¶ … community's main demands and the company's responses, we need to briefly discuss the three main categories of concern that the Manchester community has brought forward. These basically refer to pollution concerns, safety concerns and overall communication with the company's representatives.
The pollution concerns include both phonic and chemical pollution. As a chemical plant, Rhone - Poulenc transports out of the company impressive quantities of chemical waste. Additionally, preparing sulfuric acid, the company's main endeavor, implies the release into the atmosphere of hazardous residues that can only prove harmful to the citizens' health. The examples of cancer and other diseases are numerous in the area, although, as an observation, Rhone-Poulenc is not the only factory operating in the area. Pollution also includes phonic pollution, as numerous transport facilities, notably trains, ensure a noisy day.
In terms of safety, living next to a chemical plant means that one never knows what to expect. In the case study, we had the example of chemical leakage due to transport mishandling, but at any point there is a risk of fire or explosion.
As for communication, this is, in my opinion, the main cause of all debate between the company and the community. Throughout its presence in Manchester, the company has not once attempted to discuss environmental issues or any other potential causes for concerns with the members of the community. The moment they are forced to have contact with them is strictly related to the need to obtain the permit for incinerating hazardous. It is difficult, in this sense, to see something other than selfish interest on the company's behalf, given the fact that this is practically the only contact they have had with a community they operate in. In my opinion, some of the unreasonable demands that the community brings forth are related to a sense of frustration due to the ignoring policy the company has practiced.
Fixed on these three coordinates, safety, pollution and communication concerns, we are now able to list and discuss the community's demands. The first notable demand is that the community should, in the future, "meet directly...
This is clearly related to the communication issue previously described.
Another demand that should be mentioned referred to the constant and scrupulous monitoring of all
transportation that passed through Manchester every day, in order to avoid railroad blockages.
Thirdly, the community demanded the creation of a Community Advisory Committee, "an independent watchdog"
of the company and the improvement of notification procedures in the case of accidental leakage.
Fourthly, the community wanted a scrupulous monitoring and
analysis of ground and
water quality, in order to be able to detect and prevent in time any environmental disaster in the area. The
environmental concerns and demands included an "off-site sulfur dioxide monitoring system" and a "dispersion modeling effort"
. The community would participate in the discussions following the report and findings of the independent environmental auditor required.
Finally, the community demanded that a fund would be constituted at the company's expense that would analyze the citizens'
health and would conduct a full survey in this sense.
As a comment on these demands, as I have previously discussed, some of them seem to be unreasonable, mainly because they have nothing to do with what the company can actually control. There is one thing to demand meetings with the
management and a totally different one to demand monitoring of all transport that passes through or around the city. It is just as unreasonable to demand that the
water surface and ground be constantly controlled, as is the demand that a fund be created for citizens' health surveys. Indeed, it is as if Rhone-Poulenc needs to be made responsible for all misfortunes that may happen around Manchester. The area itself is an industrial one, with several other
plants and factories contributing both to an increased number of daily transports and to chemical emissions into the water and ground. There is no reasonable argument that should lead to the
conclusion that Rhone-Poulenc alone should be held responsible and should pay for all environmental requirements. In part, the company's responses to the demands reflect this aspect.
As…
