Hazardous Cargo Ships Accidents Impact on Marine Environment

Chapter II- Literature Review

This literature review delves into the effects of hazardous cargo ship accidents on the marine environment, seeking to unveil their environmental consequences.

Introduction

Marine transportation of goods and commodities has revolutionised the speed of progress globally and possess an important status in world trade and growth of economies. According to Fagerholt et al (2007), the benefits of marine transportation are fast trading to support rapid large scale industrialization, overcome the land transport barriers, and to enhance the population growth across the globe. In other words, the impacts of marine transport are significantly in four major areas of economic, social, environmental, and political (Mullai 2006). Furthermore, Esq (2001) added that maritime transport is an essential component of national transport infrastructure of any country and impacts the development of the people lives and support the economical transportation of goods across the continents. Also, the connection of land transport chains is another favourable perspective of maritime transport (EC 1996).

On the other hand, the risks involved in safety and security of marine transportation is also of high magnitude. Iakovou (2001) argued the increased accidents in marine transport generate huge losses to the economy and environment that can be replenished over the period of many decades. The increased demand of chemicals, petroleum and related products has increased the pressure on marine transport as well as security of inflammable liquids is a more sensitive issue.  Iakovou (2001) further added that in order to avoid long terms losses, the prevention of marine cargo transported petroleum and related products from accidents is also very important.

Marine cargo considers as hazardous if the transportation is for material produce contamination for human and marine life and environment if exposed after any accident (Celik and Cebi 2009). In this research, the marine transport of inflammable liquids such as chemicals, liquefied natural gas (LNG), Crude oil, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and related dangerous goods are considered to be highly hazardous due their higher risk associated with fire, explosion as well due their adverse impact on the marine life.

Kenneth Grant (2006) asserted that petroleum or Crude oil is transported as unrefined oil with constituents of hydrocarbons, hazardous for the human and marine life as a case of oil spill in sea.  This crude oil further distillate to produce gasoline, diesel, and other petrochemical items, used to supply energy for commercial and residential uses. LNG and LPG are also derivatives of petroleum that are also transported through marine cargo. According to Redovic et al 2014, over one million ton of crude oil and its derivatives are entered in marine environment annually due to the accidental leakages, oil spills, natural seepages, and from industrial resources. IMO (2012) report suggested the preventive measures to assure the safe marine transport of inflammable liquids and discussed the means to build more safe oil tankers to avoid accidental and operational pollution.

However, it important to further analyse how relevant these recent changes have been, and if these engineering improvements have been sufficient in ensuring that the hazardous materials as described previous can considered to safe during the course of the shipments. Therefore, effort has been made to review the literature related to marine cargo accidents and analyse the primary causes of major accidents under marine environment

Marine Cargo Accidents

The clear definition of marine accidents is important to differentiate it from the term “marine incident”. According to Weintrit (2009: 248), the later is used to signify the number of adverse impacts like marine accidents and incidents. Marine accidents occur as a result of sudden and undesirable events combination. Also, Mullai & Paulsson, (2011) used the term accident in discussion of the research methodology for the evaluation of the impacts of marine cargo clashes and oil spills. Hence, this paper is also used the term ‘marine accidents’ to discuss the impacts of undesirable events happened to crude oil and related products carrying vessels. Atken (2006) added that despite of the introduction of latest marine navigation and transport technologies and the enhanced communication networks used b ship[ping companies, the shipping accidents are yet to be ceased.

Causes of Marine Cargo Accidents

As far as the causes of marine accidents are considered, Merrick et al. (2000) classified the causes in two major groups, immediate causes and root or basic causes. The root causes are the result of unskilled operators with lack of technical knowledge, presence of inappropriate safety system management, and the natural disasters. In contrast, the immediate causes are a result of human error, injuries, machine failures, and any other immediate natural calamity.  The physical and psychological disorders of operating staff are also considered as one of the major causes of ship accidents when the machinery and environment is regular with no unexpected drift. Some major causes of ship accidents from the literature reviewed are explained below:

1. Kobyliński (2008) also considered human failures, machinery faults, and external environmental conditions are the major causes of marine accidents. The human factor is one of the prime reasons behind all marine transportation failures as it is connected with design and making of ships, operating, and maintaining the vessels, and controlling the ship in accidental conditions, According to the research of Kobyliński (2008), nearly 20% accidents are occurred due to the faulty ship designs and their failure during operation. Hence, the human factor is responsible from the design to the actual operation of the ship in deep waters. These human errors are classified in three major classes by Merrick et al. (2000) as the health inclination of operators, individual characteristics of honesty and self-integrity, and the experience, skills, and tra9ning of these operators.
2. Natural phenomena also contributed to one of the major causes like high tides, cuurents, severe winds and heavy streams, reduction in visibility due to fog/ snow, and sea storms are some major hindrances in marine transportation (Celik & Cebi, 2009).
3. Technical failures and malfunctions in machinery, ship design, electrical connections, and construction flaws also result in severe marine accidents. The external environment issues also affected on the operations of ship machinery and operations and can create undesirable malfunctions. The ship design and construction weaknesses have long term impacts on the transport safety and assurance of safe transportation.
4. Cargo induced factors are also important cause of marine accidents due to the hazardous characteristics. The crude oil (petroleum and related products), nuclear material and toxic waste, and chemicals are main cause of destruction in case of collision. The placements and storage of hazardous material also constitute risks for transportation.

