The Contamination of Love Canal
In 1947, Hooker Chemical and Plastic Company bought a piece of land called Love Canal near Niagara Falls, New York, as a landfill for waste chemicals. By the time the landfill closed in the early 1950s, nearly 22,000 tons of wastes, including 248 different kinds of chemicals, had been dumped there. Some of these wastes were caustic, carcinogenic, or toxic. Hooker did little to contain the waste, and contamination spread throughout the canal area. At the time, little was known about the harmful properties of many of the chemicals. The local residents did not complain of a problem so there was no reason to investigate. When the landfill closed, the company worked harder to contain the waste. They lined the canal with concrete, and built a waterproof ceramic cap to prevent rain water from entering. After the landfill had been sealed, the Niagara Falls Board of Education demanded the land to build an elementary school. Hooker reluctantly sold the land to the school for one dollar, protesting that the land should not be excavated. Hooker inserted a clause into the contract releasing the company of any further liability for the land. However, the company did not disclose what it had dumped or how much.
The local government removed some of the ceramic cap when constructing the school, permitting rainwater to seep into the canal. Heavy rains in the mid 70's raised the water table and caused some of the land to subside, creating cesspools of wastewater which leaked into homeowner basements. Health problems in the community escalated, which prompted an investigation and began to reveal reasons behind the low birth weight and chromosomal damage in the community. By 1978, 238 residents of the state of New York had been relocated due to this problem. The state of New York offered full finacial compensation for their homes. The federal government sued Hooker, at that time a subsidiary of Occidental Chemical, for damages. In 1994, Occidental agreed to pay $120 million for a new containment facility plus continuing operation and maintenance costs. Litigation did not finally end until 1998.
- Who was responsible for the environmental damage? To what degree?
- Which of the virtues were ignored, and by whom?
