Chemical Compliance
Intelligence & Solutions
Home / News / Details

Suppression of Information on Fujian Chemical Spill Enrages Chinese Netizens

On Nov, 4th, a chemical leak of 6.97 metric tons of C9 happened in Quangang in Fujian Province in East China. The spill garnered significant attention amongst Chinese netizens not for the inherent dangers posed by C9, but rather for by the bizarre attempt to suppress information about the details of the spill centering around accounts of Chinese net moderators deleting posts from social media platforms and other online forums.

The most serious allegation leveled at Fujian provincial government is that the reports offered by government in the wake of the disaster underestimate the risks posed to public health. 4 days after the spill on Nov 8th, Department of Environmental Protection of Fujian Province published a notice claiming the leaked product was C9 derived from pyrolysis rather C9 derived by reforming.  C9 is a hydrocarbon compound containing 9 carbons, it could be alkane, alkene, alkyne and arene. Arene, a.k.a. aromatic hydrocarbon, is the priority concern when assigning potential hazard and risk to public health and the environment. Reforming C9 major consists of an arene, so what about pyrolysis C9?

Pyrolysis C9 consists of over 150 chemicals, among them, according to the Chinese paper: Comprehensive Utilization and Development Trend of C9 in China and Abroad, aromatic hydrocarbon has a mass percentage around 40~50%.

*data from http://220.250.52.197:38899/index.html (Air quality information platform of Fujian)

So far air and water quality in the vicinity of the spill has been reported as good. The testing items in GB 3095-2012 air quality standards include: SO2, NO2, CO, O3, Particles (both particles with diameters no bigger than 10μm and 2.5μm), TSP (Total Suspended Particle), NOx, Pb and BaP(Benzo-a-pyrene). Since the main components of C9 are elemental Sulphur and Nitrogen the testing standard is not able discern risk here. Chinese netizens living in the area affected by the spill have reported strange odors and feeling nauseous, prompting calls for increased government transparency and open dialog on the topic.

According to official reports released on local government websites on Nov 12th 20.73 tons of used sorbents were collected on the site.

It is an extremely inefficient usage of 13.76 tons of sorbents to absorb the 6.97 tons of C9 and this huge disparity has peaked our interest here at Chemlinked. From our analysis of industrial standard “JT/T 560-2004 Sorbents for ship (船用吸油毡)”,sorbents for ship is in a solid form, used in water to adhere, adsorb, collect the spilled oil from vessel, wharf and accidents. A compliant sorbent should meet below physicochemical properties:

 In the first 3 items, it states that:

  1. Oil absorbency: 10 times or more of its own weight

  2. Water absorbency: at most 10% of its own weight

  3. Oil retention: no less than 80%

We calculate the spilled oil tonnages based on the standard:

  • 10 times weight of the sorbent, 10% water absorbed and 100% oil retained:

  • Formula: 10X+X*10%+X=20.73T

  • Hence the oil spill tonnage 10X could be at least 18.67 tons, in theory.

As interesting as our calculations are it amounts to little more than speculation and in fairness to local government they responded efficiently to the emergency. However this efficient response has been undermined by yet another example of government attempting to suppress information and steer public discourse.

Copyright: unless otherwise stated all contents of this website are ©2024 - REACH24H Consulting Group - All Rights Reserved - For permission to use any content on this site, please contact cleditor@chemlinked.com