How Dow Chemical Can End the Bhopal Tragedy

[cancel2 2022]

Brilliant article from Motley Fool about Dow and why they should face up to their responsibilities over Bhopal.

By Isaac Pino and Charlie Kannel with Tom Gardner
July 27, 2012 | Comments (92)


Editor's note: This article has been corrected to reflect that the Bhopal company was majority-owned, not wholly owned, by Union Carbide.
Early in the morning on Dec. 3, 1984, a leaking tank within an insecticide plant unleashed approximately 45 tons of a toxic gas in the northern area of Bhopal, a city in central India. The poisonous gas cloud -- a methyl isocyanate compound -- spread across the surrounding neighborhoods and slums as the people of Bhopal slept. Direct exposure to the substance reportedly killed 3,800 people during the night, while thousands of others fled the city and the expanding cloud of toxic fumes.
Almost three decades later, the gas has vanished, but Bhopal remains devastated by the toxic leak. The company responsible for the disaster was a majority-owned subsidiary of Union Carbide, which itself is now a subsidiary of Dow Chemical. The story of Bhopal has been unearthed because of Dow's prominent role as a key sponsor in the 2012 Summer Olympics.
A controversial Summer Games
London's 2012 Summer Olympics were supposed to be the "first truly sustainable Olympic Games," according to organizers. Contrasting with Beijing's over-the-top production, London aimed to leave a legacy of environmental responsibility. Dow's sponsorship (to say nothing of co-sponsors BP and Rio Tinto) has put that legacy in serious jeopardy. The relationship between Dow, Bhopal, and Olympic sustainability triggered protests and anti-greenwashing campaigns, while provoking outcries against globalization. We believe the story of Bhopal and Dow should be shared with investors to encourage corporate transparency around the world.
We also believe Dow can reverse this public relations nightmare by taking responsibility for Bhopal on the global stage of the Olympics. As outlined below, we propose a very clear, simple, and fair solution. We strongly encourage readers to share this article to bring further attention to an important issue. We recommend financing a Bhopal remediation effort through a public stock offering, a move that would boost Dow Chemical's reputation and, most importantly, provide the people of Bhopal with the services and health care they desperately need.

The disaster and the devastation that followed
For Americans, the disastrous gas leak is a distant memory, but the aftermath burdens the daily lives of Bhopal citizens even today. While figures vary widely, several accounts estimate the disaster ultimately led to 20,000 deaths, and a 2006 Indian government affidavit stated that the leak caused 558,125 injuries. Those numbers continue to grow because of the hazardous waste that remains at the crumbling insecticide plant. The city has become a symbol of broken governance, legal maneuvering, and extreme human suffering.
Originally, Union Carbide claimed the gas leak was a result of sabotage. However, plaintiffs in a 1998 civil suit in India revealed a laundry list of safety issues that were contributing factors to the catastrophe. Among these were poor maintenance, failure to implement safety precautions, and evidence that cost-cutting measures increased the severity of the disaster. Reports have noted that the safety equipment and procedures in place in Bhopal were seriously lacking compared to those of similar U.S.-based plants.
Following the disaster, Union Carbide failed to appear in court for trial in India, and eventually reached a settlement, agreeing to pay $470 million in 1989, which amounted to $1,500 per death and $550 per contaminated individual. The figure was substantially reduced from the $3.3 billion original claim presented by the Indian government and seems drastically low given the lingering adverse health effects of the gas leak. Unusually high instances of cancer, respiratory difficulties, immune and neurological disorders, near-blindness, reproductive difficulties, and heart problems continue to afflict the survivors. Bhopal's miscarriage rate is now seven times the average in India . Moreover, no one under the age of 18 was registered as a victim during the aftermath, yet the number of children exposed to the gas is estimated to be over 200,000.
Adding insult to injury, some 425 tons of hazardous waste remain on the grounds of the old factory today. Little has been done to clean up or remove the various chemicals, which continue to seep into the ground and pollute the local drinking water. The Indian government ships fresh water, but the deliveries are highly irregular. As a result, slum-dwellers are left with no choice but to drink the tainted groundwater.

To make matters worse, the slums expanded around the site because of the relatively low cost of nearby land. The inhabitants, already crippled by extreme poverty, develop chronic and debilitating illnesses that burden their everyday lives. Their ability to work is diminished. Children raised in this area face twice the risk of dying as do children elsewhere, partly because their parents cannot care for them adequately. Surprisingly enough, despite the serious health problems reported over the years, Union Carbide once claimed that methyl isocyanate was only a "mild throat and ear irritant."
Legal wrangling, scapegoating, and corruption have let persist an environmental cesspool that is destroying human life. Had Union Carbide or the government cleaned up the waste and provided an adequate water supply, as originally intended, countless birth defects and premature deaths could have been avoided.
Only recently has the Madhya Pradesh state government taken steps to address the crumbling factory site, which The New York Times described as a "wasteland in the city's heart." A German agency has agreed to remove 350 tons of waste over the course of the next year, all at Indian taxpayers' expense. While the local government had previously impeded studies on Bhopal's environmental contamination, the Madhya Pradesh government's willingness to let the German agency remove the waste is a hopeful sign. Still, the epic mess that began over a quarter-century ago is far from over. Who can -- and should -- help the remaining victims and put an end to the ordeal once and for all?

Why Dow should assume responsibility
For nearly three decades, the companies involved and the Indian government repeatedly deflected responsibility for the Bhopal disaster. The plant's operator at the time of the leak, Union Carbide India Limited, was spun-off from the Union Carbide Corporation after the disaster, but by then the plant had closed permanently and the assets and liabilities were no longer on UCIL's books. After an extended round of the blame game, the responsibility for Bhopal fell into a black hole while Bhopali citizens continued to suffer.
We conducted a careful analysis and believe all roads lead to Dow when it comes to Bhopal's environmental liabilities. One by one, let's dissect and rebut Dow's arguments:

