Recent Chemical Plant Leaks Fuel Public Criticism of Union Carbide

The Harris Survey

For Release Thursday AM, October 10th, 1985 1985 182 ISSN 0273-lQ37

RECENT CHEMICAL PLANT LEAKS FUEL PUBLIC CRITICISM OF UNION CARBIDE

By Louis Barris

In the aftermath of the recent leak of toxic gas from its Institute, West Virginia chemical plant, Union Carbide appears to be riding into a storm of growing public criticism. A substantial 91-8 percent majority nationwide thinks that wfederal and state governments should crack down a lot harder on chemical companies such as Union Carbide than they have. Of course, the troubles of Union Carbide in West Virginia followed the company's disaste~ the worst in modern history, in Bhopal, India, where 200,000 people were injured and over 2,000 were killed. Thus, 72 percent of the American people think the recent West Virginia episode was wve ry serious" and another 21 percent view it as "somewhat serious." This is according to the latest Harris Survey conducted by telephone nationally among a cross section of 1,255 adults between September 5th and 8th. After the Institute leak, Union Carbide investigated the accident, and openly admitted that a series of mistakes had been made. The public is convinced that all of these mistakes were wve ry serious w: --86 percent feel that it was "very serious" that "after the leak took place, no alarm was sounded for.36 minutes." --90 percent say it was wve r y serious" that "before the leak, high-pressure alarms were repeatedly shut off and ignored." --93 percent feel that it was wve r y serious" that "a level indicator in the tank that leaked and was known to be broken was not fixed." --85 percent believe it was "very serious" that "a high temperature alarm was out of service. " --86 percent are convinced it was wve ry serious" that "the unit's computer, which silently recorded the rising problems for days, was never asked for information by operators. w --92 percent also view as wve ry serious" the fact that won the morning of the accident, 6 operators in the control room, which was enveloped by a thick cloud of toxic gas, only had tvo breathing devices to share among them. w All in all, it is apparent from these results that the American people believe that Union Carbide was highly culpable in the patent errors that were cOlllllllitted at its Institute, West Virginia plant. Nonetheless, in some respects, people are willing to give Union Carbide some benefit of the doubt: --By 70-29 percent, a big majority thinks that Union Carbide should receive wsamew credit for admitting that it made some errors in Institute. This indicates that admission of corporate fallibility in such situations goes down well with the public. --By 63-36 percent, a 2 to 1 majority also believes that Union Carbide wean be trusted to clean up its problems much faster than it has before, as it claims it will." However, there are also indications that a potential consumer boycott of Union Carbide's consumer products may be growing:

(over) THE HARRIS SURVEY October lOth, 1985

-2

--38 percent of the entire adult public now says that because of what has happened to Union Carbide in its plants in India and West Virginia, they are "less likely to buy their products, such as Eveready Batteries and Glad Bags." After the Bhopal disaster, a somewhat lower 31 percent of the public said it was likely to be buying less of these products. Consumer boycott sentiment against their products is higher in the South, where it is running at 42 percent, in the West at 40 percent, among women at 43 percent, among blacks at 53 percent, and among Hispanics at 49 percent.

But perhaps the most potentially damaging development from Union Carbide's stand point may well be the overwhelming 91-8 percent majority of the public who feels that govern ment now should "crack down a lot harder" on such chemical companies.

All in all, it appears that public patience with Union Carbide is running out. Any other disasters or serious leaks could easily crystallize public opinion to a fever pitch, where severe and retributive legislation or regulation by government could result. Where human lives are at stake, public tolerance for mistakes, no matter how readily admitted, seems bound to diminish. And the consequences now seem likely to go beyond the immediate case of Union Carbide.

TAB L E S

Between September 5th and 8th, the Harris Survey asked a nationwide cross section of 1,255 adults by telephone:

"Union Carbide, the chemical company that had a plant disaster in India, where 200,000 people were injured and over 2,000 people were killed, recently had another leak of toxic gas at its plant in Institute, West Virginia. The leak caused 135 injuries. How serious a danger do you feel are these leaks from chemical plants such as these -- very serious, somewhat serious, not very serious, or not serious at all?"

SERIOUSNESS OF LEAKS FROM CHEMICAL PLA~TS

Very serious 72 Somewhat serious 21 Not very serious 4 Not serious at all 1 Not sure 2 "Right after the West Virginia leak took place, Union Carbide undertook a study of what went wrong and admitted that a whole series of mistakes had been committed. Do you think Union Carbide should receive a great deal of credit for admitting such strong blame for the accident, some credit, not much credit, or no credit at all?"

UNION CARBIDE RECEIVE GREAT DEAL OF CREDIT FOR ADMITTING BLAME?

Great deal of credit 22 Some credit 48 Not much credit 12 No credit at all 17 Not sure 1

"Here are some of the mistakes that Union Carbide admitted took place in the latest Institute, West Virginia accident. For each, tell me if you think that is a very serious violation by the company, somewhat serious, not very serious, or not serious at all."

(continued) THE HARRIS SURVEY October 10th, 1985

-3

SERIOUSNESS OF VARIOUS MISTAKES BY UNION CARBIDE

Very Somewhat Not very Not at all Not Serious Serious Serious Serious Sure % % % % -%

A level indicator in the tank that leaked and was known to be broken was not fixed 93 6 • • 1 On the morning of the accident, 6 operators in the control room, which was enveloped by a thick cloud of toxic gas, only had two breathing devices to share among them 92 7 • • 1 Before the leak, high-pressure alarms were repeatedly shut off and ignored 90 8 2 • • After the leak took place, no alarm was sounded for 36 minutes 86 12 1 1 • The unit's computer, which silently recorded the rising problems for days, was never asked for information by operators 86 12 1 • 1 A high temperature alarm was out of service 85 12 2 • 1

• = less than 0.5 percent

wUnion Carbide claims that it will now move to clean up its problems much faster than it has before. How much do you trust Union Carbide to clean up its problems -- very much, some but not a lot, only a little, or hardly at all?"

TRUST UNION CARBIDE TO CLEAN UP PROBLEMS?

Very much 19 Some but not a lot 44 Only a little 18 Hardly at all 18 Not sure 1

WThe causes of all these disasters and accidents cannot be completely known. But with some indications that they are being caused by negligence on the part of Union Carbide and its employees, would you be less likely to buy Union Carbide's products such as Eveready Batteries and Glad Bags, or not?"

LIKELIHOOD OF BUYING UNION CARBIDE PRODUCTS

September 1985 **December 1984 % %

Less likely 38 31 Not less likely 61 61 Not sure 1 8

**Oecember 1984 Wording: "At the moment, the cause of the disaster is not completely known. If it turns out that the disaster was caused by negligence on the part of Union Carbide and its employees, would you be less likely to bUy Union Carbide's products such as Eveready Batteries and Glad Bags, or not?W

WOo you feel that the federal and state governments should crack down a lot harder on chemical companies such as Union Carbide than they have, or don't you feel that way?"

(over) THE HARRIS SURVEY October 10th, 1985 -4

FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS CRACK DOWN HARDER ON CHEMICAL COMPANIES?

Should crack down a lot harder 91 Don't feel that way 8 Not sure 1

MET HOD 0 LOG Y

This Harris Survey was conducted by telephone witin the United States between September 5th and 8th, among a cross section of 1,255 adults nationwide. Figures for age, sex, race and education were weighted wehre necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population.

In a sample of this size, one can say with 95 percent certainty that the results have a statistical precision of plus or minus three percentage points of what they would be if the entire adult population had been polled.

This statement conforms to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.