Unscrupulous shippers’ ‘toxic cargoes’ pose a danger to crew and vessels
“ANY valuable info about the two missing boys,” was the poignant tweet from a gent in the Philippines, “[will be] deeply appreciated. John Rey Begaso is my nephew. Kindly help us find them… and keep me posted. Thank you so much.”
He was referring to the serious fire in the huge container ship Maersk Honam in the Arabian Sea, forcing the crew to abandon ship as toxic smoke enveloped the vessel and created a massive column that was visible for kilometres. The tweet from John Begaso’s uncle stems from the tragic fact that three crew members are dead, while two men – including a South African – are missing.
En route from Asia to Europe via the Suez Canal, the vessel is one of the new generation of ultra-large container ships with her accommodation far forward, the main cargo deck between the accommodation and the machinery space which is about three-quarters of the way towards the stern.
With two tugs in attendance, the fire, that reportedly started in the hold, was extinguished, but most containers that had been stowed on deck forward of the accommodation were reduced to rubble by the intensity of the fire. It also appears that the superstructure has suffered serious damage.
She will probably be towed to a port to discharge the undamaged containers, and to assess the extent of the damage. A fire of that ferocity is also likely to have caused major structural damage to side and deck plating, tank-tops, ribs, steel cell guides, and hatch-covers that will require extensive repairs and renewal of steel, putting the ship out of service for many months. Of particular concern for cargo salvors will be the removal of the remains of toxic cargoes.
In such circumstances, identification labels on drums are often burnt off or are illegible.
While the stowage plan will be of help, those working amid the debris will have a difficult and dangerous task, especially if unscrupulous shippers have declared dangerous contents of containers as benign, usually to escape higher insurance or freight rates on hazardous materials.
Although the cause of the fire in Maersk Honam still has to be established, investigators will look very closely at the container manifests, and, where possible, compare them with what salvors find aboard. In several other events of this kind, cargoes of fireworks, for example, have been declared as “toys”, or temperature-sensitive chemicals are passed off as benign cargoes and therefore are not stowed in insulated or refrigerated containers on deck. Based on the declared contents, the computerised stowage programme allocates particular slots to such containers, understandably ignorant of their dangerous contents that could ignite in the tropical heat or if stowed below deck, a practice forbidden by international regulations.
Similar fires have occurred recently, including a serious cargo fire off Durban a few years ago, a ro-ro vessel went ashore north of Richards Bay after a crippling fire among her deck cargo of containers, while another container ship caught fire off Port Elizabeth last year. Photographs taken in her hold after the fire had been extinguished showed damage of an apocalyptical nature.
In the current tragedy, innocent seafarers – like young John Begaso and his four shipmates who had promising careers ahead – have perished in a cargo fire aboard a well-maintained ship operated by a highly respected global company, pointing most likely to a cargo problem.
This vessel is more than 350 metres in length, while others on the same trade are even longer with greater container capacity. Passenger ships carrying over 6 000 people are entering service, while 380metre Vale-class ore carriers pass our coastline almost daily.
Is the industry overextending itself in building such large carriers and exposing itself to enormous losses should something go wrong?