Dan Warnick

Oil Tanker Runs Aground in Mauritius - Oil Spill

Recommended Posts

Nasty oil spill in Mauritius.  As if the cessation of tourism weren't enough, if they don't get this one cleaned up pretty quick, tourists may not come back for a very long time which will crush the local economy.  Throw in the fact that many islanders get their food from these same waters and it is truly a crisis.  The Japanese company is taking responsibility and making efforts to remove the ship and clean up the mess, and the French government are reacting as quickly as they can as well.  

What is the accident rate on tankers worldwide?  What is that rate as compared, say, aviation/aircraft crashes or automobile crashes?  I'm guessing it's pretty high statistically, but I could be wrong.  Call me naive, but I don't think there is ever a good excuse for even one of these to occur. DW

Residents and environmentalists alike wondered why authorities did not act more quickly after the ship, the MV Wakashio, struck the reef on the southeast coast of the Indian Ocean island on July 25.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, this happened on July 25th and the particulars in charge/responsible for it are just Now gettin busy with trying to extract the ship an 'prevent' further damage?!?!?!?

WTH!!  Heads at All levels need to roll!  No matter what side of the 'fence' you're on with respect too Oil. This is tragic!  It certainly gives the Left even More ammo in their 'argument' against the use of let alone the extraction/production of said commodity.  (ahem)

Someone needs a serious boot up their ass!

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Residents and environmentalists alike wondered why authorities did not act more quickly after the ship, the MV Wakashio, struck the reef on the southeast coast of the Indian Ocean island on July 25.

We are carrying oil in ships that could be wrecked by merely coral reef?? 😳

Edited by specinho
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inside Story!  Here is one of the comments from a Thai forum today:  

WARNING:  Not PC

I'm stuck I'm Mauritius, border is closed. The fault lies entirely with the corrupt, despicable government here. Indians. They're almost as vile as the Thai dictators. They had 24 hours to send a tug to divert the ship. Didn't, because no bribe in it the boat grounded, government did nothing. A south African offered to come and pump the oil for free, as long as he could keep the oil as per maritime law. The government said no as they realised it had a value of $16 million. They thought there was some cash in it for them. They sent two tugs to free the boat, and instead of pulling it away, pulled it further on to the reef, tearing the hull. And now, here we are. Tourism is already screwed, Mauritius may well lose its special banking status because of corruption, and so that will be the economy finished. The people pay while the politicians line their pockets. Sound familiar?

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important that the responsible party is held accountable also for the long term environmental damage. For example, the Deepwater Horizon incident contributed to massive rise in contaminants in local fish (mercury, heavy metals) - whereas a mackerel caught in the Gulf of Mexico can have ten times larger HG contamination that a similar fish caught in NE Atlantic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Inside Story!  Here is one of the comments from a Thai forum today:  

WARNING:  Not PC

I'm stuck I'm Mauritius, border is closed. The fault lies entirely with the corrupt, despicable government here. Indians. They're almost as vile as the Thai dictators. They had 24 hours to send a tug to divert the ship. Didn't, because no bribe in it the boat grounded, government did nothing. A south African offered to come and pump the oil for free, as long as he could keep the oil as per maritime law. The government said no as they realised it had a value of $16 million. They thought there was some cash in it for them. They sent two tugs to free the boat, and instead of pulling it away, pulled it further on to the reef, tearing the hull. And now, here we are. Tourism is already screwed, Mauritius may well lose its special banking status because of corruption, and so that will be the economy finished. The people pay while the politicians line their pockets. Sound familiar?

I think you need to do some fact checking on your sources. It is a bulker; not a tanker. https://splash247.com/stricken-bulk-carrier-off-mauritius-tipped-to-break-up-in-the-coming-hours/

Not defending the Mauritius government, but whoever wrote above have ZERO clue about maritime law, salvage operations, salvage practices etc and really should be called out on it. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While some oil did manage to escape, almost all got pumped.

"Oil barriers were in place and a skimmer ship was nearby by the time the vessel broke apart."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

While some oil did manage to escape, almost all got pumped.

"Oil barriers were in place and a skimmer ship was nearby by the time the vessel broke apart."

Why did this happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rasmus;

"I think you need to do some fact checking on your sources. It is a bulker; not a tanker"

That is true.  It has 'tanks' carrying liquids, thus it is a tanker in the most basic of terms.  I get your point, just my three cents...

I stand by my earlier point, this is Unacceptable the way this has been 'handled' thus far!!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2020 at 1:25 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I think you need to do some fact checking on your sources. It is a bulker; not a tanker. https://splash247.com/stricken-bulk-carrier-off-mauritius-tipped-to-break-up-in-the-coming-hours/

Not defending the Mauritius government, but whoever wrote above have ZERO clue about maritime law, salvage operations, salvage practices etc and really should be called out on it. 

