Navy tug on way to seek El Faro wreckage and VDR

The tug is deploying to a search area northeast of Crooked Island in the Bahamas island chain, which is the last known location of the vessel.

The initial search area is 100 square miles, and water depth is estimated to be 15,000 feet across the expected search area. Transit to this search area is expected to take four-to-five days due to weather.

Apache is equipped with several pieces of underwater search equipment, including a voyage data recorder locator, side-scan sonar and an underwater remote operated vehicle.

The Navy’s mission will be to first locate the ship and then, if possible, to retrieve the voyage data recorder (VDR) – commonly known as a black box.

The U.S. Navy operates some of the world’s most advanced underwater search and salvage systems. Though this equipment is typically used to search for and recover downed military ships and aircraft, the Navy has a long history in assisting other federal agencies in underwater search and salvage operations, including the search and recovery of TWA 800 and the space shuttle Challenger. In 2013, the Navy assisted the government of Australia in its search for missing Malaysian Airliner MH 370.

USN Apache is a fleet ocean tug operated by the Military Sealift Command. The ship provides towing, diving and standby submarine rescue services for the Navy.

The ship is 226 feet long and has a crew of approximately 22 civilian mariners and uniformed Navy personnel.
The crew will be joined by a team from the Navy’s Supervisor of Diving and Salvage.

Also on board is the NTSB Investigator-in-Charge, Tom Roth-Roffy, and representatives from the USCG, TOTE and ABS, all parties to the NTSB investigation (see new story).

Euro MPs want to fast track setting of shipping GHG target

 

Specifically, the resolution “calls for all the Parties to work through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to develop a global policy framework to enable an effective response, and to take measures to set adequate targets before the end of 2016 for achieving the necessary reductions in the light of the 2 °C target [for a limit on global warming].”

The resolution has drawn a very guarded response from European shipowners.

“We are happy to see that the European Parliament recognizes the importance of a global solution for international shipping and gives a vote of confidence to the IMO, which should be allowed to pursue its efforts,” said Patrick Verhoeven, Secretary General of ECSA, the European Community Shipowners Association. “We are however also concerned by the deadline adopted by MEPs on Wednesday. 2016 is right around the corner and as such it is rather unrealistic to expect the IMO to come up with a solution in a matter of months. A unilateral European push for a hard deadline may be counterproductive.”

ECSA calls IMO’s track record in developing technical CO2 energy efficiency measures for the maritime sector “impressive.”

Following the adoption of the amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, which came into force worldwide in 2011 and which now apply to about 95% of the global merchant fleet, international shipping is the only industrial sector already covered by mandatory and binding global measures, notes ECSA. IMO also recently adopted the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), which requires all ships constructed after 2025 to be 30% more efficient that those built in the 2000s, with further efficiency improvements going forward. Finally, the shipping industry itself, prompted by an increase in bunker prices, has made strides in increasing its energy efficiency and curbing its CO2 emissions.

As a result of recent efforts, the contribution of shipping to global CO2 emissions has in fact dropped, says ECSA.

According to the latest IMO Green House Gas study, published in 2014, international shipping (while transporting about 90% of world trade) produces about 2.2% of the world’s total CO2 emissions. This figure was 2.8% in 2007, and the total CO2 emissions from shipping went down by over 10% between 2007 and 2012. This was despite continuing growth in maritime trade which means that shipping is already delivering carbon neutral growth.

“The 2016 deadline is not consistent with the steps already taken at EU level” commented Benoit Loicq, ECSA Safety and Environment Director. “By pushing for an extremely tight deadline, the EU would essentially undermine the IMO procedure. If the EU would then focus on regional measures, it would be backtracking on its own policy.”

ECSA says the EU Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) Regulation is intended to be the first phase of a stepwise approach geared towards a global (read IMO) solution by allowing to determine the real contribution of shipping to global CO2 emissions.

“The course of action that has been agreed is to start with an accurate picture of the shipping industry’s CO2 emissions in 2018 (i.e. two years after the MEP-backed deadline),” says Mr. Loicq. “If we now backtrack and skip the data collection phase altogether, how would it be possible to set realistic and fair targets?”

Crowley in strategic partnership for BWTS retrofits

The agreement includes technical services, engineering, integration, commissioning, training, scheduled delivery and spare parts.

