NEWSJYOTIToday is Sunday, February 05, 2012 according to our host server in United States
(+13:30 Hrs for India)
NewsJyoti Group: Your own voice; your own 'Multi-Lingual' channel on internet
Contact @+91-9891613989 (New Delhi-India). Introduction to Jyoti Narula

Special message for Mona: Come on Mona, this website is all yours;whatever anyone may say... (read more)




The greatest industrial disaster of India; was it man-made?



Summary of background and causes:

The UCIL factory was established in 1969 near Bhopal. 50.9% was owned by Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and 49.1% by various Indian investors, including public sector financial institutions. It produced the pesticide carbaryl (trademark Sevin). In 1979 a methyl isocyanate (MIC) production plant was added to the site. MIC, an intermediate in carbaryl manufacture, was used instead of less hazardous but more expensive materials. UCC understood the properties of MIC and its handling requirements.

During the night of December 2–3, 1984, large amounts of water entered tank 610, containing 42 tons of methyl isocyanate. The resulting exothermic reaction increased the temperature inside the tank to over 200 °C (392 °F), raising the pressure to a level the tank was not designed to withstand. This forced the emergency venting of pressure from the MIC holding tank, releasing a large volume of toxic gases into the atmosphere. The gases flooded the city of Bhopal, causing great panic as people woke up with a burning sensation in their lungs. Thousands died immediately from the effects of the gas and many were trampled in the panic.

Theories of how the water entered the tank differ. At the time, workers were cleaning out pipes with water, and some claim that owing to bad maintenance and leaking valves, it was possible for the water to leak into tank 610. In December 1985 The New York Times reported that according to UCIL plant managers the hypothesis of this route of entry of water was tested in the presence of the Central Bureau Investigators and was found to be negative. UCC also maintains that this route was not possible, and that it was an act of sabotage by a "disgruntled worker" who introduced water directly into the tank. However, the company's investigation team found no evidence of the necessary connection. The Trade Union Report failed to mention that the investigation was totally controlled by the government investigators denying UCC investigators any access to inspecting the ill-fated tank.

The 1985 reports give a picture of what led to the disaster and how it developed, although they differ in details. .....more