I believe you're mistaken about maritime law and salvage. I've done work with a company that does exactly this, pumps oil from derelict and sunken vessels. They get to keep every drop, plus generally get paid by someone (insurance, governments) for their work. I'm calling you out, unless you can document what you're saying. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

I believe you're mistaken about maritime law and salvage. I've done work with a company that does exactly this, pumps oil from derelict and sunken vessels. They get to keep every drop, plus generally get paid by someone (insurance, governments) for their work. I'm calling you out, unless you can document what you're saying. 

I'm pretty sure you're correct, used to be the spoils go to the salvage and insurance pd to clean up also.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I believe you're mistaken about maritime law and salvage.

I am not. 

12 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I've done work with a company that does exactly this, pumps oil from derelict and sunken vessels. They get to keep every drop, plus generally get paid by someone (insurance, governments) for their work.

This is true, but this is not the point. 

This was a bulker, so the oil in tanks would max have had a value of USD 500k; Not USD 16 mio as @Dan Warnicks source claimed. Also, the tab for the clean up and wreck removal will always be picked up by the insurance company unless it was a ship sailing illegally without insurance. 

The only role the Mauritius government will have in this is approving the salvage plan. The Salvor will be selected and contracted by the insurance. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am not. 

This is true, but this is not the point. 

This was a bulker, so the oil in tanks would max have had a value of USD 500k; Not USD 16 mio as @Dan Warnicks source claimed. Also, the tab for the clean up and wreck removal will always be picked up by the insurance company unless it was a ship sailing illegally without insurance. 

The only role the Mauritius government will have in this is approving the salvage plan. The Salvor will be selected and contracted by the insurance. 

It wasn't a "source".  It was a screen clip of a comment from another public forum.

I offered the clip as a "man on the scene" take on what was happening locally. 

I don't care if he got the right nomenclature for the type of ship; we know what ship he was talking about.

I don't care about his knowledge of maritime law; what I took from it was that the authorities (local, shipping company, insurance company, etc.) had received a public offer of salvage, which they apparently did not accept or were delaying action on due to what he perceived as local government (read, local people in power) greed and corruption.

If you are arguing simply to show that you have a better knowledge of maritime law, just say so and outline what could realistically be expected.  No need to attack anyone here about what that man said in a forum comment on another site.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

If you are arguing simply to show that you have a better knowledge of maritime law, just say so and outline what could realistically be expected.  No need to attack anyone here about what that man said in a forum comment on another site.

Noted.

4 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

It wasn't a "source".  It was a screen clip of a comment from another public forum.

I offered the clip as a "man on the scene" take on what was happening locally. 

I don't care if he got the right nomenclature for the type of ship; we know what ship he was talking about.

 

noted. 

4 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

I don't care about his knowledge of maritime law; what I took from it was that the authorities (local, shipping company, insurance company, etc.) had received a public offer of salvage, which they apparently did not accept or were delaying action on due to what he perceived as local government (read, local people in power) greed and corruption.

OK. In this case I think his perception was wrong. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am not. 

This is true, but this is not the point. 

This was a bulker, so the oil in tanks would max have had a value of USD 500k; Not USD 16 mio as @Dan Warnicks source claimed. Also, the tab for the clean up and wreck removal will always be picked up by the insurance company unless it was a ship sailing illegally without insurance. 

The only role the Mauritius government will have in this is approving the salvage plan. The Salvor will be selected and contracted by the insurance. 

Is it possible the $16m was in Mauritius money, whatever that is? 

I could definitely see insurance company dragging its feet, stupid as that is in 2020 hindsight. They were probably looking for an out, and once they accept any responsibly they're obligated from then on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

They were probably looking for an out, and once they accept any responsibly they're obligated from then on.

As they should be. Strange no-one is writing about the ship gps logs. Why was it so far off course? Drunken sailors???

@Ward Smith XE Currency Converter: 1 MUR to USD = 0.0250217 US Dollars

https://www.x-rates.com/calculator/?from=MUR&to=USD&amount=1

Edited by Old-Ruffneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2020 at 12:17 AM, Prometheus1354 said:

Um, this happened on July 25th and the particulars in charge/responsible for it are just Now gettin busy with trying to extract the ship an 'prevent' further damage?!?!?!?

WTH!!  Heads at All levels need to roll!  No matter what side of the 'fence' you're on with respect too Oil. This is tragic!  It certainly gives the Left even More ammo in their 'argument' against the use of let alone the extraction/production of said commodity.  (ahem)

Someone needs a serious boot up their ass!

That is less than a month to assess the situation, come up with a viable plan and then get the people/equipment on location. The ship breaking up at this time likely complicated the issue.

Do you think that you could have done any better? Keep in mind that the legal paperwork/bureaucracy nonsense needed to be addressed as well.

I have always wondered why, once the vessel was deemed a loss, they don’t simply ignite the cargo and spilled oil? Wouldn’t this be the less evil of all options?

