# Australian coast hit by oil spill (BBC News)



## SN NewsCaster (Mar 5, 2007)

An oil slick coats beaches and wildlife along Australia's east coast, after a cargo ships spills its load in stormy seas.

More from BBC News...


----------



## SN NewsCaster (Mar 5, 2007)

*Australia beaches 'disaster zone' (BBC News)*

Australia declares a 40-mile stretch of oil-blackened beach along its east coast a disaster zone, after a ship sheds its load.

More from BBC News...


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

Well a FLAG OF CONVIENENCE, has a lot of questions to anser ???


----------



## trotterdotpom (Apr 29, 2005)

Is Hong Kong a flag of convenience? Weren't Swires always HK registered?

Still a disaster of course, and it looks like there may have been a few fibs told about how much oil was lost.

John T.


----------



## McFlett (Mar 17, 2007)

This ship was heading north towards a well forecast severe tropical cyclone 'Hamish'. The people in control of the movements of this ship obviously underestimated what they were tackling. The resultant mess is also obviously the total responsibility of the people in control of the ship's movement's, the owners of the ship and her insurers. Therefore they should totally foot the bill for the cleanup and provide total compensation for their incompetency.

But I'd like to bet that us ratepayers who have had to put up with this ecological disaster on our doorstep, will be out of pocket.


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

I get so annoyed with such emotional rubbish writen by pollies, MUA union idiots, and newspaper landlubbers.
This ship is a large ocean going vessel, which could handle the conditions ahead of her.
She didn't confront a cyclone as stated, the storm was hundreds of miles north of her, and reducing in severity. The Captain had no choice but to continue as the labour ( stevadores ) whould have been ordered the moment she left New Castle which is only a days steaming from Brisbane.
The shipping company would have payed the QLD government an insurance policy for such an event, as well as having a P&I club cover.
The only difference between having a foreign crew on board, or an Australian crew would be how much paint was applied to the vessel. That is all.
The idea that foreign crews are inferior to Australian crews is a myth.
I know, I work with these foreign masters, and they are excellent.
This disaster would not have been avoided whatever nationality of the crew.
Ship happens!


----------



## trotterdotpom (Apr 29, 2005)

I saw that MUA delegate on TV and tend to agree with your comments RNW. However, the initial declaration of a loss of 20 tons of heavy oil was obviously grossly underestimated. Maybe a more accurate statement would have engendered a more rapid response to the incident. Maybe a more accurate estimate of the oil loss wasn't possible - I'll await the result of the inquiry with interest.

John T.


----------



## oceangoer (Jan 3, 2008)

Four Bells said:


> Well a FLAG OF CONVIENENCE, has a lot of questions to anser ???


All of Swires ships were registered in Hong Kong (their home port). Swires are also known as China Navigation Co. The Swire Group also controls Cathay Pacific Airlines.
Usually manned by Chinese crew and European officers. There's nothing second rate about this company.


----------



## oceangoer (Jan 3, 2008)

McFlett said:


> This ship was heading north towards a well forecast severe tropical cyclone 'Hamish'. The people in control of the movements of this ship obviously underestimated what they were tackling. The resultant mess is also obviously the total responsibility of the people in control of the ship's movement's, the owners of the ship and her insurers. Therefore they should totally foot the bill for the cleanup and provide total compensation for their incompetency.
> 
> But I'd like to bet that us ratepayers who have had to put up with this ecological disaster on our doorstep, will be out of pocket.


I suspect your emotion has taken control. Let's wait and see where the real truth lies.


----------



## cboots (Aug 16, 2004)

In the past CNCo's ships were registered in London although the company was Hong Kong based, in those days effectively a British colony. They employed British certified ranks and Chinese ratings. Now whether a different scenario would have emerged had the ship been Austalian registered and crewed is debatable, although a flag state does have the potential for far greater control over vessels under its jurisdiction.
Before we all resort to the usual round of union bashing, polie bashing, or leaping to the defence of owners etc, it is worth bearing in mind that this is an environmental disaster with appalling effects on all types of wildlife that will remain for some time to come.
CBoots


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

Seems that this is the latest http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/14/2516277.htm


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

Not only have we got an oil slick 60k's long but 31 containers of cemicals,sitting on the ocean bed,another interesting link http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/12/2514816.htm


----------



## Sister Eleff (Nov 28, 2006)

An early report (that should be reporter) stated that the containers had been lashed properly - er, how did they come off then?

A friend told me (!) that a picture of the ship he had noticed 'Monrovia' on the stern, could this mean that she was registered there?


