Home Globe Greenpeace Cyberactivist Community  
Posts (by Subject)
Search:
Menu Corners Menu Corners about Menu Corners Menu Corners groups Menu Corners Menu Corners forum Menu Corners Menu Corners news Menu Corners Menu Corners logs Menu Corners Menu Corners help Menu Corners
Generic Spacer
Menu Corners Current Quote Menu Corners
Until we find leaders who will stop being controlled by special interests, alternative energy sources will always be under attack.
Anonymous
more More
Generic SpacerRecent Articles

Wednesday, December 11

  • Brazil Mudslides Kill 34, More Feared Buried 
  • Cheney Victory In Court Over Energy Documents 
  • Wallstroem: EU Lacking Political Will To Meet Kyoto Targets 
  • Forest Stress Linked to Climate Change 
  • Spain Says Sunken Tanker Leaking 125 Tonnes Of Oil Every Day 
  • Cananda, New Zealand Ratification: Brings Kyoto One Step Closer To Reality 

    Tuesday, December 10

  • Canada Will Cap Business Kyoto Costs  (7)
  • Series Of Wind Farms For Scotland  (1)
  • New Zealand Ratifies Kyoto  (1)
  • Warming Models "Nicer Than What Is Likely To Happen"  (2)
  • Victory for Exxon Valdez Plaintiffs  (1)
  • EU Agrees GHG Trading System 

    Monday, December 09

  • Bhopal Open House  (18)
  • Slovakia Does First Kyoto Deal  (3)
  • Bush Inaction Plan On Global Climate Change  (2)
  • Spanish Oil Slick Clean-Up Extended  (1)
  • Oil Slick Off British Coast  (2)
  • Climate Change Will Exacerbate World Poverty 
  • Australia: Awfully Big Blaze In The Bush 
  • Environment Agency Warns EU On Kyoto Targets 
  • Greenpeace Discovers Vocal Anti- Kyoto Scientists In Canada Funded by Esso  (6)

    Thursday, December 05

  • Adbusters on Exxon 
  • NASA: Permanent Arctic Ice Cap Will Be Gone By Century’s End  (32)
  • EU Legislation For Implementing Kyoto Is Ready For Approval  (1)
  • Germany Blocks EU Energy Tax Agreement 
  • Smoke Over Sydney As Fires Rage 
  • Dutch Government Re-Instates Renewables Subsidies 
  • Exxon admits campaign having impact!  (11)

    Wednesday, December 04

  • Canadian Parliament to Vote on Kyoto  (2)
  • Bush Conference On Global Warming  (4)
  • EU Considers Common Energy Tax Plan  (1)
  • Freak Drought Causes Energy Price Surge In Scandinavia 
  • EU Blacklist Of Oil Tankers  (2)
  • the rabbit  (2)
  • Bhopal Open House
    by Radagast on 09 December 2002 @ 07:27 PM

    With Bhopal campaigner Delcio Rodrigues and toxics campaigner Darryl Luscombe

    Delcio, Darryl and other Greenpeace staff will be responding to your questions and comments over the next few days - please join in the discussion.

    Union Carbide caused the world's worst industrial disaster in Bhopal in 1984. Thousands died that night but the effects of the toxic gas have killed 20,000 people to date and one person a day dies in Bhopal due to the lasting effects of the disaster.

    Dow Chemical, since its merger with Union Carbide in 2001, has refused to assume these liabilities, despite the fact that over 20,000 people in vicinity of the Union Carbide factory continue to be poisoned by toxic chemicals in the groundwater and soil contamination.

    In fact, in a recent memo to all employees, the CEO of Dow Chemical, Michael Parker, states categorically, "But what we cannot and will not do - no matter where Greenpeace takes their protests and how much they seek to undermine Dow’s reputation with the general public - is accept responsibility for the Bhopal accident."

    New evidence indicates Union Carbide installed a poorly designed factory and cut costs to compromise on safety and maintenance systems. Dow says it wants to be a "responsible corporate citizen" and that "protecting the people and the environment must be part of everything we do and every business decision we make". It is difficult to see how Dow can claim to be a sustainability leader while not accepting responsibility to address the continuing tragedy in Bhopal.

    Now that Dow Chemical has purchased Union Carbide, the liability for cleaning up the factory site should rest with them. Yet they have taken no action to clean up the poisoned site or take responsibility for the people of Bhopal who are ill and dying. If Bhopal was in the US you can bet that it would have been cleaned up in a few years rather than still ongoing 18 years later.