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Is it possible the $16m was in Mauritius money, whatever that is? 

The USD 16 mio was likely the salvage value of the ship (80% of insured value) if the insurance company / Owner had accept a LoF. 

14 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I could definitely see insurance company dragging its feet, stupid as that is in 2020 hindsight. They were probably looking for an out, and once they accept any responsibly they're obligated from then on. 

Sometimes waiting and planing is the best way forward. A grounded ship can sit for months if the oil has been pumped out.. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

That is less than a month to assess the situation, come up with a viable plan and then get the people/equipment on location. The ship breaking up at this time likely complicated the issue.

Do you think that you could have done any better? Keep in mind that the legal paperwork/bureaucracy nonsense needed to be addressed as well.

I have always wondered why, once the vessel was deemed a loss, they don’t simply ignite the cargo and spilled oil? Wouldn’t this be the less evil of all options?

My issue is the leaders Gov't/Co. took several weeks too even begin addressing it.  It was reported a salvage company offered to try an pull the ship off the reef within a cpl days of the accident once it was obvious the ship couldn't extract itself.  They were told no thanks.  It's also been reported that a few days ago while trying to pull the ship free they pulled it further onto the reef because they weren't paying attention to the direction they were pulling the ship thus causing enough damage effectively splitting the hull.

I sure as hell wouldn't have waited this long too Try an address the problem.  

Burning the oil would help reduce spread but it also induces pollution issues on top of those already in effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

40 minutes ago, Prometheus1354 said:

My issue is the leaders Gov't/Co. took several weeks too even begin addressing it.  It was reported a salvage company offered to try an pull the ship off the reef within a cpl days of the accident once it was obvious the ship couldn't extract itself.  They were told no thanks.  It's also been reported that a few days ago while trying to pull the ship free they pulled it further onto the reef because they weren't paying attention to the direction they were pulling the ship thus causing enough damage effectively splitting the hull.

I sure as hell wouldn't have waited this long too Try an address the problem.  

Burning the oil would help reduce spread but it also induces pollution issues on top of those already in effect.

It hasn’t even been 4 weeks since the vessel ran aground! By your original post, that was 25 July. How do you get the following?

40 minutes ago, Prometheus1354 said:
6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

My issue is the leaders Gov't/Co. took several weeks too even begin addressing it.  It

Burning the oil (bunker fuel) would quickly burn off the lighter fractions and would likely reduce the volume of the spill quickly and efficiently. Granted, there would be some air pollution, but this would be the lesser evil as opposed to letting the slick expand and be at the mercy of the currents, winds, waves and weather.

Perhaps the offer of the salvage tug was refused as the ship might have broken up as a result of the attempt, which is apparently what happened. Furthermore, by your comments, the operators of the salvage vessel appear to be inept...if the towed it further onto the reef!

I don’t think you realized the scope of work, difficulty and risks involved in gettind a ship off of a reef.

Edited by Douglas Buckland
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

the operators of the salvage vessel appear to be inept...if the towed it further onto the reef!

Don't think that was salvage operator, my understanding is the country sent out two tugboats. Not sure why they pulled it farther into the reef, miscommunication? Who knows how many languages were involved?  That was a big ship over 300 meters long. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

I think @Dan Warnick source maybe right 
Edit: I thought it was 1.6mil. 16mil is too much, typo?

 I don't know much the price but if it is 400usd per ton for that oil, the value would be 1.6 mil.

The MV Wakashio ran aground on a coral reef, Pointe d'Esny, on 25 July while carrying 4,000 tonnes of fuel oil, causing an ecological emergency.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53819112

It is likely they need WIFI for a birthday party to go near the shore.

Police said crew members questioned as part of their investigation informed them there had been a birthday party on the ship the day it ran aground.

Another theory being investigated is that the ship navigated close to the shore in order to pick up WiFi signal, the BBC's Yasine Mohabuth, in Port Louis, reports.

Edited by SUZNV
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 8/17/2020 at 4:45 PM, Old-Ruffneck said:

As they should be. Strange no-one is writing about the ship gps logs. Why was it so far off course? Drunken sailors???

@Ward Smith XE Currency Converter: 1 MUR to USD = 0.0250217 US Dollars

https://www.x-rates.com/calculator/?from=MUR&to=USD&amount=1

Back of the envelope says that's $400k for the fuel (16m times .025) or about what @Rasmus Jorgensenguessed. 

Edited by Ward Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2020 at 7:45 AM, Old-Ruffneck said:

As they should be. Strange no-one is writing about the ship gps logs. Why was it so far off course? Drunken sailors???

@Ward Smith XE Currency Converter: 1 MUR to USD = 0.0250217 US Dollars

https://www.x-rates.com/calculator/?from=MUR&to=USD&amount=1

Remember the days when sailors could actually sail and determine their position without GPS?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.