A Man-Made Catastrophe: No One Responsible Can Escape Blame

A Man-Made Catastrophe: No One Responsible Can Escape Blame
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 4, 2014

Summary: The Kaohsiung City gas pipeline explosion was a major disaster. Many people bear heavy responsibility. That is inescapable. A tiny hole in the pipeline could have been the result of neglect by a handful of workers, or a gaggle of bureaucrats. It led to an unqualified disaster. The question one must ask now, is after this unforgettable pain, what have we learned?

Full Text Below:

According to the available evidence, the cause of the Kaohsiung City gas explosion was a propene leak by LCY Chemical Corp. One. The propene delivery time is consistent with public reports of the incident. Two. Communication records show that China General Terminal & Distribution Corporation (CGTD) which sent the shipment, and LCY Chemical Corp., which received the shipment, did indeed encounter problems with propene shipment. Three. Prosecutors have learned that people smelled strange odors emerging from locations where underground LCY Chemical pipelines were located. So far, LCY Chemical has denied responsibility.

The next point of contention that must be addressed is, why was the pipeline leaking? Was LCY Chemical responsible? Over the last few days, LCY Chemical has offered two responses. First it said it may have been the result of improper construction near the pipeline rupture, for example, the nearby municipal light rail project. Next it said maintenance of the pipeline was the responsibility of the CPC Corp., not LCY Chemical.

But prosecutors discovered a hole in the pipeline where a "square metal patch" had fallen off. It did not appear to be the result of nearby construction projects. It looked more like the result of age and disrepair. Repair records should have been kept. Maintenance and repair should have been more diligent. LCY Chemical apparently failed to meet its responsibilities. CPC Corp. said that 30 years ago the ownership of the pipeline was transferred to LCY Chemical. It said every company should be responsible for the maintenance of its own property. It said CPC Corp. and LCY Chemical never signed a maintenance contract. If true, the damaged propene pipeline that resulted in a leak is the inescapable responsibility of LCY Chemical.

This major disaster was entirely man-made. LCY Chemical is a listed company with annual output of $50 billion NT. But it has repeatedly disowned all responsiblity. It has demonstrated no sense of social responsibility. The night before the gas explosion, personnel in charge of receiving the propene shipment may not have been aware of the gas leaks. They noticed the pressure loss, contacted CGTD, then continued shipping the propene. One cannot say that the company knowingly caused the disaster. but the CGTD foreman revealed that there was a gas leak on Ersheng Road. Both sides closed their delivery valves. Shortly afterwards a string of explosions occurred. The company must now be fully aware of its propene problems. Yet its conduct in recent days has been farcical.

LCY Chemical cannot escape responsibility. But Kaohsiung City Government disaster prevention and relief also failed. First of all, the city's underground pipeline map contains no record of this LCY Chemical pipeline. Clearly the city's fire and public works management is incomplete and includes basic information gaps. Secondly, the city government misjudged the situation during the first three hours of the crisis. City officials thought it was a natural gas explosion. Finally, the EPA Southern District contingency team, which has the ability to deal with toxic gases, waited too long. Third, One hour before the explosion, the Kaohsiung City Fire Department asked Sinochem and Sinopec to cut pipeline transmission. But it failed to notify LCY Chemical. This was a blunder. Fourth, people repeatedly reported the disaster. Yet the municipal government "public service center" repeatedly responded in a perfunctory manner. City officials lied, saying "We have the situation under control." This demonstrated a stupefying disregard for human life.

Nor was that all. The gas explosion led to heavy casualties and losses. This reflects on Kaohsiung's lack of emergency rescue systems. It had virtually no control of the situation. Many firefighters on the scene busied themselves with traditional water sprays. This may be effective against natural gas leaks. But using it with propene leaks merely adds fuel to the fire. Propene is heavier than natural gas. Propene is unlike natural gas, which dissipates into the air. Continuous spraying merely causes propene to flow into the sewers, increasing the area of damage. We have to wonder. When firefighters were busy on the front lines, did their superiors in command and control consider their safety? Did they consider the risk to local residents? If they did, why did they not cordon off the site and evacuate passing pedestrians and vehicles? City officials have been blaming LCY Chemical for failing to inform them when they were transporting propene. In fact, the laws and regulations do not require notification.

The number of deaths from the gas explosion continues to mount. Two missing firefighters have yet to be found. An underground section still contains 260 tons of propene that must be dealt with. Road reconstruction is still a long way off. As evidence continues to emerge, those guilty of administrative negligence cannot be allowed to escape responsibility. LCY Chemical and the Kaohsiung City government must tell the truth about what happened, and shoulder responsibility. Central and local government division of labor for pipeline management must be clarified. There cannot be any "no man's land." They must not resort to mud-slinging or shameless evasion, in order to shift the focus of attention.