The GloEn-Patrol treatment system utilizes a filter to remove 50 micron or larger size organisms and medium-pressure UV lamps to disinfect smaller organisms.

GloEn-Patrol models treat from 50 to 6,000 cubic meters of ballast water per hour. They have IMO-type approval and certification from many classification societies including American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) and DNV GL, and U.S. Coast Guard Alternate Management Systems (USCG AMS) for non-hazardous areas such as engine rooms, and explosion proof models for installation in areas such as the main decks of articulated tug barges (ATBs) and tankers.  

“We found Panasia ballast water treatment systems to be a good operational and functional fit for our vessels, backed with a level of commitment and service we require,” said Bill Metcalf, Crowley vice president of strategic engineering. “Panasia and its management team is fully committed to our vessels’ safety and the environmental performance of our ballast water systems, and we are pleased to have them as our partner.”

Crowley says that DNV GL is completing the required tasks for the Panasia system to secure USCG type approval will provide its report by October, 2016.

DHI Group has been chosen for shipboard tests and Golden Bear Facilities has begun the work on the land-based tests, all under DNV GL’s guidance, and supervision to comply with the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program.

New security door aimed at protecting ship from pirates

 

Whereas the Citadel Access Protection (CAP) SPS panels, which make up a door, are clamped in place from the inside to form a safe haven for the crew, these lockable doors are secured from the outside to protect sensitive areas of a vessel, in the event of hostile intruders.  With no visible lock, the SPS security doors have a detail free, clean flat surface.  SPS doors and panels provide six times the protection from impact loads, explosions and projectiles than equivalent steel and 75% more ballistics protection.

Ian Nash, Business Manager, SPS Marine and Offshore, says, “This innovation was in response to a client’s request to protect vulnerable areas.  The permanently fitted security doors take seconds to secure from the outside.  This allows the crew members to shut down areas of the vessel before taking refuge.  Eighty vessels have been fitted with SPS CAP security panels and doors to date.”

A recent order from Fleet Management Europe Ltd brings their total to five vessels under their management, which have been supplied with SPS CAP door panels.  More orders are expected to follow, says IE.

SPS CAP security doors and panels can be made to suit individual requirements—size, weight and door thickness can all be tailored.  By altering the thickness of the SPS panels (steel and polyurethane) their performance can be altered to meet specific safety criteria.

Silver Ships delivers multi-mission boat

OCTOBER 14, 2015— Silver Ships, Inc., Theodore, AL, recently delivered a Freedom 21 all-aluminum patrol/rescue boat to the Southampton, NY, Bay Constables.  The 21-foot center console boat was designed and engineered for

Safety: The Unseen Killer

 

A shift in the approach to safety management of enclosed spaces on board ships is needed. Fifteen years ago, while working as an independent surveyor, I was carrying out a condition survey on board a bulk carrier. The scope of the survey included testing the emergency generator, located in the steering flat and accessed by an inclined ladder.

Accompanied by the superintendent and the chief engineer, we had no sooner reached the bottom of the space when the chief engineer urgently ordered us all out. By the time we had exited the space, within seconds, we were all in a state of dizziness and confusion, compounded by our inability to comprehend what had just occurred. Further investigation revealed that Freon gas had leaked from refrigeration machinery located in the steering flat and being heavier than air, had migrated into the emergency generator space, displacing breathable air. It was a lucky escape. Victims of asphyxiation in enclosed spaces deficient in oxygen will normally receive no such warning that anything is wrong or have the ability to quickly escape.

Should we have been aware that this emergency generator space, not being enclosed in the usually perceived sense of the word, was potentially dangerous for entry? Absolutely.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) currently defines an enclosed space as having any of the following characteristics:

  1. Limited openings for entry and exit;
  2. Inadequate ventilation; and
  3. Is not designed for continuous worker occupancy, and includes, but is not limited to, cargo spaces, double bottoms, fuel tanks, ballast tanks, cargo pump-rooms, cargo compressor rooms, cofferdams, chain lockers, void spaces, duct keels, inter-barrier spaces, boilers, engine crankcases, engine scavenge air receivers, sewage tanks, and adjacent connected spaces. This list is not exhaustive and a list should be produced on a ship-by-ship basis to identify enclosed spaces.”

Most could be forgiven for not considering our generator space to fall within this definition, although it was clearly proven to present a danger in a particular circumstance.

