You are here

U.S. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY LAGS ALARMINGLY BEHIND DEVELOPED WORLD: U.S. Industrial Loss Burden 3 Times European Union and Gap Is Growing

Press Release - Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), July 9, 2014

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

Washington, DC — America’s industrial infrastructure is substantially more susceptible to catastrophic failure than those in other industrialized countries, according to reports posted today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). In certain key sectors, such as petrochemicals, aging U.S. refineries are become more dangerous with each passing month.

The combined losses from the fires, explosions and spills regularly plaguing U.S. chemical plants takes a proportionately greater toll than in the rest of the world. For example, the reinsurance giant, Swiss Re, concludes that the sum of all reinsurance losses (the “loss burden”) in refining, petrochemical processing and gas processing industry in the U.S. is approximately three times that of the comparably sized sector in the European Union (EU), with the rest of the world similar to the EU cluster.

Beyond economic losses, the toll on American workers is also higher. A study entitled “Occupational Fatality Risks in the United States and the United Kingdom” published earlier this year in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine found the fatality rate of U.S. workers approximately three times that of workers in the U.K. American worker deaths from chemical exposure were more than 10 times higher than their U.K. counterparts; death by fire nearly 5 times and by explosion nearly 4 times as likely.

Rather than improving, some key U.S. industrial sectors are declining.

For example, a recent review of refinery safety in California concluded:

“With some exceptions, other countries that refine oil have experienced a decline in major refinery incidents over the last decade, whereas the U.S. appears to be following the opposite trajectory.”

“America is on a trajectory toward Third World industrial safety,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “Just as our bridges, highways and other public infrastructure require reinvestment so do our industrial plants if we are to avoid the damage and dysfunction driven by a crumbling core.”

Perhaps the paradigm case is Chevron’s refinery in Richmond, California. In August 2012, a steel pipeline sprung a leak which gasified into a plume and then ignited, creating a chemical cloud that forced 15,000 residents to seek medical care. The leak was caused by sulfidation corrosion from the sulfur in petroleum. There was a similar leak at the same refinery just a week prior; Chevron had four such leaks in its other refineries that year. Moreover, nearly 95% of the 144 U.S refineries were built before 1985 and have similarly vulnerable steel piping. The same year as the Richmond accident, there were 45 other corrosive leaks. This becomes even more concerning as the sulfur content in U.S. oil sent to refineries rises.

Yet, no new safeguards have been adopted. A recommendation by the Chair of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board calling for a preventive rather than reactive approach to chemical plants, requiring inherently safer design similar to the approaches taken in U.K., Australia and Norway, has been stymied by opposition. Indeed, every one of the very few major industrial safety proposals coming out of the Obama administration has been stillborn.

“By standing pat on industrial safety, the U.S. is actually falling further behind,” Ruch added. “Without regulation requiring safer systems, plant operators do not have a sufficient economic incentive to invest because the real costs are borne by sacrificial workers and sickened communities.”

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.