Bhopal Gas Tragedy Case Study

In December of 1984 there was an incident that lead to a gas leak in Bhopal, India that is referred to as the “Bhopal Gas Tragedy.” This gas leak is commonly referred to as one of the worst industrial disasters in history. The gas leak was at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) chemical plant in Bhopal, India. This chemical plant produced Sevin which is a pesticide that was commonly used throughout Asia [12]. Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) owned a little more than half the shares of the UCIL company at the time of the gas leak. The gas leak created a cloud of extremely toxic methyl isocyanate gas (MIC) and killed roughly 3,800 people [12]. Many people that were originally affected by the gas leak that are still living have given birth to
After the leak, the UCC immediately tried to dissociate itself from the legal responsibility of the tragedy [12]. During the time of the gas leak, the UCC was not directly in charge of the plant. The plant was ran by the UCIL, however the UCC took several actions following the leak. Some of the work they did was donate money to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund, the Indian Red Cross, to hospitals in the area and they dispatched team of MIC experts to conduct studies and provide medical equipment and assistance [13]. Bhopal, India was clearly not ready for a tragedy to occur with only four local hospitals that were all understaffed and under-resourced [12]. The people of Bhopal, India will be affected for a lifetime. Therefore, the Government of India (GOI) enacted the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act. According to UCC, this enabled, “the GOI to act as the sole legal representative of the victims in claims arising from or related to the Bhopal disaster” [13] (p.1). The GOI settled with the UCC and the UCIL for $470 million for the victims affected by the gas leak [13]. Some say that this is an extremely small amount for the lifelong effects and deaths the people of Bhopal had to be exposed to. During the time of all the legal trials and investigation remediation of the site was not allowed. The UCC stated that their researched confirmed the gas leak did not contaminate the soil or the groundwater
The Bhopal disaster raised public awareness and concern for the storage of toxic chemicals. Toxic chemicals like MIC are regulated in the United States as hazardous waste but not always regulated in developing countries. Broughton, author of The Bhopal Disaster and Its Aftermath: A Review, highlighted that, “seemingly local problems of industrial hazards and toxic contamination are often tied to global market dynamics” [12] (p. 3). Safety and chemical regulations are needed worldwide because they can have catastrophic consequences that affect the entire world [12]. Broughton also implied that local governments should not allow industries to be situated in urban areas because of the risk to such a large amount of people if something were to happen [12]. The leak also led to the first United States community right to know law being passed under the 1986 Superfund Re-authorization [7]. Defined by the USEPA The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) was created to, “help communities prepare to respond in the event of a chemical emergency and to increase the public’s knowledge of the presence and threat of hazardous chemicals” [7] (p.1). The communities should be given the information to be prepared and ready for an event if a hazardous waste leak were to happen and EPCRA is responsible for