• The Indian government should take responsibility for the Bhopal site.
  Both India and the U.S. adhere to the "polluter pays" principle, which states that the producer of pollution must pay for its consequences. Union Carbide was the polluter, and the continued existence of severe health problems and toxic waste in Bhopal shows that Union Carbide never fulfilled its responsibility. Further, Union Carbide signed a lease with the Indian government, promising to return the site "in its original condition." Even though the Indian government does in fact own the site now, Union Carbide failed to fulfill its original obligation.
• If Union Carbide owned the Bhopal plant, Dow bears no responsibility.
  In 1984, Union Carbide owned the plant. A decade later, Union Carbide claimed that the plant was sold during an auction in 1994. However, contradictory to that claim, the plant was no longer on the books at the time of the auction. Instead, the Indian government had shut down the plant, and the legal ramifications of the pollution were still being resolved. In 2001, Dow acquired Union Carbide for $11.6 billion and the two entities became one and the same. So when we write "Dow," think "Union Carbide." Union Carbide describes the relationship in its annual report: "Union Carbide's business activities comprise components of Dow's global operations rather than stand-alone operations."
• Dow bought Union Carbide free of liabilities.
  According to international law, the principal of "successor liability" requires the purchaser to gain both the assets and liabilities of the target. So, along with the wealth of assets acquired from Union Carbide, Dow should also be responsible for the environmental and health damage Union Carbide caused in Bhopal.
• There is no precedent for Dow assuming Union Carbide's liabilities.
  A Dow spokesperson has pointed out that providing funds for Bhopal is out of the question since it would open up the company for additional liabilities. However, after purchasing Union Carbide in 2001, Dow acknowledged its responsibility for asbestos liabilities from American incidents involving Union Carbide dating back to 1972. In fact, Dow set aside $2.2 billion to resolve the asbestos issues. So Dow recognizes that "successor liability" applies, yet it ignores the inherited liabilities of the Bhopal disaster.
• Union Carbide settled the claim years ago.
  The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide represented 15% of the original $3.3 billion claim, and left victims with about $550. Dow Public Relations Officer Kathy Hun once asserted that "$500 is plenty good for an Indian." According to The Bhopal Reader, "It was widely believed that the courts had been pressured or influenced by the [Indian] Congress government ... and that the government had made a private deal with Union Carbide." To this day, Dow has continued to pressure the Indian government to keep the company free of liability, acknowledging that the debt is not fully paid and the criminal case not entirely resolved. In a 2006 letter to the Indian ambassador, Dow CEO Andrew Liveris sought assurance Dow had no further responsibility at Bhopal "to ensure that we have the appropriate investment climate."
• Eveready Industries should be liable.
  While Eveready Industries did purchase Union Carbide India Limited, Union Carbide's Indian subsidiary, in 1994, the Bhopal plant had long been closed, so there was no transfer of the site and its liability to Eveready. Union Carbide owned and operated the Bhopal site, so Union Carbide (and now Dow) should be held liable according to the "polluter pays" principle.

A company should take responsibility for the environmental damage caused by its operations. Since Dow acquired Union Carbide outright in 2001, this responsibility should lie with Dow, but thus far the U.S. courts have disagreed. Untangling the legal liability is outside of our focus, however, and the mistakes by the Indian government only made the legal mess worse. Ultimately, Dow should remedy the situation for ethical reasons, and establish an entirely new precedent.
This type of convoluted legal maneuvering by Union Carbide and Dow is not a new story. In Ecuador, beginning in the 1960s, Texaco discharged billions of gallons of oil waste directly into the Amazon rainforest, creating an oil spill that ruined the lives of countless indigenous people. Chevron, after acquiring Texaco (and its liabilities!) in 2001, has refused to pay the $18 billion fine ordered by Ecuadorian courts, claiming fraud. In a company statement, Chevron argues that PetroEcuador, the state-owned oil company that took over Texaco's facilities after 2001, should be held responsible. Sound familiar?
As these cases illustrate, multinational companies can use legal loopholes to shirk their responsibilities in developing countries. Some of the world's richest companies profit at the expense of some of its poorest citizens. Meanwhile, shareholders in these companies often remain oblivious to the true nature of these transactions.

A solution to this continuing tragedy
Dow's management team, employees, and shareholders should capitalize on the unique opportunity the company has as a sponsor of the 2012 Olympic Games. While Dow has no legal obligation, Dow has an ethical obligation to right this wrong, a move that will end up benefiting Dow in the long run. Independent of the Indian government, Dow should create a Bhopal relief fund immediately to accomplish the following:

• End unnecessary human suffering.
  Dow must take responsibility for the survivors' health and rehabilitation. While the Indian government has attempted to finance a health insurance policy for victims, the effort failed because of bureaucracy and corruption. Dow should buy a group insurance plan to ensure people receive the care they deserve, while adhering to the "polluter pays" principle.
• Build health care facilities.
  Dow must provide ongoing access to treatment for the individuals affected by the Bhopal disaster. Allow organizations representing victims to participate and conduct research to better understand the afflicting illnesses.
• Clean up the site.
  A thorough cleanup is of utmost priority to prevent further exposure to toxic soil and groundwater. Beyond removing the waste, cleanup will include decontaminating the soil and water to remove all traces of the toxic chemicals and will ensure that Dow's liability does not keep growing.

Estimating the cost of the above actions is difficult. At this point, only the Indian government has access to critical information about the site and victims, and its studies recently estimated that just over $1 billion would be an appropriate comprehensive total. We outline below how Dow could finance at least half this amount (perhaps much more) soon after the 2012 Olympic games:

1. Conduct a subsequent stock offering ($540 million investment)
Dow's board of directors should propose a 1.5% dilutive stock offering, which would result in 18 million new common shares. Such an offering would raise approximately $540 million at Dow's current share price of $30, all of which would be committed to the Bhopal Relief Fund.
Initially, shareholders might balk at the idea of diluting their claim on the company's earnings. The recommended sum, $540 million, may give investors sticker shock, but this isn't an unusual move for the $36 billion company. Just last year, Dow issued 9.2 million new shares, half the amount proposed here. Even if shares drop initially, Dow's support would help erase a liability that management has ignored for over a decade. We think the market could interpret Dow's approach positively, if the company communicates the proposal effectively.
At the Fool, we encourage buy-and-hold investing practices, and shareholders with a similar outlook would recognize the move as an intangible investment in Dow's reputation. Investors should urge Dow to rise above its legal maneuvering and make a long-term investment by aiding the victims of Bhopal.
2. Sponsor an Olympic fundraising campaign ($10 million investment)
In addition to the stock offering, Dow should raise funds through a widespread campaign announced during the Olympics. Thus far, Dow's Olympic sponsorship has resulted in utter outrage in London and India. A motion in March 2012 to terminate Dow Chemical's Olympic sponsorship was only narrowly rejected in an 11-10 vote by the organizing committee.
The backlash has yet to subside, but Dow could change public sentiment during the London Games. Dow should announce the launch of a $10 million campaign to raise awareness for the people of Bhopal, calling attention to its intent to remediate Bhopal during one of the most widely watched events in the world.
While it's impossible to estimate third-party donations resulting from such a campaign, the response could be significant. Dow's willingness to take action despite its lack of legal obligation would set an important precedent in corporate America.
Overall, Dow's contribution would go a long way in addressing its liability to Bhopal inherited from Union Carbide. Dow would be committing more than half of the $1 billion requested by the Indian government. This is a fair and reasonable approach that would prevent Dow from paying for the government's inaction and missteps over the years. At the same time, this move would show that Dow has decided to rise above the legal mess, take responsibility for its subsidiary's negligence, and do what is ethically right.
Why now?
Dow's refusal to take responsibility for Bhopal has hit the company's bottom line well beyond the associated legal costs. The unaddressed liability has hurt its reputation, resulted in protests and media backlash, and even limited its ability to invest overseas. One activist organization went so far as to

on the BBC, claiming responsibility for the Bhopal disaster, and consequently causing a sell-off in European markets that erased $2 billion worth of Dow's market cap (which was recovered when the hoax was revealed).
Despite Dow's disregard for Bhopal, the company's "

