A couple things the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation should have thought about was the respect for persons model and confidentiality. Respect for person means that actions will protect/respect human’s moral agency (Harris, Pritchard, Rabins, James, Englehardt, 1995). At the time, only the School Board knew about the toxic chemicals. However, the corporation should have informed all the citizens so they could make their own logical decisions whether to stay or relocate to another area. It’s definitely crucial to not hold information especially when citizen’s health and safety are at risk. As a result, many people reported that chemicals were entering their houses, women would report miscarriages, children would have high percentages of birth …show more content…
In this case, the following tests are the most relevant for this disaster: harm test, colleague test, and publicity test. The harm test consists on analyzing if the options perform less harm than the alternatives (Davis, 1999). In other words, this test implies that the benefits need to prevail over the harm, which will minimize the harm and maximizing the benefits. In the Love Canal case, this test failed since it was clear that the well-being of the public was affected due to the birth defects, miscarriages, and health issues that the community exhibited. Similarly, the colleague test consists on asking yourself what your colleagues would say when suggesting this option as the solution (Davis, 1999). When making decisions, engineers and companies should take actions on activities that would look appropriate for the general population to accept and for a panel of peers. With this in mind, Hooker’s engineers and the company itself did not care about how chemically polluting the environment will be judged or looked like in front of publics eyes and the community; therefore, the Hooker’s engineers and the company failed this test due their lack of public awareness. Additionally, when considering the publicity test, everyone should ask themselves if they want their “choice of this option published in the newspaper” (Davis, 1999). In this country, journalism plays a crucial role in our society, so when engineers and companies ends up in the news, it means that their actions had a social or environmental repercussion; consequently, because of Hooker’s lack of professionalism, an entire community was exposed to carcinogens that ended up affecting the locals and the unborn; as a result, by 1978, many newspapers and TV news reported
In Chicago’s early days of rising to become a major US city, its population exploded, causing the city to modernize quickly and businesses to cut corners to keep their edge. The river soon became the dumping ground for both sewage and toxic waste dumped by the slaughter houses. By demand of citizens, a canal was built “which later would be named the Illinois and Michigan (I&M) Canal (Hansen, pg. 41). The proposed canal “called for an excavation that woul...
In The Artificial River, Carol Sheriff describes how when the digging of the Erie Canal began on July 4, 1817, no one would have been able to predict that the canal would even be considered a paradox of progress. One of the major contradictions of progress was whether or not triumphing art over nature was even considered progress. People were not sure during the nineteenth century if changing the environment for industrialization was necessarily a good thing. Another contradiction to progress that resulted from the Erie Canal was when people started holding the state government responsible for all their financial misfortunes. An additional contradiction to progress that the Erie Canal displayed was how many of its workers were either children, or men that lived lives that were intemperate and disrespectful to women. As American history students look back at the Erie Canal today, they generally only imagine how the canal was extraordinary for the residents of New York, but not all the issues and problems it also produced.
Love Canal was a small town in Niagara Falls, New York, located between two bodies of water: the Bergholtz Creek to the North and the Niagara River to the South. Seems innocent enough right? Wrong. This town was built on top of 21,000 tons of toxic waste (Verhovek). In the early 1890’s, William T. Love wanted to build a canal which would connect the Niagara River to Lake Ontario to generate hydroelectric power for his would be city. However, due to a severe drop in investors and laws passed by Congress, he was not able to bring his idea to life. By the time his funds were completely depleted in 1910, he had dug one mile of the canal, about 50 feet wide, and 10 to 40 feet deep and he had constructed a few streets and homes (Blum). In the 1920’s, the giant hole was used as a dumpsite for the nearby city of Niagara Falls, which lead the way into one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history (Beck). A small handful of people who decided they would not leave are all that remains of the town today; 90% of the buildings were demolished or boarded up (Verhovek).
The Erie Canal is a waterway in New York that runs 363 miles from Albany, New York, on the Hudson River to Buffalo, New York, at Lake Erie, completing a navigable water route from the Atlantic Ocean to the Great Lakes. The canal contains 36 locks which allows a boat to go from one level of a water to another level lower by raising the water level in one section which lets the boat move from one lock to the next. By doing this, the Erie Canal makes a once non-accessible waterway a common mean of transportation for both goods and people.
It was believed that it would be cheaper for PG&E to dispose of the chemicals illegally since the company officials were more concerned with the profits than about people's lives. The hiding of this critical information had tragic consequences for the people involved. PG&E must have realized that they were guilty since they settled the case for $330 million in private arbitration. All in all, it probably ended up costing PG&E more money than it would have if they had properly lined the water pools and taken care of things the correct way in the beginning.