    We would like to hear how you think Dow can be made to take it's responsibility in Bhopal and how we can show companies that they cannot hide their corporate crimes behind expensive greenwashing.



    ( Reply )

    The Fine Print: Comments and articles posted on the Greenpeace Cyberactivist Community are owned by the person who posted them and do not necessarily represent the views of Greenpeace.
    Generic Spacer
    Menu Corners Related Links Menu Corners
  • Articles on Toxics
  • Also by Radagast
  • Radagast Home Page
  • Webmail Radagast
  • Over 10 comments listed. Printing out index only.
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by tig3933 on 10 December 2002 @ 01:57 AM
    After reading most of the GPI site on Bhopal, and some Indian and Japanese sites, I sent the letter to Dow.

    I got a quick reply from the CEO, Parker, with his perspective on the issue.

    One point I didn't read in any of the websites was that the site is now owned by the Indian govt. Why can't they clean up the site and sue Dow to recover the costs? It works in the US.

    The fact that the plant (and it's continuing harm) is now Indian owned, seems to have gotten Dow off the hook. How could the Indian courts have agreed to this in the first place? No clean-up stipulated in the "final" agreement? And why did the courts settle for so paltry a sum in the first place?

    I agree Dow should take responsibility for doing more to end this tragedy. But it also seems the Indian govt is ignoring it's own people by not pressing for reparations in a US court, where their pleas would be more sympathetically heard.

    Are there legal angles to be looked into? A high priced Hollywood lawyer would probably find some way to get another $billion or so for clean-up and personal damages. Wasn't there another case where a company was sued in US courts for irresponsible action abroad? Wasn't it Shell in Nigeria, or something?

    I would also be very interested in starting a world-wide "Down with Dow!" campaign (action day?) to bring this into the headlines, which is where most battles are fought, and sometimes won.

    Tig

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anna F on 10 December 2002 @ 05:15 AM
    I guess Dow are on the charm counteroffensive. I received an e-mail from Dow addressed to 'Dear Interested Stakeholder' with a link to their public report site where they tell us all about their promises and good intentions. I did respond to their e-mail through the link available at the site. I tried to point out that Morality, Responsibility and Care are shown by actions not words, and that until actions match words then there was no real interest in becoming a 'stakeholder'. I had sent e-mails to them not just through Greenpeace but at least one other group who were taking action some months ago. This is, I assume, how Dow had my e-mail. Should we draw more attention to the fact that when we have 'chemical slaughter' there has to be more to differentiate murderous dictators from company directors, than a "Oops! Sorry! we did not mean it. Here's some pettycash go sort it out". Legal action as Tig suggests is also surely a good idea, although I guess expensive and since some recent developments between Dow and the Indian Government perhaps no longer an option. I heard some months back that Indian activists in New Delhi were on hunger strike to protest against the (then) proposed Indian government action that would essentially eliminate the responsibility of Union Carbide and Dow Chemical to provide any further restitution for the surviving victims of the disaster. I believe a woman in Texas was going to join the hunger strike. The Indian Ambassador in the USA received e-mails in protest against the Indian Government intended action, but I am not aware of how successful the action was. If anyone thinks this information, or information on the groups (I believe in the USA) who were taking action on this issue could be useful in setting up links and some form of common action I am pretty confident I can find the info and post it. Corporations are becoming far too adept at placing themselves above the law and achieving immunity from prosecution. Anna
    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by *Shane* on 10 December 2002 @ 06:37 AM
    Although I agree with the actions taken by the authorities to cracdown on poor workplace management, I think that the only reason there is an attempt to make measures safer was because thousands were killed. If only things would happen before lives are spared. I'm afraid that nothing would have been done until something as singnificant as this would have happened. Sigh. If only this happened sooner.
    You are kidding yourself if you think this is going to make other mines safer.
    Corporate CEOS will not be safe if it costs money and it will never happen and that is the saf reality.
    Shane

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anonymous on 10 December 2002 @ 09:09 AM
    Did anybody see this press release that came out last week??? It was posted at Indymedia. The website it linked to was outrageous, but I guess Dow thought so too. I sent the link to a whole bunch of friends and none of them could see it, and when I went back it was gone gone gone.

    December 3, 2002 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact:
    press@dow-chemical.com

    DOW ADDRESSES BHOPAL OUTRAGE, EXPLAINS POSITION
    Company responds to activist concerns with concrete action points.