" advertising campaign allegedly "showcases Dow's commitment to addressing global economic, social and environmental concerns." Now is the time for Dow to embody this uplifting message it has paid millions to publicize. By taking action for Bhopal, Dow has an opportunity to rebuild its brand and become the paradigm for corporate social responsibility.
Dow's employees, shareholders, and even the broader investing community have something at stake. Dow's reparations would pay back a debt to thousands of victims that had previously been excluded from its balance sheet, creating transparency in an opaque reporting environment. This approach should be championed across the business world.
We're forwarding this article and our proposal to Dow's 10 largest institutional investors. Alone, these 10 institutions hold 42% of the company, but there are millions of other shareholders. Every Dow investor should use his or her voice to support a resolution to help the people of Bhopal. There is no better time than now for Dow to live up to its advertising campaign and demonstrate the ideals of the Olympic Games.
How can you help? Our goal is to spread the word about a tragedy that many Americans had never heard of or scarcely remember. Share this article with friends and family, and tell them about the Bhopal tragedy. Also, contact the Dow Investor Relations Office at 1-800-422-8193 and voice your concerns about Dow's role as an Olympic sponsor.


http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...-can-end-the-bhopal-tragedy.aspx#.UBen8fKYPVg

 

[cancel2 2022]

I think this extract from the article cover the main objections that have been used to deny Dow's responsibility on here and elsewhere. Contrast Dow's behaviour with the way that BP paid up promptly, apparently shrimps are rated higher than Indians when it comes to compensation.

• The Indian government should take responsibility for the Bhopal site.
  Both India and the U.S. adhere to the "polluter pays" principle, which states that the producer of pollution must pay for its consequences. Union Carbide was the polluter, and the continued existence of severe health problems and toxic waste in Bhopal shows that Union Carbide never fulfilled its responsibility. Further, Union Carbide signed a lease with the Indian government, promising to return the site "in its original condition." Even though the Indian government does in fact own the site now, Union Carbide failed to fulfill its original obligation.
• If Union Carbide owned the Bhopal plant, Dow bears no responsibility.
  In 1984, Union Carbide owned the plant. A decade later, Union Carbide claimed that the plant was sold during an auction in 1994. However, contradictory to that claim, the plant was no longer on the books at the time of the auction. Instead, the Indian government had shut down the plant, and the legal ramifications of the pollution were still being resolved. In 2001, Dow acquired Union Carbide for $11.6 billion and the two entities became one and the same. So when we write "Dow," think "Union Carbide." Union Carbide describes the relationship in its annual report: "Union Carbide's business activities comprise components of Dow's global operations rather than stand-alone operations."
• Dow bought Union Carbide free of liabilities.
  According to international law, the principal of "successor liability" requires the purchaser to gain both the assets and liabilities of the target. So, along with the wealth of assets acquired from Union Carbide, Dow should also be responsible for the environmental and health damage Union Carbide caused in Bhopal.
• There is no precedent for Dow assuming Union Carbide's liabilities.
  A Dow spokesperson has pointed out that providing funds for Bhopal is out of the question since it would open up the company for additional liabilities. However, after purchasing Union Carbide in 2001, Dow acknowledged its responsibility for asbestos liabilities from American incidents involving Union Carbide dating back to 1972. In fact, Dow set aside $2.2 billion to resolve the asbestos issues. So Dow recognizes that "successor liability" applies, yet it ignores the inherited liabilities of the Bhopal disaster.
• Union Carbide settled the claim years ago.
  The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide represented 15% of the original $3.3 billion claim, and left victims with about $550. Dow Public Relations Officer Kathy Hun once asserted that "$500 is plenty good for an Indian." According to The Bhopal Reader, "It was widely believed that the courts had been pressured or influenced by the [Indian] Congress government ... and that the government had made a private deal with Union Carbide." To this day, Dow has continued to pressure the Indian government to keep the company free of liability, acknowledging that the debt is not fully paid and the criminal case not entirely resolved. In a 2006 letter to the Indian ambassador, Dow CEO Andrew Liveris sought assurance Dow had no further responsibility at Bhopal "to ensure that we have the appropriate investment climate."
• Eveready Industries should be liable.
  While Eveready Industries did purchase Union Carbide India Limited, Union Carbide's Indian subsidiary, in 1994, the Bhopal plant had long been closed, so there was no transfer of the site and its liability to Eveready. Union Carbide owned and operated the Bhopal site, so Union Carbide (and now Dow) should be held liable according to the "polluter pays" principle.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Had the incidend occurred in the US then DOW would have accepted liabilty for the disaster under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Liability and Compensation Act (CERCLA aka Superfund). Meaning, as stated above, that DOW would have purchased both assets and liabilities and since they have the deep pockets the US government would have assessed them for remediation of the site. Having said that, this would have amounted to DOW not having purchased Union Carbide in the first place. A signifiant portion of the blame for Bhopal...and pay attention here wingnuts, libertarians and those other who oppose government regulations, belongs to the India government for it's lack of both enforcement and supplying the resources to remediate this site. This is what you can expect from laissez-faire capitalism. The first argument being made here is a weak one. Had this occurred in the US and there has been incidents in the US larger is scope from a contamination stand point in which the corporate deep pockets were either out of business or bankrupted by the remediation penalties when remediation was far from being cleaned up. By law, in those cases, the US goverment remediated those cost at tax payers expense and then persued damages from the customers who contributed to the contamination, which resulted in little net revenue for remediation. Though I do agree with the principle of CERCLA that the those liable for environmental contamination of this degree should be held liable that in no way changes the fact that the Indian government has grotesquely failed to provide the neccessary health and safety standards, enforcement actions and remediation resources even after 30 years. This is just reprehensible of the Indian government and though in no way am I arguing that DOW should be let of the hook, the dumb asses bought the liability after all, this should have no bearing what so ever on the Indian governments moral, ethical and humanitarian responsibilty to remediate this site first, as should have been and should still be done and then gone after the deep pockets.

What I find strangely odd about this effort is that though it can be argued that DOW inherited liability for the Bhopal site when it purchased Union Carbide they were in no way directly responsible for conditions which lead to the disaster yet they are the ones being demonized while the Indian Government, who's corruption and incompetence bore a direct responsibilty that contributed significantly for the disaster and has done very little to mitigate or remediate the site gets a free pass.

I don't buy that. India has one of the fastest growing economies in Asia and lets be perfectly clear about this. The predominant responsibility for mitigating and remediating the Bhopal site belongs first and foremost with the Indian government. They have evaded and avoided this responsibility for over 30 years. It's time for that nonsense to stop. It is the Indian Government who should be publicly pillaried to clean this mess up first and then argue with DOW as to who the hell should pay for the job!!

