Effects of an even worse Bhopal Disaster on Union Carbide

Obviously increasing the death toll would increase the likelihood that Union Carbide wouldn't walk away from the disaster scot free, but would a more severe disaster do anything to result in any permanent legislation regarding the operational safety standards of potentially hazardous industrial sites (like the Bhopal plant) situated in developing countries? How would this affect the public perception of multinationals in both the first and third worlds? Would multinationals based on heavy industry and cheap labor take measurable hits in growth and lost profits by lack of business in India?
 
Bhopal could have killed Union Carbide completely, and India's relations with multinationals were badly soured by what happened there. They didn't really walk away scot free, but they certainly could have been hit harder. As for regulations on better safety standards, have fun with globalization, then. Companies like Union Carbide are gonna look for the lowest such rules under most circumstances, and US lawmakers are not gonna have much effect on a company's actions abroad.
 
With a more severe disaster, good chance there would be less evidence remaining of how it actually occurred? In that case, they could be in even bigger doo-doo, if I recall the details correctly.
 
By a more severe disaster, I was thinking that maybe the wind carries the deadly gas cloud further away from the plant (increasing the number of people affected), while the plant itself would suffer no more damage than it did IOTL.
 
Top