Union Carbide Case

8/6/2019 Union Carbide Case

1/20


2/20


3/20

Causes of Disaster

No Precise conclusion

Possibly 3 causes

1. Equipment Failure2. Human error

3. Sabotage

However, one lawsuit against company claims thecorporation for its negligence in designing the plant.

The technology used at Bhopal Plant was inferior tothe technology used in America & Europe.


4/20

Some evidence show that Union Carbide was

aware of the some of deficiencies at the Bhopal

Plant.

Two years prior to the tragedy, the company

inspectors from U.S. found 10 major deficiencies.

Next year Bhopal Plant confirmed that all the

problems had been solved. The U.S. inspectors did not return to India to

confirm this.


5/20

The Indian Government openly blamed UnionCarbide for the tragedy.

There was a speculation that the disgruntled

managers at the Bhopal Plant might havesabotaged the system.

The gauges supposed to warn not functioningproperly at that time.

The plant was permanently closed. Some compensation awarded to the victims and

their families.


6/20

What do you think happened at

Bhopal?

Approximately 43 Tons of MIC was filled in

Tank No. 610C.

The maximum allowable limit for the Tank was50%, but the tank was filled up to 87% (43

Tons).

Immediate cause of the pressure built up was

the exothermic reaction caused by the

contamination of water into Tank No. 610C.


7/20

Due to pressure built up the safety Valve wasopened and gas escaped into the atmosphere.

The refrigeration system was designed to coolthe liquid at the temperature of zero degreecelcius.

But the refrigeration system was shut down

and water was poured around the tank to coolit. So the temperature was not maintained atzero degree celcius.


8/20

On the day of disaster the water leaked into

the tank causing built-up of pressure and

temperature.

Pouring was continued.

To prevent the tank from exploding the safety

valve opened and released the gas.


9/20

Do you think that Union Carbide exhibit Social

responsibility by designing the plant less than

safe, if at all?

The technology used at Bhopal Plant was

inferior.

The maintenance and safety standards were

lower compared to the Europe & US Plants.


10/20


11/20

The vent gas scrubber contained inadequate

quantity of caustic soda.

Water curtain/spray could rise upto 13 meters

while the gas evolved at the height of 33 meters.

The mandatory refrigeration for MIC unit was

shut down for three months to save money.

Other plants in US and Europe had a safetysystem automatically control with manual back-

up devices. But they were manual at Bhopal.


12/20

There were not any emergency planning

measures and local authority knew nothing

about the dangers of MIC.

Union Carbide was aware of all these

deficiencies but in order to cut the cost no

measures were taken to improve the

condition of the plant.

This has led to loss of thousands of lives.


13/20

Also the company paid only $ 470 million as an

amount for compensation against @ 3000 million

demanded by the Government of India.

From this amount each victim received $ 500

(only seven cents per day). This was a very little

amount which equal to the amount needed for

one cup of tea and a piece of bread. So in true sense the Union Carbide didnt exhibit

corporate social responsibility.


14/20

Would you hold Union Carbide ethically

responsible for the death of thousands of

Indians? If so, explain.

Yes, Union Carbide was ethically responsible

for the death of thousands of people.

The safety system used in the plant was sub-

standard. Also the parts used were of poor

quality and older technology.


15/20

Plant production process

Methylamine (1) reacts with phosgene (2)

producing methyl isocyanate (3) which reactswith 1-naphthol (4) to yield carbaryl (5)


16/20

Equipment and safety regulations


17/20

The MIC tank alarms had not worked for four years.

There was only one manual back-up system, comparedto a four-stage system used in the US.

The flare tower and the vent gas scrubber had beenout of service for five months before the disaster. Thegas scrubber therefore did not treat escaping gaseswith sodium hydroxide (caustic soda), which mighthave brought the concentration down to a safe level.

The maximum pressure the scrubber could handle,provided it had been operating, was only a quarter ofthe pressure during the leak. The flare tower could onlyhold a quarter of the gas that leaked in 1984.


18/20

To reduce energy costs, the refrigeration systemwas idle. The MIC was kept at 20 degrees Celsius,not the 4.5 degrees advised by the manual.

The steam boiler, intended to clean the pipes,was out of action for unknown reasons.

Slip-blind plates that would have prevented waterfrom pipes being cleaned from leaking into the

MIC tanks through faulty valves were notinstalled. Their installation had been omittedfrom the cleaning checklist.


19/20


20/20

Carbon steel valves were used at the factory, eventhough they corrode when exposed to acid.

UCC admitted in their own investigation report thatmost of the safety systems were not functioning on the

night of December 3, 1984. The design of the MIC plant, following government

guidelines, was "Indianized" by UCIL engineers tomaximize the use of indigenous materials andproducts. Mumbai based Humphreys and GlasgowConsultants PVT. Ltd. were the main consultants,Larsen and Toubro fabricated the MIC storage tanks,and Taylor of India Ltd. provided the instrumentation.

Documents

Union Carbide Case