 

[cancel2 2022]

Had the incidend occurred in the US then DOW would have accepted liabilty for the disaster under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Liability and Compensation Act (CERCLA aka Superfund). Meaning, as stated above, that DOW would have purchased both assets and liabilities and since they have the deep pockets the US government would have assessed them for remediation of the site. Having said that, this would have amounted to DOW not having purchased Union Carbide in the first place. A signifiant portion of the blame for Bhopal...and pay attention here wingnuts, libertarians and those other who oppose government regulations, belongs to the India government for it's lack of both enforcement and supplying the resources to remediate this site. This is what you can expect from laissez-faire capitalism. The first argument being made here is a weak one. Had this occurred in the US and there has been incidents in the US larger is scope from a contamination stand point in which the corporate deep pockets were either out of business or bankrupted by the remediation penalties when remediation was far from being cleaned up. By law, in those cases, the US goverment remediated those cost at tax payers expense and then persued damages from the customers who contributed to the contamination, which resulted in little net revenue for remediation. Though I do agree with the principle of CERCLA that the those liable for environmental contamination of this degree should be held liable that in no way changes the fact that the Indian government has grotesquely failed to provide the neccessary health and safety standards, enforcement actions and remediation resources even after 30 years. This is just reprehensible of the Indian government and though in no way am I arguing that DOW should be let of the hook, the dumb asses bought the liability after all, this should have no bearing what so ever on the Indian governments moral, ethical and humanitarian responsibilty to remediate this site first, as should have been and should still be done and then gone after the deep pockets.

What I find strangely odd about this effort is that though it can be argued that DOW inherited liability for the Bhopal site when it purchased Union Carbide they were in no way directly responsible for conditions which lead to the disaster yet they are the ones being demonized while the Indian Government, who's corruption and incompetence bore a direct responsibilty that contributed significantly for the disaster and has done very little to mitigate or remediate the site gets a free pass.

I don't buy that. India has one of the fastest growing economies in Asia and lets be perfectly clear about this. The predominant responsibility for mitigating and remediating the Bhopal site belongs first and foremost with the Indian government. They have evaded and avoided this responsibility for over 30 years. It's time for that nonsense to stop. It is the Indian Government who should be publicly pillaried to clean this mess up first and then argue with DOW as to who the hell should pay for the job!!

Whilst accepting what you say about the Indian government and more to the point the Madhya Pradesh state government, Dow Chemical is clearly liable for restitution under international law. The article points out that Union Carbide had in their contract a clause stating full restoration of the site after use. I would also point these two paragraphs.

For Americans, the disastrous gas leak is a distant memory, but the aftermath burdens the daily lives of Bhopal citizens even today. While figures vary widely, several accounts estimate the disaster ultimately led to 20,000 deaths, and a 2006 Indian government affidavit stated that the leak caused 558,125 injuries. Those numbers continue to grow because of the hazardous waste that remains at the crumbling insecticide plant. The city has become a symbol of broken governance, legal maneuvering, and extreme human suffering.
Originally, Union Carbide claimed the gas leak was a result of sabotage. However, plaintiffs in a 1998 civil suit in India revealed a laundry list of safety issues that were contributing factors to the catastrophe. Among these were poor maintenance, failure to implement safety precautions, and evidence that cost-cutting measures increased the severity of the disaster. Reports have noted that the safety equipment and procedures in place in Bhopal were seriously lacking compared to those of similar U.S.-based plants.
Following the disaster, Union Carbide failed to appear in court for trial in India, and eventually reached a settlement, agreeing to pay $470 million in 1989, which amounted to $1,500 per death and $550 per contaminated individual. The figure was substantially reduced from the $3.3 billion original claim presented by the Indian government and seems drastically low given the lingering adverse health effects of the gas leak. Unusually high instances of cancer, respiratory difficulties, immune and neurological disorders, near-blindness, reproductive difficulties, and heart problems continue to afflict the survivors. Bhopal's miscarriage rate is now seven times the average in India . Moreover, no one under the age of 18 was registered as a victim during the aftermath, yet the number of children exposed to the gas is estimated to be over 200,000.
Adding insult to injury, some 425 tons of hazardous waste remain on the grounds of the old factory today. Little has been done to clean up or remove the various chemicals, which continue to seep into the ground and pollute the local drinking water. The Indian government ships fresh water, but the deliveries are highly irregular. As a result, slum-dwellers are left with no choice but to drink the tainted groundwater.

______________


Legal wrangling, scapegoating, and corruption have let persist an environmental cesspool that is destroying human life. Had Union Carbide or the government cleaned up the waste and provided an adequate water supply, as originally intended, countless birth defects and premature deaths could have been avoided.
Only recently has the Madhya Pradesh state government taken steps to address the crumbling factory site, which The New York Times described as a "wasteland in the city's heart." A German agency has agreed to remove 350 tons of waste over the course of the next year, all at Indian taxpayers' expense. While the local government had previously impeded studies on Bhopal's environmental contamination, the Madhya Pradesh government's willingness to let the German agency remove the waste is a hopeful sign. Still, the epic mess that began over a quarter-century ago is far from over. Who can -- and should -- help the remaining victims and put an end to the ordeal once and for all?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Whilst accepting what you say about the Indian government and more to the point the Madhya Pradesh state government, Dow Chemical is clearly liable for restitution under international law. The article points out that Union Carbide had in their contract a clause stating full restoration of the site after use. I would also point these two paragraphs.

Not contending that. What I'm contending is the demonization of DOW when the Indian government has a far greater moral and ethical obligation to clean this mess up than DOW does. Why aren't they being publicaly chastized?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Not contending that. What I'm contending is the demonization of DOW when the Indian government has a far greater moral and ethical obligation to clean this mess up than DOW does. Why aren't they being publicaly chastized?

Nobody doubts that the Indian government is corrupt, the US claims to be morally superior. Anyway, DOW is liable under international law pure and simple, they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities.

If for no other reason, you would think that they wouild want to do something to restore their wretched PR image after Bhopal and Agent Orange.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Nobody doubts that the Indian government is corrupt, the US claims to be morally superior. Anyway, DOW is liable under international law pure and simple, they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities.

If for no other reason, you would think that they wouild want to do something to restore their wretched PR image after Bhopal and Agent Orange.

Again with this? Dow is not responsible. The claim was settled with the Indian Government at the time of purchase. Had the Indian Government stated otherwise, Dow would not likely have bought the site. You cannot come back 20 years later and say 'just kidding, you are still liable for something that you had absolutely no part in and that we told you when you bought the company that you would not be liable for it.'

Now you toss in the agent orange bullshit. Dow made agent orange at the request of the government. They are not the ones that used it. The US Government did. The US government was told by Monsanto long before Vietnam that there were serious health risks associated with it. Yet they did it anyway.