Moreover, Celik & Cebi, (2009) asserted that despite of the attempts and claims of safe marine cargo transportation, several reports on past incidents show serious challenges to the safe marine transport of hazardous cargo, which is the primary focus of this research

Impacts of marine accidents which are also associated with the transportation of hazardous materials can be presented in the following two major categories:

1. Immediate Impacts, and
2. The delayed impacts on the immediate environment.

Immediate impacts of such incidents can include various catastrophes including high death tolls, injuries to staff, property losses, and various other form of threats/risks to individuals. On the other hand, delayed impacts spread long term environment pollution as well as marine life, financial losses, and the increase in death toll (Merrick et al. 2000). The long term environment pollution under such cases are considered to highly catastrophic as it can lead to an imbalance of natural life of underwater species for years to come. This has been observed in various accidents where the oil tankers and deep-water oil extraction processes mal-functioned and caused major incidents (UNEP 2007).

On account of oil tankers, the final after effect of the natural harm because of the oil spill is the primary concern (Soares and Teixeira 2001), which might happen on the port during loading or offloading on the container terminals. In some previous studies, it is noticed that influencing environment by few elements has made a troublesome occupation to evaluate the outcomes of marine transport. Ellis and AB (2002) asserted that these components can be shoreline, residue, and affectability of the marine biotic group, climate, seasonal changes, and so forth.

Analyses of Marine Related Accidents

As discussed previously, accidents related to cargos containing hazardous materials is a major concern in marine engineering for both the immediate and delayed impacts. For this reason, there are various codes of practices as well as regulations applied all over the globe, such as the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) codes, Dangerous Goods and Marine Pollutant Regulations-1997, the Dangerous Substances in Harbour Areas Regulations-1987, Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) (UK’s department of transport, 2012). The codes, legislations and practices requires the shipping organizations to follow and meet a certain set of requirements under each material categorized as hazardous.  This primarily includes:

• Classification which is defined such as explosives, gases, flammable liquids etc., shipper's certifications, training, compatibility.
• Packaging, loading unloading methods inspections
• Hazard communications systems and incident reporting systems inspections
• Any other special requirements for Handling and transportation of hazardous materials

However, accidents still incur even if the procedural steps are completed for any cargo. Various studies such as EMSA 2007, Mamaca et al., 2009 and HASREP 2005 have assessed the accidents related to hazardous materials, which provides detailed impact assessments of some of most influential accidents across the globe.  The scientific analyses of most of these accidents shows the marine carrying flammable oils and gases are subjected to higher risks; as indicated by the research findings of Romer et al. 1995, which showed that accidents involving oil  were twice more frequent as compared to other chemicals.

The research completed by Marchand in the year 2002 also investigated various such accidents across European Union waters , and reported that at least 23 accidents with meaningful information related to causes, places, product/chemicals involved, mitigation measures as well as impacts on environment have been documented. According to this study, the majority of the accidents incurred with bulk carriers at the time the vessel was moving during the transit-phase at EU sea, and were primarily caused by bad weather conditions, structural damage and human health issues due to the results of reactive substances.

Similarly, The Helsinki Commission, also known as HELCOM, presented statical analyses report (2012) of at least 210 numbers crude oil-tankers, chemical/product tankers, liquid-bulk tankers which were involved in accidents from the period of 1989 till 2012 in Baltic Sea. However, during the last few decades it is observed that the large number of oil and chemical spills have reduced after the introduction of single hull tankers, improvised technical equipment and strict legislations. As per Rytkonen and Hänninen (2006:4) around 80% of most of the accidents and incidents are caused due to human error. For instance, machine and human interference combined with cultural performance are the main reason of the problems. The human factor can be categorized into two areas where one is the true human error which arises due to falling asleep, being careless or taking poor judgments. While on the other hand there are some organizational errors which include contradictory instructions, poor communication and pressurized conditions (Rytkonen and Hänninen, 2006).

According to the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) it is found that out of the total 75 ships which are navigating in the Baltic Sea were involved in calamities during year 2009. This includes;

• Sinking - 3 accidents
• Fires and explosions - 10 accidents
• Groundings – 33 accidents
• Collisions – 24 accidents and other types of accidents were recorded as 5 (EMSA 2010a: 34).

As per HELCOM (s.a.) statistics there are 105 accidents recorded from which ten accidents have resulted in pollution. Moreover, during the last few years there are 628 accidents which have occurred and 41 of these have resulted in pollution. Moreover, in 2007 it is found that the polluting substance was the chemical named potassium chloride. However, in the remaining cases the polluting substance was categorized as oil or in some cases it remained unidentified.

Recently, there have been only a few incidents in the region while the other examples are over thirty years old. The accidents can be categorized into two sets in which most important is the human error, technical problem or mechanical wear and tear. Moreover, human error is further divided into two subtypes in which one in the improper handling of cargo while the second include the improper supervision and navigational errors such as loading and unloading of cargo.