    In response to growing public outrage over its handling of the Bhopal disaster's legacy, Dow Chemical http://www.dow-/
    chemical.com has issued a statement explaining why it is unable to more actively address the problem.

    "We are being portrayed as a heartless giant which doesn't care about the 20,000 lives lost due to Bhopal over the years," said Dow President and CEO Michael D. Parker. "But this just isn't true. Many individuals within Dow feel tremendous sorrow about the Bhopal disaster, and many individuals within Dow would like the corporation
    to admit its responsibility, so that the public can then decide on the best course of action, as is appropriate in any democracy.

    "Unfortunately, we have responsibilities to our shareholders and our industry colleagues that make action on Bhopal impossible. And being clear about this has been a very big step."

    On December 3, 1984, Union Carbide--now part of Dow--
    accidentally killed 5,000 residents of Bhopal, India, when its pesticide plant sprung a leak. It abandoned the plant without cleaning it up, and since then, an estimated 15,000 more people have died from complications, most resulting from chemicals released into the groundwater.

    Although legal investigations have consistently pinpointed Union Carbide as culprit, both Union Carbide and Dow have had to publicly deny these findings. After the accident, Union Carbide compensated victims' families between US$300 and US$500 per victim.

    "We understand the anger and hurt," said Dow Spokesperson Bob Questra. "But Dow does not and cannot acknowledge responsibility. If we did, not only would we be required to expend many billions of dollars on cleanup and compensation--much worse, the public could then point to Dow as a precedent in other big cases. 'They took responsibility; why can't you?' Amoco, BP, Shell, and Exxon all have
    ongoing problems that would just get much worse. We are unable to set this precedent for ourselves and the industry, much as we would like to see the issue resolved in a humane and satisfying way."

    Shareholders reacted to the Dow statement with enthusiasm. "I'm happy that Dow is being clear about its aims," said Panaline Boneril, who owns 10,000 shares, "because Bhopal is a recurrent problem that's
    clogging our value chain and ultimately keeping the share price from expressing its full potential. Although a real solution is not immediately possible because of Dow's commitments to the larger industry issues, there is new hope in management's exceptional new clarity on the matter."

    "It's a slow process," said Questra. "We must learn bit by bit to meet this challenge head-on. For now, this means acknowledging that much as it pains us, our prime responsibilities are to the people who own Dow shares, and to the industry as a whole. We simply cannot do anything
    at this moment for the people of Bhopal."

    Dow Chemical is a chemical products and services company
    devoted to bringing its customers a wide range of chemicals. It furnishes solutions for the agriculture, electronics, manufacturing, and oil and gas industries, including well-known products like Styrofoam, DDT, and Agent Orange, as well as lesser-known brands like
    Inspire, Retain, Eliminator, Quash, and Woodstalk.

    For more on the Bhopal catastrophe, please visit Dow at
    http://www.dow-chemical.com/.

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anonymous on 10 December 2002 @ 09:58 AM
    I see unscrupulous human's consequences on Bhopal (unscrupulous Union Carbide India Ltd !!'!), and i remember that sites type exist in other country : Albanie, Russie, roumanie and...

    I can't forget the East Country who, after catastrophic politics, are victim to catastrophic ecological desaster.

    100% de soutien aux activistes Greenpeace et aux organisations locales de survivants de la catastrophe du Bhopal !!'!

    Peace!!'!

    Christophe

    Click to download attachment Estagnous.jpg
    16KB (17222 bytes)

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anonymous on 10 December 2002 @ 05:50 PM
    The best way to kindle the company's notice to the badly-hit people of Bhopal, to at least give relief funds, is to join together and stop buying its products such as 'Eveready' cells.
    Albert.

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by daniell on 11 December 2002 @ 12:41 PM
    For me there is no doubt that Dow will have to accept responsibility for the Bhopal accident, this is only a question of time. But what does this mean, to take responsibility? Greenpeace points this out by four points: 1) ensure the toxic factory site is cleaned up, 2) ensure clean drinking water is provided, 3) secure medical rehabilitation and long-term medical treatment facilities, 4) secure economic rehabilitation for the gas-affected persons and their families. I agree with this list, because I believe it is very important to always point out clearly what an abstract word like "responsibility" means. I think that it should not be our goal to try to destroy Dow or even to take revenge on this company, BUT just to make them pay what they are due. (Of course there still are all these lives lost, health ruined and pain caused, something that can never be paid with money.) But let's just suppose Dow has agreed to take responsibility: Has anybody ever tried to figure out the costs for Dow if they accept these four points? I guess it should be possible for the first three points to give quite exact numbers, while for point 4 it might be difficult. My point: On one hand this will be an enormous sum of money. BUT: It has to be compared to the enormous amount of money this company makes, and has made, every year. So by pointing out the effective costs I am sure it will be clear that Dow CAN AFFORD to take the step, take responsibility and really do something for the people in Bhopal.
    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Compare and Contrast - Dow v Bhopal
    by Tom Dowdall on 11 December 2002 @ 04:35 PM
    Hi,