Now, on to the real criminals... lets talk about the BP spill... shall we. Why are they not fully funding the clean up here? Why have they not paid everyone in full for everything that went wrong as a result of their spill?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Again with this? Dow is not responsible. The claim was settled with the Indian Government at the time of purchase. Had the Indian Government stated otherwise, Dow would not likely have bought the site. You cannot come back 20 years later and say 'just kidding, you are still liable for something that you had absolutely no part in and that we told you when you bought the company that you would not be liable for it.'

Now you toss in the agent orange bullshit. Dow made agent orange at the request of the government. They are not the ones that used it. The US Government did. The US government was told by Monsanto long before Vietnam that there were serious health risks associated with it. Yet they did it anyway.

Now, on to the real criminals... lets talk about the BP spill... shall we. Why are they not fully funding the clean up here? Why have they not paid everyone in full for everything that went wrong as a result of their spill?

Dow are liable under international law, that is a fact whether you like it or not. Why does Dow think $1500 is a fair price for a life? I have pointed out that this is how US corporations routinely behave be it Exxon , Dow, Chevron in South America or Occidental in the North Sea. BP has paid far more for shrimps than Dow has ever paid for people.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Dow are liable under international law, that is a fact whether you like it or not. Why does Dow think $500 is a fair price for a life? I have pointed out that this is how US corporations routinely behave be it Exxon , Dow, Chevron in South America or Occidental in the North Sea. BP has paid far more for shrimps than Dow has ever paid for people.

No, they are not. Which is why your article states quite clearly that they are NOT legally obligated to do anything. A settlement was reached long before they bought Union. Again, you cannot tell a company 'yes, this was settled and taken care of' and then ten years later tell them 'just kidding'.

BP is legally responsible for all of the clean up and damage. They have not paid up. Get them to pay up Tom. Why are they not paying up Tom? This was actually THEIR mess. Unlike Dow, they did not buy a company 17 years after said company made a mess. Why is BP so negligent Tom?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Nobody doubts that the Indian government is corrupt, the US claims to be morally superior. Anyway, DOW is liable under international law pure and simple, they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities.

If for no other reason, you would think that they wouild want to do something to restore their wretched PR image after Bhopal and Agent Orange.

I believe Monsanto produced agent orange (dioxin based pesticides).

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Again with this? Dow is not responsible. The claim was settled with the Indian Government at the time of purchase. Had the Indian Government stated otherwise, Dow would not likely have bought the site. You cannot come back 20 years later and say 'just kidding, you are still liable for something that you had absolutely no part in and that we told you when you bought the company that you would not be liable for it.'

Now you toss in the agent orange bullshit. Dow made agent orange at the request of the government. They are not the ones that used it. The US Government did. The US government was told by Monsanto long before Vietnam that there were serious health risks associated with it. Yet they did it anyway.

Now, on to the real criminals... lets talk about the BP spill... shall we. Why are they not fully funding the clean up here? Why have they not paid everyone in full for everything that went wrong as a result of their spill?

It doesn't matter SF. The legal standard for managing hazardous waste, including spills and accidental releases to the environment, in the US and internationaly has been "Cradle to grave liability." for around 40 years now. The OP is correct that when DOW bought the assets and liabilities of Union Carbide they also bought the cradle to grave liability for Bhopal. Now to what extent their liabilities are is a legal question to be argued by lawyers and the Indian governement but as I also stated previously just because the Indian government is pursuing DOW for cradle to grave liability does not mean they can just sit on their collective asses and do nothing till they can squeeze blood from a turnip. The first and highest obligation to remediate this hazardous waste site belongs to the Indian government. Who is liable to pay damages to the Indian goverment is a question which should be answered after this site has been remediated. I also agree with you that Monsanto's and DOW's past in manufacturing pesticides using dioxin precursors is a non-sequitor where Bhopal is concerned other than from a PR point of view.

The Times Beach Missouri case is an excellent comparison. Times Beach was once a town of about 2,000 people. It's now a ghost town. In the early to mid 70's a gentleman by the name of Russ Bliss was operating a waste hauling business. If anyone has ever been to this part of Missouri during the summer then they would be aware of the problem they have with dust in the summer due to most of the rural roads being gravel. Russ Bliss's company was being paid by the town of Times Beach to spray waste oil on the gravel roads to suppress dust. A common practice in the region. Bliss in around 1972 took a contract with a local company to dispose of hazardous waste. This was prior to 1976 when the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA for short) which regulates how hazardous waste is managed, became the law of the land. Well Russ entered into a contract with ICP who had a contract to manage hazardous waste for NEPACCO who operated a plant that produced hexachlorophene, a dioxin precursor. Well this rocket scientist Bliss got the bright idea of mixing NEPACCO's hazardous waste with the waste oil he was spraying on the gravel roads for dust suppression. This occurred from around 1972 to 1976. Over time all sorts of reports came in about health problems in Times Beach, animal/pet deaths, miscarriages, childhood cancer, etc. Eventually in the early 80's EPA investigated and found that the area had been contaminated with dioxin at levels of 500 to 2000 times what is considered safe (about 1 ppb).

To it's credit the US government didn't go after Bliss, ICP or NEPACCO, at first, they literally bought out the town, removed all the people from Times Beach (except for one elderly couple that adamantly refused to move) at a cost of around $25 million and proceeded to quarentine the area around Times Beach which had been contaminated. The US government then built an incinerator on the site and incinerated the contaminated soil at a cost of $110 million dollars (total cost of $135 million including the buy out) of which they only recieved about $10 million in compensation from NEPACCO's parent company. The point being that NEPACCO was direclty responsible for gross negligence in permmitting a bafoon to manage their highly hazardous waste but it was the US Government who took responsibility of cleaning up the Time Beach disaster, whcih though it didn't affect nearly as many people as Bhopal was comparable in scope in terms of the area and degree of contamination (though Dioxin is far, far more toxic and bioavalable than methyl isocyanate).

So my point is let the laywers argue to what degree DOW is liable for Union Carbides liabilities but in the mean time the Indian government needs to get off their dead asses and clean this mess up.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I believe Monsanto produced agent orange (dioxin based pesticides).

Monsanto created it, but both Dow and Monsanto produced it for the US Government

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Brilliant article from Motley Fool about Dow and why they should face up to their responsibilities over Bhopal.

