DEATH TOLLS FROM VARIOUS

AIR POLLUTION EPISODES

BY

JEREMIAH FRIDAY OGUGO

SALISU SULAIMAN

YOUSRA MAHER BAGHDADI

IBRAHIM ALZORQI

SHRIDHARAN PARTHASARATHY

MSc CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM ,MALAYSIA CAMPUS

 DEATH TOLLS FROM VARIOUS AIR POLLUTION EPISODES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Meuse valley, Belgium air pollution episode, 1930

3. Donora , Pennsylvania air pollution episode, 1948

4. Poza Rica, Mexico air pollution episode, 1950

5. London smog disaster, 1952

6. Conclusion

References
 1. INTRODUCTION

History has witnessed numerous disasters, both natural and manmade, that are remembered even
today for their devastating impact on human health and environment. Every incident leaves
behind it, victims, either in form of direct loss of lives and properties or indirectly by altering the
natural processes. Atmospheric pollution has often been the cause of many accidents, which had
far reaching effects on the environment.

Most researches, articles and journals concerning the health effects of air pollution begin by
referring to the London fog of December, 1952, which led to an increase in deaths of about 4000.
The London fog became a landmark in air pollution epidemiology because of the scale of the
disaster. However, an earlier landmark is the fog that affected the Meuse Valley, Belgium, in
December, 1930. This episode led to the first scientific proof of the potential for atmospheric
pollution to cause deaths and disease, and it clearly identified the most likely causes.

2. MEUSE VALLEY, BELGIUM (DECEMBER 2-5, 1930)

The area of Liege on the River Meuse, was once of the most industrialized area in Continental
Europe, with steel works, zinc smelters, glass manufacturing and fertilizers (Benoit et al 2001).
Between December 2 and 5, 1930, an atmospheric event known as a thermal inversion trapped
fog over a 15-mile-long stretch of the Meuse Valley. At the end of the first day, many residents
complained about nausea, short breath, stinging eyes, and burning throats. In three days, 60
people had died and thousands more were ill with an unknown ‘disease’ (Sunil 2005). People in
the entire country and aboard were deeply shocked and the deadly fog received considerable
media attention. Some think that the valley had been sprayed with poison gas, fumes had leaked
from a chemical plant, or even that bubonic plague had broken out. The sickness was actually
caused by pollutants trapped beneath the dense fog clouds .
Respiratory problems rapidly improved after the fog cleared on Dec 5. Death rates were
subsequently made ten times above normal, especially among the elderly, asthmatic, debilitated,
or those with cardiac disease even when they had remained in doors .
Children were described as being indisposed and a few were seriously affected, though none
died. Moreover, there were also respiratory problems in cattle.60 deaths that were attributed to
the fog occurred on Dec 4 and 5. Engis, the town of 3500 residents, had the highest number of
deaths (Benoit et al 2001).

WEATHER CONDITIONS WHICH COULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEATHS AND ILLNESSES

The weather from Dec 1 to 5 was cold, a little above freezing during the day. At night the
temperature reached 10 below while the wind speed was only 1-3km/hr. The temperatures had
been falling in the days before the deaths, and heavy fog formed as moist air cooled near the
ground. There was an unusual weather pattern called a temperature inversion (Benoit et al 2001).

Warm air usually rises, but in valleys like the Meuse (and Los Angeles) during the winter, once
the sun goes down the ground loses heat very quickly which cools the air near the ground (Sunil
2005). Because air does not conduct heat very well, the air above the surface remains warmer by
comparison. Colder air does not rise through warmer air. Therefore, there is little mixing of air
(Benoit et al 2001).

POST EPISODE INVESTIGATIONS

Investigation led to the conclusion that the cause was poisonous products in the waste gas of the
many factories in the valley, in conjunction with unusual climatic conditions. Moreover,
investigators concluded that the signs and symptoms were entirely and solely due to a local
irritant action towards the mucosa directly exposed to the outside air (Benoit et al 2001).

They ruled out the low temperature and the density of the fog, since similar weather conditions
had prevailed over large parts of Belgium. Respiratory infections were also excluded, mainly on
clinical grounds.