Another very common example of confusion over what actually constitutes an “enclosed space” is the inconsistent perception of the dangers presented by CO2 fixed fire extinguishing system cylinder storage rooms. A leak in the system may accumulate in the space and displace breathable air if not thoroughly ventilated.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) rooms are frequently not identified as enclosed spaces on board and not provided with appropriate warning signs at the space access. Crew members may easily fail to appreciate that a CO2 room should properly be included within the aforementioned definition of an enclosed space.

No atmosphere hazard warning notice
The IMO list of enclosed spaces is not exhaustive, it is therefore important that ship managers and crew apply a wide interpretation as to what spaces on board each vessel could potentially be deficient in oxygen, and/or contain flammable and/or toxic gases or vapours, therefore requiring safety precautions to be observed prior to entry.

The dangers associated with enclosed spaces are well known yet deaths continue to occur.

Part of the issue may be misconceptions as to what spaces are or may become dangerous, and how they are identified. At present, there is no industry standard for the design and siting of warning notices and symbols that may be universally understood by ship and shore personnel. Indeed, on many ships, no attempt is made to provide any such labelling at points of access.

Cargo hold access – No warning notices
Warning notices alone will not overcome the problem as otherwise professional and well trained seafarers continue to enter enclosed spaces. In May last year, three crew members on board a cargo ship lost their lives after entering a cargo hold loaded with sawn timber, a cargo known to cause oxygen depletion.

Another part of the solution must also lie in improved levels of education and training of both ship and shore personnel. Reference is made to IMO Resolution A.1050(27) “Revised Recommendations For Entering Enclosed Spaces Aboard Ships” adopted in 2011. These recommendations provide, inter alia, that shipowners must adopt a comprehensive safety strategy to prevent accidents on entry to enclosed spaces, and that procedures for enclosed space entry are included among the key shipboard operations concerning safety of personnel and the ship. The recommendations also provide that no person should open or enter an enclosed space unless authorized by the master or the nominated responsible person, and unless the appropriate safety precautions laid down for the particular ship have been followed.

Despite the training requirements included in the above revised recommendations, IMO has recognized that more needs to be done to respond to the continuing loss of life from personnel entering shipboard enclosed spaces. This has taken the form of amendments to SOLAS regulation III/19 “Emergency training and drills”, which entered into force on January 1, 2015, and requires that enclosed space entry and rescue drills are to be conducted at two month intervals. The amendments include the following:

“3.6 Enclosed space entry and rescue drills

3.6.1 Enclosed space entry and rescue drills should be planned and conducted in a safe manner, taking into account, as appropriate, the guidance provided in the recommendations developed by the Organization [i.e. Resolution A.1050(27)] .

3.6.2 Each enclosed space entry and rescue drill shall include:

.1 checking and use of personal protective equipment required for entry;

.2 checking and use of communication equipment and procedures;

.3 checking and use of instruments for measuring the atmosphere in enclosed spaces;

.4 checking and use of rescue equipment and procedures; and

.5 instructions in first aid and resuscitation techniques.

4.2 Every crew member shall be given instructions which shall include but not necessarily be limited to:

.5 risks associated with enclosed spaces and on board procedures for safe entry into such spaces which should take into account, as appropriate, the guidance provided in recommendations developed by the Organization.

In addition to these welcome changes, the IMO has recently seen fit to rectify the anomaly that until now, no industry wide requirements have been in place, requiring all vessels to carry atmosphere testing instruments.

For all of this to be effective, it is necessary that ship staff, with the support of shore management, perform mandatory drills, training and actual entry procedures with a dedication and seriousness that reflects the dangers that attend enclosed space entry. A Permit to Work must be fully completed and signed off at the site of the task so that it is contemporary and reflects the actual hazard and safety needs of the operation. All too often, On every occasion before carrying out a job, pre-work meetings or “tool box talks” need to be arranged to identify who does what, the tools needed to identify the risks involved and what to do if something goes wrong.

Drills and training should be properly planned and be used as an opportunity to assess the challenges of rescue from the variously identified enclosed spaces on board. Training should also emphasize to crew the importance of raising the alarm when persons are found to be in difficulty within an enclosed space, and that any rescue is properly coordinated in accordance with practiced procedures.

Comprehensive record keeping and interactive post drill de-briefs will assist in identifying any weaknesses in procedures and promote crew ownership of the training program.