By Isaac Pino and Charlie Kannel with Tom Gardner
July 27, 2012 | Comments (92)


Editor's note: This article has been corrected to reflect that the Bhopal company was majority-owned, not wholly owned, by Union Carbide.
Early in the morning on Dec. 3, 1984, a leaking tank within an insecticide plant unleashed approximately 45 tons of a toxic gas in the northern area of Bhopal, a city in central India. The poisonous gas cloud -- a methyl isocyanate compound -- spread across the surrounding neighborhoods and slums as the people of Bhopal slept. Direct exposure to the substance reportedly killed 3,800 people during the night, while thousands of others fled the city and the expanding cloud of toxic fumes.
Almost three decades later, the gas has vanished, but Bhopal remains devastated by the toxic leak. The company responsible for the disaster was a majority-owned subsidiary of Union Carbide, which itself is now a subsidiary of Dow Chemical. The story of Bhopal has been unearthed because of Dow's prominent role as a key sponsor in the 2012 Summer Olympics.
A controversial Summer Games
London's 2012 Summer Olympics were supposed to be the "first truly sustainable Olympic Games," according to organizers. Contrasting with Beijing's over-the-top production, London aimed to leave a legacy of environmental responsibility. Dow's sponsorship (to say nothing of co-sponsors BP and Rio Tinto) has put that legacy in serious jeopardy. The relationship between Dow, Bhopal, and Olympic sustainability triggered protests and anti-greenwashing campaigns, while provoking outcries against globalization. We believe the story of Bhopal and Dow should be shared with investors to encourage corporate transparency around the world.
We also believe Dow can reverse this public relations nightmare by taking responsibility for Bhopal on the global stage of the Olympics. As outlined below, we propose a very clear, simple, and fair solution. We strongly encourage readers to share this article to bring further attention to an important issue. We recommend financing a Bhopal remediation effort through a public stock offering, a move that would boost Dow Chemical's reputation and, most importantly, provide the people of Bhopal with the services and health care they desperately need.

The disaster and the devastation that followed
For Americans, the disastrous gas leak is a distant memory, but the aftermath burdens the daily lives of Bhopal citizens even today. While figures vary widely, several accounts estimate the disaster ultimately led to 20,000 deaths, and a 2006 Indian government affidavit stated that the leak caused 558,125 injuries. Those numbers continue to grow because of the hazardous waste that remains at the crumbling insecticide plant. The city has become a symbol of broken governance, legal maneuvering, and extreme human suffering.
Originally, Union Carbide claimed the gas leak was a result of sabotage. However, plaintiffs in a 1998 civil suit in India revealed a laundry list of safety issues that were contributing factors to the catastrophe. Among these were poor maintenance, failure to implement safety precautions, and evidence that cost-cutting measures increased the severity of the disaster. Reports have noted that the safety equipment and procedures in place in Bhopal were seriously lacking compared to those of similar U.S.-based plants.
Following the disaster, Union Carbide failed to appear in court for trial in India, and eventually reached a settlement, agreeing to pay $470 million in 1989, which amounted to $1,500 per death and $550 per contaminated individual. The figure was substantially reduced from the $3.3 billion original claim presented by the Indian government and seems drastically low given the lingering adverse health effects of the gas leak. Unusually high instances of cancer, respiratory difficulties, immune and neurological disorders, near-blindness, reproductive difficulties, and heart problems continue to afflict the survivors. Bhopal's miscarriage rate is now seven times the average in India . Moreover, no one under the age of 18 was registered as a victim during the aftermath, yet the number of children exposed to the gas is estimated to be over 200,000.
Adding insult to injury, some 425 tons of hazardous waste remain on the grounds of the old factory today. Little has been done to clean up or remove the various chemicals, which continue to seep into the ground and pollute the local drinking water. The Indian government ships fresh water, but the deliveries are highly irregular. As a result, slum-dwellers are left with no choice but to drink the tainted groundwater.

To make matters worse, the slums expanded around the site because of the relatively low cost of nearby land. The inhabitants, already crippled by extreme poverty, develop chronic and debilitating illnesses that burden their everyday lives. Their ability to work is diminished. Children raised in this area face twice the risk of dying as do children elsewhere, partly because their parents cannot care for them adequately. Surprisingly enough, despite the serious health problems reported over the years, Union Carbide once claimed that methyl isocyanate was only a "mild throat and ear irritant."
Legal wrangling, scapegoating, and corruption have let persist an environmental cesspool that is destroying human life. Had Union Carbide or the government cleaned up the waste and provided an adequate water supply, as originally intended, countless birth defects and premature deaths could have been avoided.
Only recently has the Madhya Pradesh state government taken steps to address the crumbling factory site, which The New York Times described as a "wasteland in the city's heart." A German agency has agreed to remove 350 tons of waste over the course of the next year, all at Indian taxpayers' expense. While the local government had previously impeded studies on Bhopal's environmental contamination, the Madhya Pradesh government's willingness to let the German agency remove the waste is a hopeful sign. Still, the epic mess that began over a quarter-century ago is far from over. Who can -- and should -- help the remaining victims and put an end to the ordeal once and for all?
Why Dow should assume responsibility
For nearly three decades, the companies involved and the Indian government repeatedly deflected responsibility for the Bhopal disaster. The plant's operator at the time of the leak, Union Carbide India Limited, was spun-off from the Union Carbide Corporation after the disaster, but by then the plant had closed permanently and the assets and liabilities were no longer on UCIL's books. After an extended round of the blame game, the responsibility for Bhopal fell into a black hole while Bhopali citizens continued to suffer.
We conducted a careful analysis and believe all roads lead to Dow when it comes to Bhopal's environmental liabilities. One by one, let's dissect and rebut Dow's arguments:

• The Indian government should take responsibility for the Bhopal site.
  Both India and the U.S. adhere to the "polluter pays" principle, which states that the producer of pollution must pay for its consequences. Union Carbide was the polluter, and the continued existence of severe health problems and toxic waste in Bhopal shows that Union Carbide never fulfilled its responsibility. Further, Union Carbide signed a lease with the Indian government, promising to return the site "in its original condition." Even though the Indian government does in fact own the site now, Union Carbide failed to fulfill its original obligation.
• If Union Carbide owned the Bhopal plant, Dow bears no responsibility.
  In 1984, Union Carbide owned the plant. A decade later, Union Carbide claimed that the plant was sold during an auction in 1994. However, contradictory to that claim, the plant was no longer on the books at the time of the auction. Instead, the Indian government had shut down the plant, and the legal ramifications of the pollution were still being resolved. In 2001, Dow acquired Union Carbide for $11.6 billion and the two entities became one and the same. So when we write "Dow," think "Union Carbide." Union Carbide describes the relationship in its annual report: "Union Carbide's business activities comprise components of Dow's global operations rather than stand-alone operations."
• Dow bought Union Carbide free of liabilities.
  According to international law, the principal of "successor liability" requires the purchaser to gain both the assets and liabilities of the target. So, along with the wealth of assets acquired from Union Carbide, Dow should also be responsible for the environmental and health damage Union Carbide caused in Bhopal.
• There is no precedent for Dow assuming Union Carbide's liabilities.
  A Dow spokesperson has pointed out that providing funds for Bhopal is out of the question since it would open up the company for additional liabilities. However, after purchasing Union Carbide in 2001, Dow acknowledged its responsibility for asbestos liabilities from American incidents involving Union Carbide dating back to 1972. In fact, Dow set aside $2.2 billion to resolve the asbestos issues. So Dow recognizes that "successor liability" applies, yet it ignores the inherited liabilities of the Bhopal disaster.
• Union Carbide settled the claim years ago.
  The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide represented 15% of the original $3.3 billion claim, and left victims with about $550. Dow Public Relations Officer Kathy Hun once asserted that "$500 is plenty good for an Indian." According to The Bhopal Reader, "It was widely believed that the courts had been pressured or influenced by the [Indian] Congress government ... and that the government had made a private deal with Union Carbide." To this day, Dow has continued to pressure the Indian government to keep the company free of liability, acknowledging that the debt is not fully paid and the criminal case not entirely resolved. In a 2006 letter to the Indian ambassador, Dow CEO Andrew Liveris sought assurance Dow had no further responsibility at Bhopal "to ensure that we have the appropriate investment climate."
• Eveready Industries should be liable.
  While Eveready Industries did purchase Union Carbide India Limited, Union Carbide's Indian subsidiary, in 1994, the Bhopal plant had long been closed, so there was no transfer of the site and its liability to Eveready. Union Carbide owned and operated the Bhopal site, so Union Carbide (and now Dow) should be held liable according to the "polluter pays" principle.