Concentrations of air pollutants in the fog were unknown and subsequent chemical analyses of
soil, plants, water, or other materials were not useful, because of background pollution. There
was no evidence of an abnormal release of toxic chemicals by industry. Therefore, the only
choice left to the investigators was to measure the fumes, gases, and dusts released by the plants
of the area. They identified about 30 substances released by 27 factories.

Most pollutants (including CO2, CO, H2, H2S, Ash, NO2, NH3, HCl , acetylene and other
hydrocarbons, sulphites, chlorides, and fluorides and nitrates of zinc or iron) were excluded on
the basis of calculations of the worst case scenarios for the amounts released and the symptoms
of those affected. Lack of oxygen was dismissed as the cause of the victims’ suffocation.

However, “the diffuse superficial mucosal congestion that occurred throughout the respiratory
tract down to the bronchioles and lung parenchyma could be attributable to fine irritant
particles”. The free or phagocytes particles in alveoli suggested that they had been inhaled a
short time before death. However, carbon particles should have been innocuous, unless they had
adsorbed irritant acids (Benoit et al 2001).

CONCLUSIONS

1. The air pollution episode in the Meuse Valley 70 years ago revealed a problem that had
hitherto received little attention.
2. The weather conditions could have contributed to the deaths and illnesses.
3. The coal burning by industry and by private households were the reasoned that emitted
SO2 was a main factor, but that, in addition, fog increased oxidation reactions that led to
H2SO4 production, which could be catalyzed by iron or zinc.

3. DONORA PENNSYLVANIA AIR POLLUTION EPISODE (OCTOBER, 26 th -31st , 1948)

INTRODUCTION

Donora an industrial community with a population of 14,000 in the Southwestern Pennsylvania

located at a bend of the Monongahela River in the valley has a large steel mill, zinc smelter, and
a sulfuric acid plant within its environ. It is situated about 48km of Pittsburgh in the United
States. Mostly coal is used basically in all the private and commercial sectors in the town as
source of fuel in the early 20th century. Other sources of pollutants in the community include; a
glass company, one electric power plant, a railroad, and steamship operation
 OCTOBER 26, 1948 INCIDENT AND CAUSES

On that fateful Tuesday morning, a cold surface anticyclone - Area of high atmospheric pressure
caused by descending air, which became warm and dry was observed and fog was persistent with
stagnant wind condition (Donald 2007). The strong radiational cooling that forms the fog, along
with the sinking air of the anticyclone, combined to form a strong temperature inversion. Light,
downslope winds spread cool air and contaminant over Donora from the community’s sources of
pollutant. The fog and its pollutant burden lingered into the following day with a sickening smell
of SO2 and vision becomes low enough which forced traffic to stop. Drainage cool winds
throughout the night keep strengthen the inversion and continue to add more effluents to the
already dirty air. The earth surface (ground) was denied sun rays by the dense fog making it get
closer to the surface due to the fog unable to mix and dispersed either horizontally or vertically
which render it stagnant and shallow. As the days pass-by and the pollutants (mainly particulate
matters and sulfuric acid) were continuously discharge into a 40m height from their sources
without noticing their effects and visibility continue to decreased to the point people on opposite
sides of the street cannot see themselves

AFTERMATH

By Saturday, the outcome of the disaster spells doom on the community members with seventeen
already waiting for their caskets. An emergency meeting was summon between community
representatives and company officials as to find remedy to the situation at hand which was
believed to be caused from their plants emission. This continues until the following day (Sunday)
when reasonable storm generated sufficient wind which vertically mix the air and dispersed the
pollutants. An unexpected rain on October 31st then did more cleaning by washing down the
pollutant (Lucien 1970). The death toll reached 20 and about half of the population experienced
on form of discomfort or the other. Cough was the most prominent symptom, but all the portions
of the respiratory track and eyes, nose, and throat were irritated in at least some persons
(Agarwal 2009) and most of those affected were older people with previous cardiac or
respiratory disorder. About 6000 people (43% of the population) were affected by the incident
(Daniel and Chris 2008), (Lucien 1970). There was no means of scientific measure to ascertain
the amount of the pollutants in the air and this set a landmark for the first time there was an
organized efforts and resources to document the health impacts of air pollution in the United
States. Donora smog disaster proved to be a catalyst that brought the US federal government,
namely the Congress and the USPHS into the policy debate about the health effects of air
pollution and the Clean Air Act of 1955, which provided funding for research and technical
assistance, was a direct outcome (Anthony 1999)

