Oil threat to Great Barrier Reef after ship runs aground

[TacticalPeek]

Source: Times Online

A Chinese coal ship aground on Australia's Great Barrier Reef is leaking oil and in danger of breaking apart, raising fears of serious environmental damage to the world's largest coral reef.

The Chen Neng 1, carrying 65,000 tons of coal to China from the Australian port of Gladstone, ran aground 43 miles (70km) off the east coast of Great Keppel Island tourist resort in northeast Australia late on Saturday. Early today it was found that the hull had been breached, increasing concerns of a major oil spill.

Aircraft that flew over the ship early this morning reported that patches of oil were visible up to two and a half miles (four km) from the stricken ship early this morning.

Maritime Safety Queensland said there had been no major loss from the ship's 950 ton store of oil, but said a fuel tank with 150 tonnes of heavy oil had been breached and the oil spill was being treated as a "serious problem."

Read more: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7087194.ece

[sakabatou]

1. Great, just what we need...

[Mithreal]

2. Don't worry. It's clean coal.

[TacticalPeek]

3. Heh.

:hippie:

[DeSwiss]

4. K&R

[Earth_First]

5. Oh, well if it's being treated as a "serious problem..."

My mind is at ease... :eyes:

[CLANG]

6. Just f-ing great.

[Bette Noir]

7. Dandy.

[feslen]

8. whoopee!

wonderful. Another Exxon Valdez spill...which they have yet to really clean up thank you very much. Another reason why we should go to natural, cleaner fuel sources!

[Quantess]

10. Agreed!

[Merchant Marine]

11. This is nowhere near the Valdez

This ship is a bulk carrier, and the only oil onboard is 950 tons of bunker fuel, which is about 10,000 bbl.

The Valdez, on the other hand, was a small VLCC displacing 210,000 tons. She spilled an estimated 253,000 bbl, give or take a few thousand.

I'm not trying to defend this spill, I just want to point out that in the scale of maritime casualties this is small potatoes.

[wickerwoman]

14. Unless the ship breaks up and dumps its coal cargo...

The situation is still developing. I think it's too early to evaluate all the casualties yet. :hi:

[Merchant Marine]

16. Coal at least has the benefit of sinking...

[AlbertCat]

9. More off shore drilling! More clean coal! What could possibly go wrong?

[Stumbler]

12. Exactly. I thought technology was so advanced that nothing could go wrong.

And while we're at it: More nuclear reactors!

[Merchant Marine]

13. "Chinese Flag" says it all.

Their reputation is not the best in the shipping industry.

[One_Life_To_Give]

18. 9 nm reminds me of an old grounding off New England

Don't remember the Ship. IIRC the Main Navigation System had developed an error. And there were ATON's logged that shouldn't have been visible had the ship been where the Nav system said it was. But nobody bothered to actually do the chartwork to determine that something was amiss.

[Merchant Marine]

28. Under-crewing and fatigue are major issues in the industry...

[One_Life_To_Give]

30. Plot Thickens

Implication in the Brisbane Times that a "Short-Cut" was being used thru restricted waters.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/outrageous-for-coal-carrier-to-be-so-far-off-course-rudd-20100406-rng5.html

[wickerwoman]

15. They weren't drilling off-shore.

$50 says it was a Chinese freighter importing coal (dug up on land in Northern China) into Australia.

Whether or not Australia should be importing coal instead of finding cleaner energy sources is another question. But off-shore oil drilling is irrelevant to this story.

[Merchant Marine]

17. Actually exporting coal from AU to China.

[fasttense]

27. Why couldn't they avoid it????

Everyone knows (or should if you are navigating these waters) where the Great Barrier Reef is located. Did it move??? How could they have hit it at full speed? They didn't even slow down or take action to avoid the giant coral reef. Did they not have equipment and eyes to see they were in shallow water (30 to 60 feet is the range of depth for the growth of coral). I guess it was all one big accident.

The ship was carrying 950 tonnes of oil and 65,000 tonnes of coal. Even ships that aren't oil tankers are a hazard to the environment when handled by fools.

Can't wait until we still drilling off the east coast. We'll be having these accidents too.

[ShockediSay]

19. Chinese ship runs aground on Great Barrier Reef

Source: Guardian

A transport ship has run aground leaking oil on the Great Barrier Reef and is in danger of breaking apart, officials said.

The Chinese coal carrier Shen Neng 1 ran aground late yesterday on Douglas Shoals, a pristine area east of the Great Keppel Island tourist resort, off the coast of Queensland, Australia. It is in a protected part of the reef where shipping is restricted.

The vessel hit the reef at full speed, nine miles outside the designated shipping lane, said Queensland's premier, Anna Bligh. A police boat was standing by to remove the 23 crew if the ship broke apart and an evacuation was necessary, she said.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/04/great-barrier-reef-ship-aground

---

Give them each 20 years then do a prisoner swap

[David__77]

20. "Give them each 20 years then do a prisoner swap" (???)

Give who "20 years?" "Them?" If you have a case of criminal negligence, I doubt it involves everyone aboard the ship. We need more details regarding what happened, and especially if there was any mechanical problem that was communicated to the relevant Australian authorities.

And, if there WAS criminal negligence, wouldn't it make sense to prosecute them normally rather than try to free Australian criminals who are imprisoned in China? (I assume that's what you meant...)

[Duer 157099]

21. Ouch. This hurts. I have to look away n/t

[Mithreal]

22. Oil threat to Great Barrier Reef after ship runs aground

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7087194.ece

Posted on DU previously but considering the potential damage, I'm not alerting. Link to earlier LBN discussion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4331795

[fasttense]

23. Why couldn't they avoid it????

Everyone knows (or should if you are navigating these waters) where the Great Barrier Reef is located. Did it move??? How could they have hit it at full speed? They didn't even slow down or take action to avoid the giant coral reef. Did they not have equipment and eyes to see they were in shallow water (30 to 60 feet is the range of depth for the growth of coral). I guess it was all one big accident.

The ship was carrying 950 tonnes of oil and 65,000 tonnes of coal. Even ships that aren't oil tankers are a hazard to the environment when handled by fools.

Can't wait until we still drilling off the east coast. We'll be having these accidents too.

[One_Life_To_Give]

24. 9 nm outside shipping lane??

This should be an interesting investigation as to how/why she was so far outside the lane.

Reminds me of a previous grounding off the US Northeast Coast. Which was caused by a reliance on the infallibility of the primary marine navigation system. Resulting in a disregard for bothering to manually chart and confirm visual and backup system observations to confirm position.

[sulphurdunn]

25. In the end,

human negligence always defeats human ingenuity.

[ShockediSay]

26. Chinese ship runs aground on Great Barrier Reef

This thread has been combined with another thread.

Click here to read this message in its new location.

[Haole Girl]

29. To quote Jacques Cousteau~

"Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans."

:-(