A company should take responsibility for the environmental damage caused by its operations. Since Dow acquired Union Carbide outright in 2001, this responsibility should lie with Dow, but thus far the U.S. courts have disagreed. Untangling the legal liability is outside of our focus, however, and the mistakes by the Indian government only made the legal mess worse. Ultimately, Dow should remedy the situation for ethical reasons, and establish an entirely new precedent.
This type of convoluted legal maneuvering by Union Carbide and Dow is not a new story. In Ecuador, beginning in the 1960s, Texaco discharged billions of gallons of oil waste directly into the Amazon rainforest, creating an oil spill that ruined the lives of countless indigenous people. Chevron, after acquiring Texaco (and its liabilities!) in 2001, has refused to pay the $18 billion fine ordered by Ecuadorian courts, claiming fraud. In a company statement, Chevron argues that PetroEcuador, the state-owned oil company that took over Texaco's facilities after 2001, should be held responsible. Sound familiar?
As these cases illustrate, multinational companies can use legal loopholes to shirk their responsibilities in developing countries. Some of the world's richest companies profit at the expense of some of its poorest citizens. Meanwhile, shareholders in these companies often remain oblivious to the true nature of these transactions.

A solution to this continuing tragedy
Dow's management team, employees, and shareholders should capitalize on the unique opportunity the company has as a sponsor of the 2012 Olympic Games. While Dow has no legal obligation, Dow has an ethical obligation to right this wrong, a move that will end up benefiting Dow in the long run. Independent of the Indian government, Dow should create a Bhopal relief fund immediately to accomplish the following:

• End unnecessary human suffering.
  Dow must take responsibility for the survivors' health and rehabilitation. While the Indian government has attempted to finance a health insurance policy for victims, the effort failed because of bureaucracy and corruption. Dow should buy a group insurance plan to ensure people receive the care they deserve, while adhering to the "polluter pays" principle.
• Build health care facilities.
  Dow must provide ongoing access to treatment for the individuals affected by the Bhopal disaster. Allow organizations representing victims to participate and conduct research to better understand the afflicting illnesses.
• Clean up the site.
  A thorough cleanup is of utmost priority to prevent further exposure to toxic soil and groundwater. Beyond removing the waste, cleanup will include decontaminating the soil and water to remove all traces of the toxic chemicals and will ensure that Dow's liability does not keep growing.

Estimating the cost of the above actions is difficult. At this point, only the Indian government has access to critical information about the site and victims, and its studies recently estimated that just over $1 billion would be an appropriate comprehensive total. We outline below how Dow could finance at least half this amount (perhaps much more) soon after the 2012 Olympic games:
1. Conduct a subsequent stock offering ($540 million investment)
Dow's board of directors should propose a 1.5% dilutive stock offering, which would result in 18 million new common shares. Such an offering would raise approximately $540 million at Dow's current share price of $30, all of which would be committed to the Bhopal Relief Fund.
Initially, shareholders might balk at the idea of diluting their claim on the company's earnings. The recommended sum, $540 million, may give investors sticker shock, but this isn't an unusual move for the $36 billion company. Just last year, Dow issued 9.2 million new shares, half the amount proposed here. Even if shares drop initially, Dow's support would help erase a liability that management has ignored for over a decade. We think the market could interpret Dow's approach positively, if the company communicates the proposal effectively.
At the Fool, we encourage buy-and-hold investing practices, and shareholders with a similar outlook would recognize the move as an intangible investment in Dow's reputation. Investors should urge Dow to rise above its legal maneuvering and make a long-term investment by aiding the victims of Bhopal.
2. Sponsor an Olympic fundraising campaign ($10 million investment)
In addition to the stock offering, Dow should raise funds through a widespread campaign announced during the Olympics. Thus far, Dow's Olympic sponsorship has resulted in utter outrage in London and India. A motion in March 2012 to terminate Dow Chemical's Olympic sponsorship was only narrowly rejected in an 11-10 vote by the organizing committee.
The backlash has yet to subside, but Dow could change public sentiment during the London Games. Dow should announce the launch of a $10 million campaign to raise awareness for the people of Bhopal, calling attention to its intent to remediate Bhopal during one of the most widely watched events in the world.
While it's impossible to estimate third-party donations resulting from such a campaign, the response could be significant. Dow's willingness to take action despite its lack of legal obligation would set an important precedent in corporate America.
Overall, Dow's contribution would go a long way in addressing its liability to Bhopal inherited from Union Carbide. Dow would be committing more than half of the $1 billion requested by the Indian government. This is a fair and reasonable approach that would prevent Dow from paying for the government's inaction and missteps over the years. At the same time, this move would show that Dow has decided to rise above the legal mess, take responsibility for its subsidiary's negligence, and do what is ethically right.
Why now?
Dow's refusal to take responsibility for Bhopal has hit the company's bottom line well beyond the associated legal costs. The unaddressed liability has hurt its reputation, resulted in protests and media backlash, and even limited its ability to invest overseas. One activist organization went so far as to

on the BBC, claiming responsibility for the Bhopal disaster, and consequently causing a sell-off in European markets that erased $2 billion worth of Dow's market cap (which was recovered when the hoax was revealed).
Despite Dow's disregard for Bhopal, the company's "

" advertising campaign allegedly "showcases Dow's commitment to addressing global economic, social and environmental concerns." Now is the time for Dow to embody this uplifting message it has paid millions to publicize. By taking action for Bhopal, Dow has an opportunity to rebuild its brand and become the paradigm for corporate social responsibility.
Dow's employees, shareholders, and even the broader investing community have something at stake. Dow's reparations would pay back a debt to thousands of victims that had previously been excluded from its balance sheet, creating transparency in an opaque reporting environment. This approach should be championed across the business world.
We're forwarding this article and our proposal to Dow's 10 largest institutional investors. Alone, these 10 institutions hold 42% of the company, but there are millions of other shareholders. Every Dow investor should use his or her voice to support a resolution to help the people of Bhopal. There is no better time than now for Dow to live up to its advertising campaign and demonstrate the ideals of the Olympic Games.
How can you help? Our goal is to spread the word about a tragedy that many Americans had never heard of or scarcely remember. Share this article with friends and family, and tell them about the Bhopal tragedy. Also, contact the Dow Investor Relations Office at 1-800-422-8193 and voice your concerns about Dow's role as an Olympic sponsor.


http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...-can-end-the-bhopal-tragedy.aspx#.UBen8fKYPVg

Keep beating that horse Tom .
Maybe you can reanimate it and get it to pull your bandwagon .