In 1979, the situation at a town called Love Canal was declared a state of emergency. How did such an isolated place in New York become a national devastation? In the 1890s, William T. Love started a project of digging a canal from Niagara River to Lake Ontario, but the canal was never completed. Hooker Chemical Company bought it, and used the land as a landfill for their chemical waste. They later sold it to the Niagara Falls School District, which was looking for more land to build an elementary school, but only after 21,000 tons of harmful chemicals were dumped and buried under a clay cap. They built many homes near the dump, and broke the clay cap. Soon, the people living near the canal started to complain about strange diseases, miscarriages, and residue seeping into their basements. A local resident, Lois Gibbs, started the Love Canal's Homeowners Association and led rallies to persuade the government to inspect their area. Soon, Love Canal started gaining national attention and in 1978, Love Canal was named a state of emergency. The residents were soon told to
While it seems somewhat illogical, especially in markets, to take a precautionary approach for every single case, nature and the human interaction with it can have much more dramatic effect if not treated more carefully. Flint, Michigan was a clear case where risks were not taken very seriously and as a result many people caught diseases and died. The biggest mistake that causes these types of situations is due to the perception of risk and partisanship. Grouping cultures and political affiliations can cause many of those in power to not see true problems that stand before them. They take voluntary risks that are clear and dangerous and spin them into involuntary risks. Because of this, issues such as the Flint water crisis can easily be pushed aside as “propaganda” or as the chief and staff referred to it as “political football.” Without correctly assessing risks and hazards and being more cautious towards our perceptions towards risk, dramatic problems such as the Flint water crisis will continue to happen across the
If DuPont had informed the workers about the side effects of exposing themselves directly to the chemical, I believe that a safety measure could have been enforced. This could have prevented many workers from being infected with diseases. A worker like Sue Bailey was demotivated ever since she knew that her son’s deformity was a result of her being exposed to the chemical. DuPont could have attempted to pay her son’s hospital bills as it investigated. These gestures could have motivated the employees even after such misfortune had occurred. DuPont further created a rift between its workers since it strived to justify that its chemicals were not the cause of this deformity. Instead, DuPont carried out suspicious investigations that protected the company’s image while sidelining the interests of its
It was clear that the governments in America would not issue a permit to Union Carbide plant under such circumstances, which lacked severe environmental standards and permitted slum dwellers to live near the plant and so on. Such actions were the ones that led to more deaths. Before the major gas leakage from the MCI unit on December 3, 1984, some people were killed because of phosgene gas leakage. However, no one took it seriously, despite the media report. One of the reasons that people ignore this was because people didnt know the potential danger of the chemical plant.
As the reader is immovable with his unique and catchy emotional word use, he then placed an unnecessary controversial topic that he should have avoided. After that minor hiccup in his powerful introduction, he uses this build up to bring up several powerful questions about managing environmental risk but they are still very misleading. He talks about risk and how environmental risks should be managed, but it turns out the he was talking about managers of companies looking out for risk in their job to protect companies from losing money. He notes questions they should look out for and how much hazardous wastes should be stored onsite. The author tries to bring these two topics together but confuses readers on exactly what he really means in terms of environmental risk until halfway into the article. Although, Norman Wei brought up great questions, but he did not elaborate enough on certain topics when he mentioned them. He should have provided more detail to why these questions are brought up and how they are relevant. Overall, this article interests the reader from the start with its powerful use of emotion and tone, but quickly comes to a halt. The article should have reached more length and gave more feedback on the topics he presented and the question he left
Based on the evaluation, all three engineers made an unethical decision to ignore the proper handling, regulations, and procedures of the hazardous wastes they were working with which put the welfare of the environment, general public, and co-workers at jeopardy and should, therefore, be held accountable and criminally responsible for their negligence in accordance to the Resource Conservation Recovery Act.
In the community of Chester, Pennsylvania, the Pittsburgh investment company, Russell, Rea & Zappala (RR&Z), was built four hazardous waste treatment facilities since the 1960’s. Chester has approximately 45,000 residents in which most are African American and of low income (“Toxic Waste in Chester”, Pennsylvania). Residents of Chester blamed the four toxic waste treatment facilities for their reoccurring health problems. Unfortunately, the state government stands behind that there isn’t proof that the waste facilities are making them ill. Resulting from the state government’s ignorance, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) still allows the construction of more toxic waste facilities in Chester. But Chester didn’t give up so
Robert Nickelsberg’s photograph of the Bruce Mansfield chemical plant in Pennsylvania shows pollution that is produced in the air, which conveys a feeling of cautiousness. The accompanying article, written by Richard Harris, explains the dangerous health effects associated with air pollution and the diseases it can cause such as lung and heart disease. However, this article shows us a different perspective on air pollution. In addition, the article...
When one thinks about an environmental disaster, the image of a large explosion in a highly industrial area comes to mind. Such is not the case in the Love Canal emergency. Unlike most environmental disasters, the events of Niagara Falls's Love Canal weren't characterized by a known and uncontrollable moment of impact. It developed over a period of several decades, since the effects of leaching chemicals is uncertain and slow in development and the visual effects are very limited. This disaster could have been identified earlier or later for as far as the rest of the world was concerned there was no emergency until the authorities made it public. The importance of Love Canal is that acknowledging the danger that existed made the country and world aware of the hazards of abandoned toxic waste disposal sites.
Within a decade from 1942 and 1952 over 21,000 tons of toxic chemical waste was disposed. All this chemical waste created a direct threat to human lives within the neighborhood. Horrendous odors were the least of it, spontaneous fires ignited and air pollution killed vegetation, but Hooker disregarded the burden they were imposing on both the environment and human health since the Love Canal was such an acceptable place for a chemical dumpsite. It had a vigorous infrastructure and was ideally positioned next to a low dense population, what more could the private industry ask for? Plus, it is important to note that neither the local or federal government was keeping a close eye on Hooker’s chemical wasteland. As a result from the lenient environmental policies at the time, the corporation would recklessly disposed waste directly into pits by covering up the chemicals with a small amount of topsoil with no penalty or fines to worry