
AUGUST 17TH 2015
TIANJIN BLAST KILLS OVER 100: WHO IS TO BLAME?
In less than 30 seconds two explosions shook Tianjin on 12 August. The massive blasts came from Binhai District, right by the port, where hills of containers are lined up with all kinds of products. There is not yet a clear statement about what provoked the initial fire, but initial reports have been talking about an industrial accident. The flames have been difficult to control. Moreover, several new explosions have been registered until today.
On 13 August BBC quoted Chinese media saying that the blast started in a warehouse storing ‘dangerous and chemical goods’ in the port area of the city. On 16 August The Guardian published an interesting piece examining the causes of the incident. It seems conclusive that 700 tonnes of sodium cyanide found at two locations within the site of the explosions are the reason. Warehouse owner, a transport company called Ruihai International Logistics, is under investigation for suspected responsibility.
According to their website, Ruihai Logistics is a private logistics company established in 2011 in the port of Tianjin. It specialises in hazardous chemicals, such as compressed air, flammable and corrosive substances, oxidizing agents, and toxic chemicals. According to Sohu Business, until the moment of the explosion Ruihai Logistics was authorised to handle hazardous chemicals, pack and unpack containers, transport them, provide cargo declarations, distribute them, and store them in warehouses.
One of such substances is sodium cyanide. This is a white crystalline or granular powder which is fatal when inhaled or ingested, as it interferes with the body’s ability to use oxygen, describes BBC. Its uses vary from chemical manufacturing, to fumigation, to mining, as an agent for the extraction of gold and silver. Quoting the same report, it is soluble in water, and absorbs water from air. Its dust is rather easy to inhale. When dissolved or burned, it releases the highly poisonous gas hydrogen cyanide. Hence, Tianjin has become a chemical warfare ground.
Key concerns in the aftermath lie with the handling and cautions at the storage of such substances. Many have criticised the warehouse for being too close to residential areas. Here, we question the business at the port. Sadly, a serious lack of responsibility is costing the lives of hundreds. On the one side, the company is to blame as their operations were way over safety standards. Moreover, Gao Huaiyou, deputy director of Tianjin’s work safety watchdog, found big discrepancies between the accounts of the company and those at customs, which made difficult to assess the specific chemicals involved in the blast. On the other side, the government is also to blame. It is not a surprise that weakly enforced regulations give too much open space for abuses by private companies.
Once again, the authorities are scrutinised. Lack of oversight has played a major role in Tianjin’s explosion. Authorities must be stricter, especially with hazardous substances that could seriously endanger people’s lives. Another day, another quality control scandal in the Heavenly Kingdom.
SOURCES:
“Chemicals at blasted warehouse not yet determined: authorities.” Xinhua News. 14 August 2015. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-08/14/c_134515849.htm
“China blasts: Tianjin port city rocked by explosions.” BBC. 13 August 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-33896292
“China explosions: The questions people are asking about the Tianjin blasts.” BBC. 17 August 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-33923472
“China explosions: What we know about what happened in Tianjin.” BBC. 17 August 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-33844084
“China Tianjin explosions: Nearly 100 people still missing.” BBC. 16 August 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-33951125
“Tianjin explosions: sodium cyanide on site may have been 70 times allowed amount.” The Guardian. 16 August 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/16/tianjin-blasts-sodium-cyanide-on-site-may-have-been-70-times-allowed-amount
???????“????”????????????. 13 August 2015. (In Chinese). http://business.sohu.com/20150813/n418753491.shtml
Annex Asia Publishing
Image: Voice of America