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

I'm not getting emotional, but we have idiots here in Australia saying such things as " with overseas ships , they turn our coastline into a sewer, then they go home"
This from Mick Carr from the MUA Queensland.
A village some where is looking for it's idiot.
The only reason most incidents are caused by non Australian crews is, there are no Australian ships left.
I'll leave it to the reader to wonder why.
This incident in Queensland is dreadful, we are all shocked by the damage this has caused, but it could have happened to any ship, any crew who were in the same situation.

Leaving the MUA alone, we also have two reporters writing for the local rag today saying " Thirty one containers filled with explosives " could be a floating time bomb"
I rest my case. We are being informed by ignorumases.
Is that how one spells twits?


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

We have the same idiots in the UK, totally clueless of all things nautical which is why there is so much general ignorance, something I have been banging on about for years.

I know exactly how disastrous it can be having such a huge oil slick having had so many on our coasts small and large, sometimes neglect, sometimes purely accidental that nobody could foresee or prevent. You only have to look at the AIS of the English Channel to see how busy it is, ships coming and going from all over the world, crews of all nationalities. The ships carrying cargoes that would cause immense environmental damage if they got into trouble but thankfully rarely do because they are all professionals. Like the captain of a cruise ship once said jokingly: "I will not put this ship in jeopardy because I am concerned about only one person, me!". In other words, he would not put his own life at stake, let alone others. 

With the amount of ships at sea at any one time, including the busy English channel accidents are hardly worth mentioning compared accidents on the roads etc. Sea and air travel is one of the safest means of transport there is from passenger to cargo. 

Yet have just one accident, and the landlubbers are shouting from the hill tops. This does not lessen the damage this oil slick is doing, and will do to the Queensland coast, tourism and of course wild life. But from what I can gather from the posts above, this was a pure accident, and could not have been prevented. 

David


----------



## McFlett (Mar 17, 2007)

_I suspect your emotion has taken control_
Yes you do get emotional when your favorite surf beach at your doorstep is covered with thick black oil.
_This ship is a large ocean going vessel, which could handle the conditions ahead of her_
Am I missing something here?? This large ocean going vessel didn't seem to handle the conditions terribly well!
_She didn't confront a cyclone as stated, the storm was hundreds of miles north of her, and reducing in severity_
No - but she was facing bad weather associated with the cyclonic sytem. One can only speculate what would have happened if they faced true cyclonic conditions!
_This incident in Queensland is dreadful, we are all shocked by the damage this has caused, but it could have happened to any ship, any crew who were in the same situation_
Now that is a scary thought!
_An early report (that should be reporter) stated that the containers had been lashed properly - er, how did they come off then?_
Exactly my thoughts. This ship and its cargo were obviously not in a seaworthy condition!
_But from what I can gather from the posts above, this was a pure accident, and could not have been prevented_
Huh!?


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

Murphy's Inverse Law seems to have now been exercised. "Those who have never loaded a ship are the most knowledgeable". Good jobs those non indigenous people were absent when the Endeavour run aground, otherwise they would be crawling out of the bulkheads to advise Capt. Cook on his failings.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

McFlett said:


> _I suspect your emotion has taken control_
> Yes you do get emotional when your favorite surf beach at your doorstep is covered with thick black oil.
> _This ship is a large ocean going vessel, which could handle the conditions ahead of her_
> Am I missing something here?? This large ocean going vessel didn't seem to handle the conditions terribly well!
> ...



As I say, from what I can gather from posts above it was an accident. If not as the *Huh* above seems to suggest, then what *did* happen. If not an accident, then exactly what went wrong?. We in the UK are a few thousand miles away, so rely on those in the area.

I live right on the edge of the English Channel, possibly one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, so we know how easy it can be for accidents to happen, and what it is like to have our shores caked in oil. When I was young, tar on the beach was a regular thing. We were also of course a area known for shipwrecks. 

David


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

From what I read in the Sunday Mail,it was 31 containers of ammonium nitrate,that went overboard into some of the best King Prawn fishing grounds on the East coast.1700 hrs,legal papers have just been served,to Cpt Bernardino Santos,his passport taken,and will be staying in Brisbane for at least 2 weeks on board--abc news radio.(thesundaymail.com.au)also the latest from the ABC http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/15/2516564.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/15/2516457.htm,Norman


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

The second link is wrong try this
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/15/2516457.htm


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

Pompeyfan said:


> As I say, from what I can gather from posts above it was an accident. If not as the *Huh* above seems to suggest, then what *did* happen. If not an accident, then exactly what went wrong?. We in the UK are a few thousand miles away, so rely on those in the area.
> 
> I live right on the edge of the English Channel, possibly one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, so we know how easy it can be for accidents to happen, and what it is like to have our shores caked in oil. When I was young, tar on the beach was a regular thing. We were also of course a area known for shipwrecks.
> 
> David


There is no comparision to the English south coast beaches,we are talking Prestine beaches here.I would call it a DISASTER,not an accident.