4. POZA RICA, MEXICO AIR POLLUTION EPISODE (NOVEMBER, 24th 1950)

INTRODUCTION

A catastrophic exposure incident involving the release of large quantities of hydrogen sulphide
occurred in Poza Rica, Mexico on the 24th November 1950. Poza Rica a city of 22,000 people is
located about 210km northeast of Mexico, was then the centre of Mexico’s most important
petroleum-producing regions, and the relatively modern city developed in the early 20th century
as an administrative and leading oil-producing district and the site of several oil field
installations, including a sulphur-recovery plant.(Sunil 2005)

HOW IT HAPPENS
The incidence occurs as a result of Hydrogen sulphide, a colourless gas with a characteristic
odour that is soluble in various liquids including water, alcohol, ether, And solutions of amines,
alkali carbonates, and bicarbonates. It can undergo a number of oxidation reactions to yield
principal products consisting of sulphur dioxide, sulphuric acid, or elemental sulphur. Reaction
rates and oxidation products depend on the nature of the oxidizing agent.
It was during the early morning hours in which a malfunction of the waste gas stream, through
pipe leakage results in the discharge of large quantity of hydrogen sulphide gas into the
atmosphere. The hydrogen sulphide gas aided by the low level temperature and the early
morning breeze was carried to the residential area. The release of the hydrogen sulphide into
atmosphere lasted for only about 25 minutes.
DEATH TOLL OF THE INCDENCE

Within three hours of the occurrence (3hrs) 22 people were reported to be dead and another 320
people been hospitalize, the most common symptom was the loss of the sense of smell. More
than half of the patients lost consciousness, many suffered signs and symptoms of respiratory
tract and eye irritation and some developed pulmonary oedema. Four of the 320 victims
exhibited neurological sequel; 2 experienced neuritis of the acoustic nerve; 1 developed
dysarthria ; the fourth patient suffered aggravation of pre-existing epilepsy. Also an investigation
shows that animal population was also affected.

5. LONDON SMOG DISASTER (DECEMBER, 5th 1952)

INTRODUCTION

A big disaster was happened in the 5th of December 1952. It is very public and famous by the
name "The Great Smoke of London". It caused air pollution in London for several continuous
days. Because of the widely use of coal at that time, and the windless ambient cooled weather, a
thick fog layer covered London causing a harm pollution, killed many thousands of people in the
year mentioned (Agarwal 2009). Effects on visibility, different kinds of respiratory illness and
serious breath effects, and all these remnants left a hundred thousand people suffering for a long
time. It is the most considerable significant air pollution in the history of London. Wide
environmental researches, regulations, and government activities have applied and finalized with
the Clean Air Act in 1956 (Agarwal 2009).

CAUSES OF THE DISASTER

1. Environmental Effects; a cool weather in early December, and heavy snowfalls

accompanied with the anticyclones across the region. These effects created an inversion
by pushing the warmer air downwards, close to the ground, and the cool one above it.
(EHP, 2002).

2. Contaminated smoke with thousands of tones of black soot from industries, brought by
the east winds, and trapped by the air inversion.
3. The intensive and widely use of coal fired powered station, created a polluted air of
sticky particles of tar and gaseous Sulphur dioxide.

4. The amounts of pollutants were released to the atmosphere are: 1,000 tones of smoke
particles, 2,000 tons of carbon dioxide, 140 tones of hydrochloric acid and 14 tones of
fluorine compounds. Furthermore, 370 tones of sulphur dioxide were converted into 800
tones of sulphuric acid. (Urban air Quality)

DEATH TOLLS AND EFFECTS

1. According to a reported statistics; 4,000 people died suffered from chronic respiratory or
cardiovascular complaints
2. Cattle at Smithfield were asphyxiated.
3. Traveling was interrupt for several days. Road, rail and air transport were suspended
when fog in the auditorium created conditions unbearable for the audience and
performers.
4. It is shown in the graph below that smoke and sulphur dioxide peaks, compatible
with the peaks in deaths.

