New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

4 Workers Killed at DuPont Chemical Plant

Methyl mercaptan leak appears to be responsible for the deaths at the industrial accident site in Texas

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Investigators from the Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) are in Texas probing an apparent chemical leak that killed four workers and injured a fifth at a DuPont plant in La Porte, Texas.

The workers probably died from exposure to methyl mercaptan while responding to a valve leak around 4 AM on Nov. 15, DuPont said in a statement. The community around the plant was not at risk, the company adds.

“Our goal in investigating this accident is to determine the root cause and make recommendations to prevent any similar accidents throughout the industry,” CSB Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso says.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Methyl mercaptan is a colorless gas that can be easily ignited, according to the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry. It is toxic and can cause headaches, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, coma, or death.

The DuPont facility, located east of Houston, uses methyl mercaptan to manufacture insecticides and fungicides, according to CSB. However, the chemical is more widely known as the additive in natural gas that gives it a distinctive rotten cabbage smell.

Methyl mercaptan was responsible for a deadly 2001 accident at an Atofina plant in Michigan. In that incident, workers died when the chemical ignited while a railcar was being unloaded, causing an explosion. The accident killed three, injured several others, and resulted in the evacuation of 2,000 local residents.

Dupont’s La Porte facility appears to have been fined previously for safety violations by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, according to reports from the state’s news organizations.

CSB has conducted four previous investigations into DuPont facilities, all in 2010. One of those accidents killed a worker in Belle, W.Va., and in another, a worker died in Buffalo.

In the statement, DuPont officials say they are working with local, state, and federal officials as they investigate the incident. The company says it is conducting its own “top-to-bottom review.”

This article is reproduced with permission from Chemical & Engineering News (© American Chemical Society). The article was first published on November 17, 2014.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe