Continuity of Operations
QUESTION 1: Watch the video on the Bhopal Chemical Disaster: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0csW97x8d24 (WARNING: This video contains graphic and disturbing images. If you elect not to view it, please research another link regarding Bhopal. ) Briefly discuss your reaction to this disaster and identify three potential mitigations that could have/shound have been in place.
The Bhopal Chemical Disaster was a horrible incident and was hopefully a learning experience for the world. It is truly amazing to me that an American based company would go into a foreign country, build a facility to process hazardous chemicals and not run its organization up to the same standards it would in its own country. In researching the accident, it seems like it was caused by a combination of improper training, faulty/disconnected safety mechanisms, poor emergency procedures, and communication failures. There is also mention of a conspiracy theory related to potential sabotage related to someone introducing water into a vessel with methyl isocynate (MIC). In 2010, 7 Indian nationals that worked for Union Carbide stood trial and were found guilty of negligence and received a two year prison sentence (Magnier & Rana, 2010)
Mitigation 1: Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL) should have not chosen to build its facility in a densely populated area. UCIL should have worked with the Indian government to chose a location that would have kept people at a safe distance should an accident ever occur. Although there is evidence that the plant was originally going to be producing pesticides from materials that were produced elsewhere, it still should have stayed at a safe distance. Due to competition, it started to develop the actual materials to produce the pesticides which was much more hazardous (Broughton, 2005)
Mitigation 2: In 1982, a team of US engineers performed a safety audit of UCIL. During this audit, the team found corroding pipes, valves that did not work and staff that were
The Bhopal Chemical Disaster was a horrible incident and was hopefully a learning experience for the world. It is truly amazing to me that an American based company would go into a foreign country, build a facility to process hazardous chemicals and not run its organization up to the same standards it would in its own country. In researching the accident, it seems like it was caused by a combination of improper training, faulty/disconnected safety mechanisms, poor emergency procedures, and communication failures. There is also mention of a conspiracy theory related to potential sabotage related to someone introducing water into a vessel with methyl isocynate (MIC). In 2010, 7 Indian nationals that worked for Union Carbide stood trial and were found guilty of negligence and received a two year prison sentence (Magnier & Rana, 2010)
Mitigation 1: Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL) should have not chosen to build its facility in a densely populated area. UCIL should have worked with the Indian government to chose a location that would have kept people at a safe distance should an accident ever occur. Although there is evidence that the plant was originally going to be producing pesticides from materials that were produced elsewhere, it still should have stayed at a safe distance. Due to competition, it started to develop the actual materials to produce the pesticides which was much more hazardous (Broughton, 2005)
Mitigation 2: In 1982, a team of US engineers performed a safety audit of UCIL. During this audit, the team found corroding pipes, valves that did not work and staff that were
References: Bhopal.net. (n.d.). An entirely avoidable disaster. Retrieved March 3, 2011 from http://bhopal.net/an-entirely-avoidable-disaster/ Broughton, E. (2005). The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: A review. Environmental Health, 4(6). Retrieved March 2, 2011 from http://www.ehjournal.net/content/4/1/6 Magnier, M. & Rana, A. (2010, June 7). India convicts 7 in 1984 Bhopal gas disaster. New York Times. Retrieved March 3, 2011 from http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/07/world/la-fg-bhopal-verdict-20100608