As per the literature reviewed, the accidents are categorized into two major types: human error related issues and machine breakdowns / other technical problems. Human related errors can be further categorized into subtypes which includes improper handling/management of cargo and the navigational errors / insufficient supervision of processes such as loading and unloading of cargo.

1. Improper handling / management of cargo:

Human error is believed to be the reason behind most of the accidents that occur. For instance, use of improper equipment and incompatible equipment for a particular job result in accident and consequent loss. Every chemical has its distinct nature and require unique mode of handling pertinent to its natural properties. Apart from the mode and conditions, each hazardous material require exclusive equipment for its handling as per its chemical properties. for the purpose of this research, the following examples have been included to analyse the technical details of accidents occurring in this category

A Belgian tanker Rene 16 was unloading ammonia at the port of Landkrona in southern Sweden, in January 1976. A rubber hose was in use to pump out ammonia from the tanker, which burst out suddenly causing death of two crew members and losing around 180 tons of ammonia into water. Ammonia is corrosive in nature and the rubber hose used for pumping was highly incompatible for it. Rubber is used for handling propane and butane while ammonia damages the internal of rubber pipe in an instance resulting in havoc. Usage of improper and incompatible equipment was marked as a reason behind this fatal accident (HELCOM 2003: annex 3). Ammonia is a widely use chemical in industries and extensively transported globally. Material Safety Data Sheet -MSDS is developed for all chemicals in use that demonstrate its handling cautions and material compatibilities. It should be kept alongside while transportation as ammonia is highly toxic and dangerous to both the humans and environment. Ammonia spill increase COD of water creating issues for marine life as well.

A British container ship Annabella with a stack of seven containers was collapsed and damaged in February 2007. Bad weather conditions pushed the entire ship weight to a certain inclination. Out of seven containers, the upper three had butylene gas, which is considered as hazardous materials. These three hazardous containers were unloaded safely at Kotka and the ship was redirected. In Feb 2010, it was reported by “Cedre” again that four containers were collapsed in Finnish cargo ship Linda. Investigations show that the bottom most containers broke that caused top three containers fell into the sea. The crew noticed the incident twenty minutes after it happened. The ship had covered a significant distance in that time and exact location of lost containers couldn’t be traced, but it is believed that they lie around 70 to 80 meters deep beneath the sea due to their weight and saline sea nature. Due to extensive loading, exact nature of lost containers couldn’t be stated but according to investigations, one of them had 5 tons of flammable substance and rest of the two had marine pollutant weighing 15 tons.

Alert was sent to other ship on the same or nearby route to take extreme caution as the embedded containers could result in sort of explosion or damage. All investigations are led by Accident Investigation Board of Finland. Team declared the human error as potential cause of these accidents as the bottom container was damaged due to excessive weight of the top containers. Maximum allowable limit of weight was ignored while loading and stacking. Verdict was published that lack of effective communication between the shippers, crew, planners and loading terminal cause such accidents. Incomplete information and unawareness of the potential risks of chemicals plot such havoc and result in loss.

However, it is important to note at this point that human error is not the only reason for such incidents. When staff deals with machines, it has some inherent potential for break down and malfunctioning. Engine or related ship machinery can break or worn out while working or on the quays that can result in accidents too. People who are into chemical handling business should be aware of these factors too. In January 1973, A cistern was ruptured at Gothenburg port all at once while a German tanker Amalie Essberger was unloading molten phenol alongside. It was later known that rupture was due to over pressure. This incident resulted in leakage of around 400 tons of phenol into water which formed a gas cloud.

2. Inadequate supervision and navigational errors:

Handling toxic chemicals is a very sensitive area. Errors and mishandling here result in death toll. Navigational mistakes and inadequate supervision are not directly related to handling or unloading issues, but it serves as a major managerial issue in this respect. Chemical transportation in wide open seas and ocean with limited back up and firefighting facilities is a very tricky business. The level of risk involved in it calls for higher safety practices. Supervisory and navigational negligence can cost a lot. Navigational negligence result in disasters too in wide seas, as it causes ships to collapse after collision. In May 2003, Chinese bulk carrier Fu Shan Hai was sunk between Sweden and Denmark, north off the island Bornholm. It was majorly remembered for the resultant oil pollution but it was responsible for loss of 66,000 tons of potash too. Potash is one of the crude chemical that is used in fertilizers.

The sad incident of an Italian tanker, Crystal Bubino is an example of such ignorance. The physical labor is carried out by unprofessional staff which is made to work as per the directions only. It is the responsibility of the supervising manager to give clear instructions and make the activity safe for both of its employees and material. The tanker was loading nonyl-phenolethoxylate in the port of Hamina in July 2000. The loading was ongoing unsupervised and the maximum level was breached and two tons of chemical overflowed to sea, which starting to foam on the surface. As reported by AIBF 2000, the vivid cause of this negligence was unmonitored activity by untrained staff that could easily be avoided with effective directions of supervisor and proper compliance of safety checklist by the chief officer in charge.