Philiosophy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Philiosophy - Essay Example It was a burning issue at that time and did not end until 1998. The environmental damage done became a source of great disturbance in the area and remained unsolved until 1998. Generally, Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Company who brought this parcel of land for dumping chemical wastes are the ones, blamed for this whole contamination and the harmful effects it imposed on the people living in the areas nearby and it is not wrong at all to put blame on them. (Michael Harold Brown, 1980) Did Hooker know the damage it has caused to the canal area over the years? Had the company done it intentionally or unintentionally? How much responsible is the government itself and public who got affected in this scenario? The company did know about the hazardous facts and also was aware of what it had done before closing the landfill in early 1950s. Otherwise, it did not have protested against its excavation. Further noticed, it removed itself from any kind of liability at the time of selling the lan d to the local government. This makes it evident without a doubt that the company knew what damage it has posed to the whole area. Both these reasons conform to the deduction that Hooker knew what he had done to Love canal. (Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp. Public Affairs Dept.; 1980) Before closing the landfill in 1950s, the company took no necessary precaution but kept dumping its dangerous chemical wastes in the landfill, for who was going to raise a question on them. It was not after closing the landfill that Hooker started taking some precautionary actions. This time Hooker really worked and rather diligently to contain the wastes. It lined the canal with impenetrable concrete, and placed a waterproof ceramic cap over the chemicals to prevent rainwater from entering. There precautions far exceeded common practice at the time. Emphasis being on far exceeded. Why was the company so conscious about taking precautions at that time when it had not even bothered to take one before? Answer is again the same. Hooker knew the damage the contamination has done and for the same reason it had protested against the excavation of Love canal. The precautions were merely to hide the gruesome effects of its activities from the masses and government. Had there been no removal of the ceramic caps and concrete walls, no one would have known the damage company had done. (Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp. Public Relations Dept.; 1980; Seebauer & Barry 2000) In addition, the company did not disclose the details about the content of the landfill. There are great many facts that reach to the same conclusion: Hooker was the only one who was responsible for the environmental damage in Love canal and the nearby areas. It might be so that just to escape the heavy fine and charges for the violation of laws, the company did all the necessary dramatic performance to hide what they had done to the environment. The fact that public did not complaint about the health damage due to the dis astrous chemical wasting in the Love canal except some very few owes to another fact. Hooker was the major employer in the area and had some great influence. This was enough to stop them from speaking against the company. Their own jobs would have been in danger if they even thought about bringing the matter up to the Government’s consideration. Hooker Chemicals was in no way a socially responsible company, also witnessed by numerous citizens.