the life in the society since they have enormously improved people’s way of life. These days, engineering is more concerned about making people more comfortable, richer, safer, and healthier in their day-to-day lives as well as experiences. In developing countries, the significance of engineers has been felt since real difference in making life better has been made: bringing reliable, safe medications and water sources to the people or creating equipment that reduces infant mortality. Moreover, satellites designed by engineers has offered pre-warnings of possible natural catastrophes, as evidenced in the distressing earthquake in Haiti or the tsunami in Japan, where the satellites were used to offer crucial information concerning the areas that were worst affected; thus, assisting rescuers to save more lives. As mentioned by Saari (2002), it is the primary responsibility of all engineers to endure safety for all people. Conclusion In conclusion, awareness of industrial accidents can be heightened by involving employees in the system operation like designing and execution of safety and health plan or objectives, as well as by observing the standards of safety. In workplaces that have health and safety plan, employees always follow orders and actively involve themselves in the day-to-day health and safety activities with as a result help in preventing industrial accidents. As evidenced in the report, industrial accidents are attributed by a number of causes such as human factors (which includes both 'ethical' accidents as well as failure, design errors (caused by unethical practices), and materials failures. The disaster of Bhopal plant is still a warning sign that is simultaneously heeded and ignored. Bhopal tragedy and its consequences were a cautioning that the industrialisation path, for developing economies at large is oppressed by economic, environmental, and human perils. References Baura, G. (2006). Engineering Ethics: An Industrial perspective. San Diego CA: Academic Press. Berenguer, C., Grall, A., & Soares, C. G. (2011). Advances in Safety, Reliability and Risk Management: ESREL 2011. New York: CRC Press. Broughton, E. (2005, May 10). The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review. Retrieved from National Center for Biotechnology Information: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1142333/ Duffey, R. B. (2005). Predicting tragedies, accidents, errors and failures using a learning environment. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials, 6, 878–882. Eckerman, I. (2001). Chemical Industry and Public Health Bhopal as an Example. Edovagen: Population Health Unit in Nacka. Eckerman, I. (2004). The Bhopal Saga – Causes and Consequences of the World’s Largest Industrial Disaster. Bhopal, India: Universities Press. Khaleghy Rad, M., Evans, S. G., Nadim, F., & Lacasse, S. (2009). Natural hazard losses and acceptable risk criteria. Retrieved from SAO/NASA ADS: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009AGUFMNH43B1307K Knief, R. (1991). Risk Management: Expanding Horizons In Nuclear Power And Other Industries. New Jersey: CRC Press. Mitchell, J. K. (2008). Improving community responses to industrial disasters. Retrieved from United Nations University: http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu21le/uu21le03.htm Murphy-Medley, D. (2001). Exportation of Risk: The Case of Bhopal. Retrieved from http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/6559.aspx Rao, V., & Krishna, V. H. (2009). Management: Text and Cases. Delhi: Excel Books India. Saari, J. (2002). Accident Prevention. Retrieved from Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety: http://www.ilocis.org/documents/chpt56e.htm Whitbeck, C. (2011). Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Appendices Appendix 1: Problem tree in Logical Framework Approach: (Yellow = responsibility of UCC. Green = responsibility of the Governments of India and Madhya Pradesh) Appendix 2: Chemical Wastes dumped by UCIL in and around the Factory Appendix 3: Bhopal Map Appendix 4: Scope of Engineering Ethics Read More

The report will talk about industrial accidents by using Bhopal disaster as the reference point. Overview of the Bhopal Gas Disaster On 3rd December 1984, over forty tonnes of methyl isocyanate gas (MIG) leaked from Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) a pesticide plant located in Bhopal, India, instantly killing almost 3,800 people as well as resulting in significant premature and morbidity death for thousands of others. UCIL as a result tried to immediately separate itself from legal responsibility, and it ultimately agreed a settlement with the government of India through arbitration of India’s Supreme Court and agreed to the moral responsibility of the tragedy (Broughton, 2005).

In consequence, UCIL paid 433 million Euros as compensation, which according to Broughton (2005) was somewhat a lesser amount considering the noteworthy underestimations of the enduring exposure effects to the health and the large number of person exposed. The tragedy pointed out a need for implementable international standards for preventative strategies, industrial disaster preparedness as well as environmental safety so as to escape similar accidents in the future. From the time of disaster, a rapid industrialisation has been experienced in the country while numerous positive government policy changes as well as conduct of some industries have happened; however, major environmental threats from poorly regulated as well as rapid industrial growth is still existent (Broughton, 2005).

Causes The causes of Bhopal gas disaster are rooted in two main assertions; corporate negligence as well as worker sabotage. With regard to corporate negligence, it is argued that the tragedy was caused by a compelling combination of decaying as well as under-maintained facilities, a feeble approach towards safety, as well as poorly trained workers. This culminated in the actions of the worker that accidentally allowed water penetrate into methyl isocyanate gas tanks without appropriate working protections (Eckerman, 2001).

On the other hand, the worker sabotage argument arise from the fact that water cannot physically possible enter the MIC tank deprived of resolute human effort, and so that far-reaching evidence and engineering examination results in the assumption that water entered into the MIC tank when a scoundrel worker directly hooked a water hose into an empty valve on the MIC tank. This perspective further claims that the government of India took broad steps to conceal this possibility so as to direct blame to Union Carbide Corporation (UCC).

Based on corporate negligence argument, it is argued that the UCC management and partially the local government poorly invested on safety and tolerated an unsafe working environment (Eckerman, 2004). This can be evidence by factors such as filling MIC tanks past the required levels, inadequate maintenance subsequent to the stopping of MIC production late in 1984, since the safety systems were unfeasible because of poor maintenance, as well as turning off of safety systems so as to economise; this included the refrigeration system of the MIC tank that could have alleviated the severity of the disaster, and lack of disaster plans.

Besides that, the plan was not adequately equipped to handle the extra gas generated by the unexpected water addition to the MIC tank. Still, the alarms of MIC tank had not been functioning for more than four years, and the plant had only one manual back-up system. Ethical Implications and Behaviour In Bhopal plant, ethical issues stem from the lack of maintenance procedures as well as safety standards as compared to its sister plant in U.S. Augmented risk presented by the creation of a unit for MIC production at Bhopal plant in 1980 in addition to the simultaneous slum colonies establishment nearby the plant were somehow ignored by both the Indian government and UCIL.

Moreover, procedures for emergency response as well as community information for handling possible large-scale disasters were missing (Murphy-Medley, 2001).

Read More