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It doesn't matter SF. The legal standard for managing hazardous waste, including spills and accidental releases to the environment, in the US and internationaly has been "Cradle to grave liability." for around 40 years now. The OP is correct that when DOW bought the assets and liabilities of Union Carbide they also bought the cradle to grave liability for Bhopal. Now to what extent their liabilities are is a legal question to be argued by lawyers and the Indian governement but as I also stated previously just because the Indian government is pursuing DOW for cradle to grave liability does not mean they can just sit on their collective asses and do nothing till they can squeeze blood from a turnip. The first and highest obligation to remediate this hazardous waste site belongs to the Indian government. Who is liable to pay damages to the Indian goverment is a question which should be answered after this site has been remediated. I also agree with you that Monsanto's and DOW's past in manufacturing pesticides using dioxin precursors is a non-sequitor where Bhopal is concerned other than from a PR point of view.

No, they are not legally responsible.

Following the tragedy, the Government of India took control of the property. In 1994, Union Carbide sold its shares in UCIL to McLeod Russell. UCIL was subsequently renamed Eveready Industries India Ltd. (EIIL). As part of this transaction, EIIL became the property leaser and assumed responsibility for the site environmental clean up.

So despite the BS from Tom, the site clean up was included in the transition in 1994 when McLeod purchased UCIL. Hence, it was long gone before Dow bought Union Carbide.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I think this extract from the article cover the main objections that have been used to deny Dow's responsibility on here and elsewhere. Contrast Dow's behaviour with the way that BP paid up promptly, apparently shrimps are rated higher than Indians when it comes to compensation.

• The Indian government should take responsibility for the Bhopal site.
  Both India and the U.S. adhere to the "polluter pays" principle, which states that the producer of pollution must pay for its consequences. Union Carbide was the polluter, and the continued existence of severe health problems and toxic waste in Bhopal shows that Union Carbide never fulfilled its responsibility. Further, Union Carbide signed a lease with the Indian government, promising to return the site "in its original condition." Even though the Indian government does in fact own the site now, Union Carbide failed to fulfill its original obligation.
• If Union Carbide owned the Bhopal plant, Dow bears no responsibility.
  In 1984, Union Carbide owned the plant. A decade later, Union Carbide claimed that the plant was sold during an auction in 1994. However, contradictory to that claim, the plant was no longer on the books at the time of the auction. Instead, the Indian government had shut down the plant, and the legal ramifications of the pollution were still being resolved. In 2001, Dow acquired Union Carbide for $11.6 billion and the two entities became one and the same. So when we write "Dow," think "Union Carbide." Union Carbide describes the relationship in its annual report: "Union Carbide's business activities comprise components of Dow's global operations rather than stand-alone operations."
• Dow bought Union Carbide free of liabilities.
  According to international law, the principal of "successor liability" requires the purchaser to gain both the assets and liabilities of the target. So, along with the wealth of assets acquired from Union Carbide, Dow should also be responsible for the environmental and health damage Union Carbide caused in Bhopal.
• There is no precedent for Dow assuming Union Carbide's liabilities.
  A Dow spokesperson has pointed out that providing funds for Bhopal is out of the question since it would open up the company for additional liabilities. However, after purchasing Union Carbide in 2001, Dow acknowledged its responsibility for asbestos liabilities from American incidents involving Union Carbide dating back to 1972. In fact, Dow set aside $2.2 billion to resolve the asbestos issues. So Dow recognizes that "successor liability" applies, yet it ignores the inherited liabilities of the Bhopal disaster.
• Union Carbide settled the claim years ago.
  The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide represented 15% of the original $3.3 billion claim, and left victims with about $550. Dow Public Relations Officer Kathy Hun once asserted that "$500 is plenty good for an Indian." According to The Bhopal Reader, "It was widely believed that the courts had been pressured or influenced by the [Indian] Congress government ... and that the government had made a private deal with Union Carbide." To this day, Dow has continued to pressure the Indian government to keep the company free of liability, acknowledging that the debt is not fully paid and the criminal case not entirely resolved. In a 2006 letter to the Indian ambassador, Dow CEO Andrew Liveris sought assurance Dow had no further responsibility at Bhopal "to ensure that we have the appropriate investment climate."
• Eveready Industries should be liable.
  While Eveready Industries did purchase Union Carbide India Limited, Union Carbide's Indian subsidiary, in 1994, the Bhopal plant had long been closed, so there was no transfer of the site and its liability to Eveready. Union Carbide owned and operated the Bhopal site, so Union Carbide (and now Dow) should be held liable according to the "polluter pays" principle.

You keep ignoring one important part of your own article:

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Nobody doubts that the Indian government is corrupt, the US claims to be morally superior. Anyway, DOW is liable under international law pure and simple, they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities.

If for no other reason, you would think that they wouild want to do something to restore their wretched PR image after Bhopal and Agent Orange.

Provide documented proof that "...they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities..." or STFU.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Dow are liable under international law, that is a fact whether you like it or not. Why does Dow think $500 is a fair price for a life? I have pointed out that this is how US corporations routinely behave be it Exxon , Dow, Chevron in South America or Occidental in the North Sea. BP has paid far more for shrimps than Dow has ever paid for people.

Let's make this clear, once and for all:

DOW DIDN'T MAKE THE SETTLEMENT

Do you now understand?

 

[cancel2 2022]

You keep ignoring one important part of your own article:

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

The Indian government's $470 million settlement with Union Carbide...

It was a crooked deal no doubt aided by slush money from Union Carbide to bent officials in India. $500 per dead person is just fucking pathetic and I really couldn't care what anybody here says to try to defend it. The deal also never took account of anyone under the age of 18 at the time which means there are another further 200,000 victims. Finally I would take Motley Fool's opinion over you or SF any day, that article was co-authored by Tom Gardner who is one of the owners of the website and is an incredibly knowledgeable man when it come to business law and investments.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Let's make this clear, once and for all:

DOW DIDN'T MAKE THE SETTLEMENT

Do you now understand?

Why don't you go away and find out about successor liability.

Dow bought Union Carbide free of liabilities.
According to international law, the principal of "successor liability" requires the purchaser to gain both the assets and liabilities of the target. So, along with the wealth of assets acquired from Union Carbide, Dow should also be responsible for the environmental and health damage Union Carbide caused in Bhopal.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Provide documented proof that "...they bought Union Carbide because they thought they could get away with buyng the assets and avoiding the liabilities..." or STFU.

NO.