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

Who did lash those containers???
Bad non Australians?
No, MUA members lashed those containers.
Say no more.


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

2. If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read 
> the newspaper
> you are misinformed. -- Mark Twain
> 
Do I need so say more?


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Four Bells said:


> There is no comparision to the English south coast beaches,we are talking Prestine beaches here.I would call it a DISASTER,not an accident.



So our beaches on the south coast of England are not Pristine then, and not a disaster when polluted with oil or anything else that has fallen off a ship?. I think that fellow UK members will have something to say about that statement, and indeed local councils, tourism, fishermen and so on not to mention the National Trust who protects hundreds of miles of coastline on some of the most beautiful iconic stretches of coast in the UK known for outstanding natural beauty. No comparison?. Sorry, it is no less a disaster here, than in Australia or anywhere else. (Cloud) 

My point was also that because of the amount of traffic in the English Channel there is a far higher risk of an accident, collision or whatever that many other parts of the world. Remember, few of the vessels passing through do not visit our shores, the Channel is a major highway to the rest of the world from some of the busiest ports in the world like Rotterdam. They all come through the channel. Yet if something happens, the prevailing westerly and southerly winds blow the trouble onto our beaches even though the ship was not even coming here.

We are all very concerned about the damage this oil has caused to the Queensland shore line, the fishing and tourist industry, wild life and so on. but please do not say there is no comparison.

David


----------



## Bill Davies (Sep 5, 2007)

Four Bells said:


> Well a FLAG OF CONVIENENCE, has a lot of questions to anser ???


Please expand!


----------



## dom (Feb 10, 2006)

*dom*

headlines to-day on one paper
Captain Couragous
Crew tells how they feared for the lives when the Captain would'nt slow down or change course,
seems that the ship has been holded on the port and starboard sides,one reporter on the evening news stated that the container locking bars were "Rusted Through' all i can say is God help us if we ever have a major oil spill


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

Well said, the beaches of Kent, or Queensland, are special and need to be looked after.
This incident is a disaster, I have no problem with this description, what I do have a problem with is the mis reporting by people who do not know what they are talking about.
We in Australia have been told that " our children, and their children will be paying for this oil disaster"
Today we are told that " the beaches will be clean in a few weeks "
It will be somewhere in between, I think.


----------



## MARINEJOCKY (Nov 25, 2007)

Somebody had better tell them to get a boom around the ship as from the photo of the ship in Brisbane/Hamilton there is a big slick stretching away from the ship with a little boat going through it. 

For those of us who have worked on various flags we know that many times our ships were much better than some of the rubbish and un-safe vessels that were allowed to float around with a red duster on the back. 

I would have to ask how the containers being lost damaged the tanks that the fuel has escaped from. Was it a wing tank that was punctured or was the hull damaged underneath. I do not know how loosing deck cargo would affect the underwater hull areas as it was "reported" that divers had found the damage to be worse than first thought. 

I was on one ship that lost 17 containers just after the English Channel and the lashings were done by Dutch dockers and inspected by British officers. There are plenty of photos on this site of various container ships loosing boxes and I recall looking at one Mearsk ship with stacks lying all over the place. 

I am no explosives expert but the Ammonia Nitrate is a fertilizer and is nothing until other stuff is added. Until those extremists started blowing things up I am sure many farmers used tons of the stuff to spread on their fields so I doubt if 600 tons (31 boxes at say 20 tons per box) of the stuff would be that much of a problem even if all of the boxes were breached together. 

Its a disaster for sure but I have to agree with Pompeyfan that beaches anywhere are important whether they be in England, Aussie, Alaska or Florida and although in the short term it is terrible nature has a habit of fixing things over time.


----------



## RNW (Jan 24, 2009)

Well said, the beaches of Kent, or Queensland, are special and need to be looked after.
This incident is a disaster, I have no problem with this description, what I do have a problem with is the mis reporting by people who do not know what they are talking about.
We in Australia have been told that " our children, and their children will be paying for this oil disaster"
Today we are told that " the beaches will be clean in a few weeks "
It will be somewhere in between, I think.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Just to portray what I mean by a busy English Channel and how easy it it for our shores to be polluted, which according to Four Bells, is not so pristine as those in Australia, click onto this link

http://www.shipais.com/index.php?map=livbay

Then click on the the Bristol & Solent link in top left hand side. Then click on the large square that takes in Portland to the west, the Isle of Wight where I live, and over to the east and France to the south. In that relatively small section of the channel at present, I counted over 57 ships in the lanes, and a few crossing those lanes. We also have 12 ships at anchor off of Sandown and Shanklin, and the Nab anchorage. All this area can be very dangerous not only for collision, but storm force gales which pound our coast on a regular basis making it more likely for ships to lose their loads, and indeed often do. Just walk along our beaches.