http://www.portfolio.mvm.ed.ac.uk/studentwebs/session4/27/graph.jpg
CLEAN AIR ACT 1956

As a result of this disaster, the first act of the clean air issued to protect people and the
environment in London from the main polluted resources. This act includes a number of
standards presented to reduce air pollution. Firstly, by specifying smoke control areas' in some
cities in which only fuels without smoke could be burnt. Secondly, by shifting homes' sources of
heat towards cleaner coals, electricity, and gas. By all these clauses, it decreased the amount of
pollutants and sulphur dioxide from house chimneys. Later an amendment added to this act by
increasing the height of these chimneys, (EHP, 2002).

6.BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY (DECEMBER, 3rd 1984)

INTRODUCTION TO BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY

Bhopal disaster which is popularly called as Bhopal gas tragedy is considered as one of the
world’s worst catastrophe. The incident occurred on 3 December 1984 in UCIL (Union Carbide
India Limited), situated in Bhopal the capital city of Madhya Pradesh in India.
The industry situated in India mainly focused on the production of pesticide. The leakage of a
gas called MIC (METHYL ISO CYANIDE) is the reason for this major disaster. During the
incident UCIL was a subsidiary of UCC a US group. Now it is a subsidiary of Dow Chemicals.
UCIL was built up in 1968 in Bhopal. The main product was to produce Sevin (brand name
carbryl) .MIC was used as an intermediate. In 1979 MIC plant was newly added for the
production of Carbryl.

CAUSES OF THE TRAGEDY

Before this tragedy several accidents have occurred in the same plant involving phosphene and
MIC from 1981 to 1983.Water entered a tank containing 43 tones of MIC.Incident took place
between 00.40 AM TO 2.30 AM. Exothermic reaction resulted in the raise of temperature to
more than 200 c and also raised the pressure drastically. This resulted in safety valve to release
the gas into atmosphere. The ultimate result was the conversion of the sleeping city of Bhopal
into a gas chamber.MIC a gas has to be stored as a liquid; the refrigeration unit used for cooling
was shut down as an economy measure. The water was poured for cooling around the tank.

The management decided to open the safety valves in order to prevent the explosion which
would be another greater disaster. The gas should be neutralized using a caustic soda scrubber
but the scrubber was not designed for such a huge amount of gas and it overwhelmed. It can also
be neutralized using an incineration and there was an inoperable flare system resulting in the
failure of the operation. The gas started to release through the 33m flare tower. Although water
curtains for knocking down the toxic vapors were present they could not reach a height of 33m.A
panic situation raised and the management started all the efforts to contain the leakage.MIC as a
gas is heavier than air , the wind velocity and geographical characteristics influenced the rate of
dispersal and spread. (SOURCE: http://www.swarajpuri.com/facetofacebhopal.htmad of MIC.)

DEATH TOLLS OF BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY

o 3800 Died within days.

o Official count 3500-7500
o 20000 died slowly
o 1000 animals killed
o 120000 still suffering

The bodies were buried within a few days .Still many Graves were found in that place

EFFECTS OF BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY

o Groundwater contamination
o Soil contamination
o Severe chest congestion (100 % cases)
o Foreign body sensation in the eyes
o Diminished and blurred vision
o Whiteness in the eyes
o Frothing at the mouth
o Headache and giddiness
o Sore throat
 o Pain and burning sensation in the chest
o Vomiting
o Abdominal cramps (SOURCE :(Delhi Science Forum Report ‘Bhopal
Tragedy: Looking Beyond’, in Ref. 5))
Skin damage, Asthma’, Dispend, Chest pain, Lung oedema, Emphysema (damage of lung
tissue), Hemorrhaging, Bronchial pneumonia, Death. Till date the UCC plant has not been
remediated.

7.CONCLUSIONS

The report has concentrated on the death tolls of six different air pollution tragedies namely
Meuse valley, Donora pennsylvania air pollution episode, Poza rica- Mexico air pollution
episode, London smog disaster, Bhopal gas tragedy.The statistics for all the different air
pollution tragedies has been discussed. A brief idea of how the tragedy actually occurred,their
main causes and the effect after the tragedy has also been highlighted.

