Introduction
The Bhopal accident occurred in India almost 40 years ago, on December 2, 1984. This disaster claimed the lives of 3800 people, tens of thousands were injured from contact with toxic substances, and 102,000 were disabled (Lucchini et al., 2018). The incident occurred when water entered a methyl isocyanate storage tank, causing an uncontrolled chemical reaction. The overheating of the MIC storage tank resulted in 80,000 pounds of MIC being released over the city of Bhopal in a poisonous cloud (Lucchini et al., 2018). This paper analyzes and evaluates the Bhopal disaster in terms of industrial hygiene.
Industrial Hygiene Impacts on the Workers
The accident was due to the negligence of personnel who could not prevent water ingress into the MIC tank. This carelessness had dire consequences and claimed the lives of the factory workers who serviced the tank. There are industrial hygiene procedures, such as changing clothes and taking a shower after working on the factory premises. They exist to keep hazardous workers safe, although they can do little for the victims of disasters. One reasonable alternative is a protection system such as ventilation blocking.
UCC, the company responsible for the incident, tried to prevent the data on the incident from becoming public knowledge. Experts note that the most likely version was poisoning people with hydrogen cyanide (HCN), a chemical compound formed from MIC after temperature exposure during the explosion (Lucchini et al., 2018). Remarkably, the symptoms of victims of gas poisoning, such as the cherry color of the blood and internal organs, are a sign of cyanide poisoning. Subsequently, some victims were given sodium thiosulfate injections, which are used to treat cyanide poisoning.
Legal Aspects of the Incident
The incidents of such scale usually have the long-going legal repercussions for the responsible sides. However, the UCC tried to avoid liability by downplaying the number of victims and hiding information about the chemical composition of the cloud. The company paid the Government of India $470 million in compensation (Lucchini et al., 2018). The UCC recommended sodium thiosulfate for treatment but later refuted this recommendation to hide the fact of poisoning by HCN. Initially, the UCC tried to avoid liability for the gas leak by shifting it to UCIL, the Indian subsidiary that built the plant. Equally interesting, UCC developed fake news about the plant being sabotaged by Sikh extremist groups and disgruntled employees, but this version was not accepted by the public.
Key Points from an Industrial Hygienist Perspective
From the perspective of industrial hygiene, the accident is a striking example of how a violation of the requirements and standards of work in hazardous industries can lead to disaster. Workers in factories dealing with chemical and atomic elements must follow strict work procedures. These procedures include recommendations for personal safety and requirements for working with manufacturing elements. In the Bhopal incident case, safety requirements were not met, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths, injuries, and related illnesses.
Control Measures that Would Prevent the Incident from Occurring Again
Disaster prevention includes the development of policies to ensure that the industry meets technical standards, including the allocation of resources for risk analysis and assessment. Compliance with environmental regulations reduces risks to public health and ensures environmental safety. Equally important, local and state governments develop strategies to respond to environmental emergencies. These strategies may include sustainable development policies and programs, such as international policies suggested by the WHO.
Conclusion
Therefore, industrialization must be accompanied by compliance with safety requirements. When building factories, companies often seek to circumvent environmental regulations, especially if the construction takes place overseas where US regulations are not enforced. However, the handling of hazardous substances must be carried out under requirements that consider possible consequences of negligence. At the same time, a technical assessment of materials, engineering solutions, processes, and work equipment should be conducted. Equally important, personnel must adhere to safety and industrial hygiene requirements.
Reference
Lucchini, R. G; Hashim, D., Acquilla, S., Basanets, A., Bertazzi, & P. A. (2018). A comparative assessment of major international disasters: the need for exposure assessment, systematic emergency preparedness, and lifetime health care. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 1-17.