Last but not least, a zero tolerance culture to unplanned and unprepared entry into any enclosed space requires to be rigorously enforced and ingrained into all personnel, on board and ashore.

—By David Nichol, Risk Assessor, UK P&I Club

Shipping fights proposed $26 billion a year CO2 tax

 

The aim of COP 21 is to achieve a new international agreement on the climate, applicable to all countries, with the aim of keeping global warming below 2°C. This will mean a big reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. International shipping is a major generator of GHG and IMO, the UN agency that covers shipping, has been working steadily on measures to reduce them.

At COP 21, however, shipping will be in the cross-hairs of any number of interests that want to see it cut GHG even further and that will be pushing for various tough measures to see that this happens.

Even before COP 21 gets underway, an OECD think tank called the International Transport Forum has produced a policy brief calling for shipping to pay a carbon tax of around $25 per ton of CO2 generated. The policy brief doesn’t get into how the CO2 emissions would be measured or the tax collected, but it does suggest that the considerable revenues generated (around $26 billion a year) could go to the Green Climate Fund, which has been set up to finance climate mitigation projects in developing countries.

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), argues that the $25 a ton suggested by the International Transport Forum would be almost three times higher than the carbon price paid by shore based industries in developed nations. About 70% of the world merchant fleet is registered in UNFCCC “non-Annex I” developing countries, and maritime trade is of vital benefit to rich and emerging economies alike.

ICS emphasizes that shipping is committed to reducing CO2 and has a responsibility to contribute to the achievement of the United Nations 2°C climate change goal. But the UNFCCC recognizes that developed and developing nations should accept differing commitments, and shipping is no different, especially in view of its vital role in the movement of about 90% of global trade.

While China and India, for example, have already made positive CO2 reduction commitments to COP 21, says ICS, these will not deliver absolute CO2 reductions for several years. Some richer nations, however, consistent with the UNFCCC CBDR principle, have made more ambitious commitments. Shipping meanwhile has already reduced its total CO2 emissions by more than 10% (2007- 2012) and CO2 per tonne-mile by around 20% (2005 – 2015). It is therefore on course for carbon neutral growth.

“While shipping may currently have CO2 emissions comparable to a major OECD economy, it is inappropriate for the ITF to propose that the industry should be treated like an OECD economy,” said ICS Secretary General, Peter Hinchliffe.

The position of ICS remains that if IMO Member States should decide to adopt a shipping MBM (Market Based Measure) , the industry’s clear preference is for a fuel levy, rather than an emissions trading scheme or other complex alternatives that would distort global shipping markets. However, if a levy was developed by IMO, ICS believes that any money collected should be proportionate to international shipping’s share of the world’s total CO2 emissions (2.2% in 2012 compared to 2.8% in 2007), not the $26 billion dollars a year that a $25 per ton CO2 tax would raise.

Read the ITF Policy Brief HERE

Read the full ICS response HEREMBM

ABS offers guide for “SOx Scrubber Ready” ships

 

Instead, when ordering a newbuilding they may prefer to order a ship that is “SOx scrubber ready.”

Classification society ABS says that, Iin order to facilitate future modifications, ship buyers and shipbuilders must make a significant effort to figure out what features should be incorporated on a vessel and incorporate these in the shipbuilding contract.

To support shipowners taking this path, ABS has published the ABS Guide for SOx Scrubber Ready Vessels to support members and clients in preparing newbuilds for future outfitting with a SOx exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS).

The guide supports the ABS classification notation for SOx Scrubber Ready Vessels by formalizing the process for clients who wish to plan for retrofit of a SOx scrubber at a future date by providing a detailed review and approval and an associated notation.

The SOx Scrubber Ready notation is in addition to ABS EGCS notations that may be assigned for vessels fitted with an exhaust emission abatement system, including SOx scrubbers, selective catalytic reduction systems and exhaust gas recirculation arrangements for NOx emission control, in accordance with the ABS Guide for Exhaust Emission Abatement.

More HERE and HERE

 

MarAd project to convert towboat engine to burn LNG

OCTOBER 8, 2015—The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) has announced that it will provide over $1 million to support the development of two new emission-reducing maritime solutions.  The first is

Updates to DNVGL’s ECO Insight driven by user feedback

OCTOBER 8, 2015—Classification society DNV GL has recently released an update to its fleet performance solution ECO Insight. DNVGL says that the new features in the updated version draw on the feedback

LOAD MORE