A very detailed analysis of these air pollution tragedies has been discussed clearly in this
report.There are various reasons for all these air pollution tragedies but ultimately these tragedies
claim lives which are very precious.Although industrialization is good, it has to be properly
utilized, otherwise serious effects occurs for sure.
REFERENCES

"A Retrospective Assessment of Mortality from the London Smog Episode of 1952: The Role of
Influenza and Pollution". Environ Health Perspect 112 (1): 6–8. January 2004.
doi:10.1289/ehp.6539. http://www.ehponline.org/members/2003/6539/6539.html.

"Atmosphere, Climate & Environment Information Programme". Ace.mmu.ac.uk.1952-12-04.

http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/Resources/Teaching_Packs/Key_Stage_4/Air_Quality/02.html.
Retrieved 2010-06-30.

"Met Office Education: Teens - Case Studies - The Great Smog". Metoffice.gov.uk.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/education/teens/casestudy_great_smog.html#p02. Retrieved 2010-
06-30.
“Bhopal Gas Tragdey” Available At
Anthony N. Pennna (1999); Nature’s bounty: Historical and modern environmental perspective,
M.E.Sharpe.Inc., New York
Available at http://whqlibdoc.who.int/monograph/WHO_MONO_46_(p221).pdf
Barbara L. Page, Air Pollution Tragedy: A Case Study Lesson, Air -The Search for One Clean
Breath, available: http://www.vcapcd.org/AirTheFilm/pubs/AirPollutionTragedyLessonPlan.pdf
Benoit Nemery, Peter H M Hoet, Abderrahim Nemmar (2001), The Meuse Valley fog of 1930:
an air pollution disaster, department of medical history, Lancet 2001; 357: 704–08
C. Donald Ahrens (2007): Meteorology today: An introduction to weather, climate, and the
environment, 8th edu. Thomson Brooks, USA.
C. Donald Ahrens (2008), Essentials of meteorology: An Invitation to the Atmosphere, Thomson
Brooks, USA
Catcotte,E.,.J:Effects of Air pollution on Animals
Daniel A. Vallero, Chris Brasier (2008): Sustainable design: The science of sustainability and
green engineering, John Wiley and sons, New Jersey
Gablehouse(2004) ,”International Conference on the 20th Anniversary of the Bhopal Gas
Tragedy” AVAILABLE AT http://www.nasttpo.org/Tuesday/Bhopal_20th_Anniversary.pdf
Great smog at free Wikipedia Av.at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog

Guissani, V: The UK Clean Air Act 1956: An Empirical Investigation, Centre for Social and
Economic Research on the Global Environment, University College London and University of
East Anglia, 1994.

Gupta(2007), “Bhopal Gas Tragedy and its Impact on Process Safety Worldwide.”Available at
www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/RAV/conf/IDRiM07/.../Gupta.pdf

http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/aidaustin/bhopal/Bhopal_Tragedy2.pdf

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/great_smog.html

http://www.portfolio.mvm.ed.ac.uk/studentwebs/session4/27/graph.jpg

IPCS, International Progarmme on Chemical Safety: Enviromental health criteria 19, hydrogen
sulphideAvailable at http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc019.htm
Lucien Marie Le Cam (1970): Proceeding of the sixth Berkeley symposium vol. 6: Effect of air
pollution on health, Cambridge University Press, London.
Puri,.S “Face to Face with Bhopal” .Available at http://www.swarajpuri.com/facetofacebhopal.htmad
of MIC.

Robert F.P. (2002): The particulate air pollution controversy: a case study and lessons learned,
Kluwer Academic Publisher, USA
S.K. Agarwal (2009): Air pollution, New Delhi, APH publishing Corporation

Stegeman, John J. & Solow, Andrew R. A Look Back at the London Smog of 1952 and the Half
Century Since; A Half Century Later: Recollections of the London Fog (Environmental Health
Perspectives, Dec)

Sunil Choukiker(2005): Major Air Poluution Episodes: Enviromental disasters that Kill.
Available at http://www.visionriviewpoint.com/print.asp?articleid=26