    Just few pertinent facts (and a small bit of opinion at the end):

    Dow

    World largest chemical company

    Annual sales: US$28 Billion (makes Dow bigger economically than 2/3 of the world's nations)

    Assets: $US10.8 billion

    Investments: US$4.3 billion

    Property: US$13.7 billion

    Total assets: US$36.8 billion

    Bhopal

    World's worst industrial disaster

    Dead - 20,000 to date

    Injured - estimated 500,000 still suffer from the disasters conituing effects

    Current compensation - $300-500 per survivour

    Abandoned factory one of the most polluted hotspots in the world.

    What fraction of their huge assest is Dow willing to spare to end this ongoing disaster?

    Apparently from their letter to staff, not much:

    "Can, and should Dow, in its role as a global corporate citizen, help to address any of the present day needs which are apparent in Bhopal? That is why, despite the fact that we clearly have no legal obligations in relation to the tragedy, we have, for some time, been exploring various philanthropic initiatives which might address some of those needs – just as we do in other parts of the world where we have business interests."

    Basically under extreme pressure they may make a small 'gift'.

    Who wants to help ensure they do the right thing in Bhopal and show them this is the only way to really keep protesters quiet?

    Tom




    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anonymous on 11 December 2002 @ 11:04 PM
    Your statement that Dow Chemical should assume responsibiliy for the terrible crimes committed by Union Carbide is the most ludicrous statement that I have ever heard. I totally support the agressive and continuing pressure on UCC to clean up the site. I have read up on the Bhopal situation, at http://www.bhopal.com/ and at http://www.chemsafety.gov/lib/bhopal01.htm#introduction. On Feb. 6, 2001 Dow purchased all of Union Carbides STOCK and today it is still a seperately operated company. Are you trying to tell me that since I own stock in Texas Instruments that I could and should be sued by Iraqis because TI made many of the parts that were used in the laser guided bombs during the 1991 Gulf War. Are you trying to tell me that if I were to buy a used car, and it were to break down and cause me to get into a serious accident, that the person that sold me the USED car should liable for my pain and suffering? Why has Greenpeace not been sued for the economic terrorism that it supports when it's members shut down a factory and cause that company to lose, in some cases, millions of dollars in lossed revenue due to the shut down? Greenpeace's defense would be, "we are not responsible for the actions of some of our rouge members". Greenpeace opperates on the donations of it's members, so how can it not be responsible for their actions? Why the hypocrisy?

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    Re: Bhopal Open House
    by Anonymous on 12 December 2002 @ 12:02 AM
    How can Dow Chemical be responsible for what Union Carbide did in Bhopal back in 1984? I own stock in Texas Instruments. Should I be liable for the Iraqis killed by the laser guided bombs that fell back in 1991? What if I owned stock in Dow Chemical? Should I be financially liable for cleaning up Bhopal? I guarentee that in one way or another Greenpeace has directly supported Dow Chemical financially, by purchasing or using anything that contains plastics or other chemicals. What about the computer server that keeps this web site running? What about your ships that pollute the atmosphere? I could go on and on a point out the hypocrisy. The biggest liability I see that Greenpeace is responsible for, is the economic terrorism that it supports. If Dow Chemical is responsible for Bhopal, then shouldn't Greenpeace be liable for it's members that shut down various companies facilities for sometimes days at a time? Should Greenpeace not be sued by the company that lost revenue, due to the shut down? Greenpeace organized the shut down. I totally agree the pressure for Union Carbide to clean up the site should be kept up. What about the responsibilities of the Indian government, which now owns the site? You cannot go down the line and hold everyone who is related to who was directly responsible, liable for what happened.

    [ Reply to this comment ]
    ( Reply to the original article )

    The Fine Print: Comments and articles posted on the Greenpeace Cyberactivist Community are owned by the person who posted them and do not necessarily represent the views of Greenpeace.

    buffer