This was a major disaster. Many people bear heavy responsibility. That is inescapable. A tiny hole in the pipeline could have been the result of neglect by a handful of workers, or a gaggle of bureaucrats. It led to an unqualified disaster. The question one must ask now, is after this unforgettable pain, what have we learned?

當然是人禍：該負責的，一個也逃不掉
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.08.04 03:01 am

高雄氣爆主因，根據目前相關的線索，皆指向是李長榮化工當天輸送時外洩的丙烯肇禍。第一，輸送丙烯的時間點與民眾報案的時間點完全吻合；第二，通話紀錄顯示，負責輸送的華運倉儲和負責接收的榮化兩端，確曾發生丙烯未送達的問題；第三，檢方已在民眾最早發現異味外洩地點的地下涵管找到榮化管線的破漏處。至此，李長榮化工恐已責任難逃。

接下來，必須討論的新爭議點則是：當天的管線為何會破漏？責任歸屬在不在李長榮？對此，榮化連日來的說法有二：其一，可能是鄰近工地的施工不當導致管線破裂，（諸如附近的市府輕軌工程）；其二，該管線的維修保養責任在中油公司，而非李長榮。

然而，比對檢方在涵洞內發現的管線缺漏口，是一塊「方形金屬補丁」脫落，不似受其他工程外力影響所致，而比較像是老舊失修。如果先前已有過修補紀錄，平日更須勤於保養檢修，但榮化似乎並未盡到責任。而中油方面則聲明，該管線所有權卅年前由中油轉讓給榮化，產權各有歸屬，應該各自維護保養，中油與榮化從未簽訂代為維修合約。如果上述事實皆無誤，管線破損導致丙烯外洩，榮化的責任將無所遁逃。

這麼大的災難，完全是一場人禍。李長榮化工是年產值五百億元的上市公司，但它應對外界的質疑卻一再推託，看不出它的社會責任感。當夜在氣爆之前，該公司執行接收丙烯的人員或許不知市區發生氣體外洩事件，因而雖察覺壓力流失，在與華運聯繫之後，又繼續輸送丙烯；這點，不能說該公司有肇禍之故意。然而，在華運領班告知二聖路有氣體外洩事件後，雙方關閉輸送閥門，不久即發生連續爆炸；此刻，該公司應心知肚明是自己的丙烯闖禍，但其連日來的表現卻荒腔走板。

從另一端看，榮化固然責任難逃，這並不表示高雄市府在救災防災處理上沒有誤失。首先，在市府列管的地下管線中，並無榮化這條管線之記載，顯示其消防及工務管理基本資料缺漏不全；其次，市府在最初三小時的處理過程中一直誤判形勢，以為是瓦斯肇禍，最後向具有專業能力處理有毒氣體的環保署南區應變隊求援，已延誤時機；第三、在爆炸前一個小時，消防局曾要求中化和中石化切斷管線輸送，卻獨漏禍首榮化，這是因應錯謬；第四、在市民不斷報案申告災情時，市府「市民服務中心」卻一再敷衍，謊稱「情況已經控制」，這種愚民策略根本是草菅人命。

不僅如此，氣爆造成如此重大的傷亡和損失，也反映了高雄市救災系統的缺失，指揮上幾乎沒有縱深可言。從現場看，只見眾多打火弟兄在前線奔忙，用的就是最傳統的噴水方式，這對付瓦斯外洩或許有效，應對丙烯卻是火上加油。因為丙烯比重較大，不像瓦斯可以隨空氣逸散；不斷噴水，只是將丙烯帶向下水道四處溢流，反而擴大了受害面積。我們好奇的是，當消防隊員在火線奔忙時，在後勤指揮、調度、研判的長官可曾想到他們的安危？可曾考慮到當地居民的風險？如果有的話，為什麼現場不見有效的封鎖，也未疏散過往人車？市府官員一直責怪榮化在輸送丙烯異常時未曾通報，事實上，相關法規上並無強制通報的標準作業準則。

這次氣爆發生至今，死亡人數還在累增，失蹤的兩名消防隊員也尚未尋獲，包括災害路段地下還有另兩百六十噸丙烯有待處理。可知，要踏上重建之路，仍很漫長。無論如何，隨著證據不斷浮現，該承擔的人、該追究的行政疏失，都不能逃掉責任；也因此，李長榮化工和高雄市府都必須認真釐清真相和因果，拿出肩膀扛起責任。除此之外，中央和地方之間對於各種管線的管理及分工，如果還有「幽靈地帶」，也請徹底劃分清楚，不要用政治口水或耍賴手段來轉移焦點。

災難有多麼重大，責任就有多麼沉重，這是無可逃避的事。對比之下，一個小小的管線缺口，少數工作人員的敷衍了事，或者一群官僚的漫不經心，就可以釀成難以彌補的災禍。要問的是：歷經這場刻骨銘心的痛，大家學到了什麼？