On the bottom point of the Isle Wight, along to the Needles from St Catherines Point in particular was a graveyard for many ships. It is known as Back of The Wight, a very rich area for wrecks and smugglers. Lumps of tar, on the beach, birds covered was regular when I was growing up, and still a major problem. And it was not until latter years with better equipment that ships stopped coming ashore on a regular basis. However, the oil slick problem and ships losing their loads is still a major problem, not just for the pristine Australian beaches, but our lesser beaches as well. (Cloud) 

David


----------



## MARINEJOCKY (Nov 25, 2007)

Yes, I agree with Bill Davies. Everytime there is "disaster" everybody jumps on the band wagon of Flags of Convience causing the problem. Look at some of the junk that we were expected to sail on when working for the British companies, yes in their day they may have been prime examples but through lack of investment those same ships became floating time bombs. 

Many of us make jokes and tell what can now be considered funny stories of our time on the gas boats but those things were terrible and just about all of us agree we were lucky with what we got away with. 

As I have stated before I worked for a German owner who had ships under the Cyprus, Singapore and Panama flags and he stated to me that he wanted his ships maintained to a standard that he could take his wife and twin boys who were about 4 yr old at the time onto any one of the ships, sail on them to any where in the world and feel perfectly safe. We did that and yet some of my old college "pals" would not talk to me at an Institute dinner in Glasgow because of the perception that I worked on Flags of Convience yet they worked for Shell who had just flagged all of their ships in the Isle of Man.

Like I have said the Austrailian authorities are doing themselves no favors by allowing oil to flow away from the ship as she sits at the dock. 

As for the crews statements, I have learnt through my involvement in Federal court cases that taking statements from crew members can vary not just from one member to the next but also by taking a second statement from that same crew member just a few minutes later.


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

David sorry I did not mean to affend you or anyone else regarding your our prestine beaches Norman


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Four Bells said:


> David sorry I did not mean to affend you or anyone else regarding your our prestine beaches Norman


Many thanks Norman, no offence taken. It is a very upsetting times when oil slicks and other pollution affects our seas and shores, a very emotional time for all concerned. 

David


----------



## esaelk (Mar 29, 2008)

It might be helpful for those far away from the action to know that it is taking place in the context of a state election campaign which will come to a conclusion this coming Saturday. Politicians, being what they are, are inevitably trying to use the event as some sort of blunt instrument with which to beat up their opponents. I don't imagine we will get anything sensible or objective out of the politicians, media, authorities (of any sort) or unions until next week. They all have something else on their minds at the moment.

Bill


----------



## doyll (Mar 9, 2007)

MARINEJOCKY said:


> I am no explosives expert but the Ammonia Nitrate is a fertilizer and is nothing until other stuff is added. Until those extremists started blowing things up I am sure many farmers used tons of the stuff to spread on their fields so I doubt if 600 tons (31 boxes at say 20 tons per box) of the stuff would be that much of a problem even if all of the boxes were breached together.


The danger of the Ammonia Nitrate is not it's explosive use, but as fertilizer. As such if it gets into the water in high concentrates it will kill plant life, and in lower concentrates it will cause plant life to grow at rates much greater then normal (algae blooms/red tides) and disrupt the natural balance. 

The use of Ammonia Nitrate as fertilizer has caused many algae problems in lakes and streams as it leaches from the fields... often killing the fish in them.


----------



## Cisco (Jan 29, 2007)

Bill Davies said:


> Please expand!


Any flag other than Australian is Flag of Convenience according to the MUA   

I feel for the Queenslander beachgoers but as far as I'm concerned 200 tons is not a disaster... it barely rates on the richter scale....
Cheers
Frank


----------



## cboots (Aug 16, 2004)

The MUA exists to represent and, where it can, advance the interests of its members, which include Australian seamen and wharfies. Politicians are, well just politicians. The media has been so denuded of skilled reporting staff, in the never ending lust for profits of its owners, that PR handouts frequently get published as reporting. The point I am making is that those with an interest to advance will lobby and so the seeker after the real story needs to apply a credibility filter to what is said and what is reported in the media. As I have already said in an earlier post what matters here is the environmental disaster, and it is a disaster as are all events of this type wherever they occur, the effects on the ocean and the life it supports, and the effects on the environment, flora and fauna wherever this wretched stuff comes ashore.
That will all occur whoever lashed the boxes, whoever crews the boat and whatever flag it sails under. Those who have a concern for the environment and for the lives of species other than human beings need to constantly push for greater vigilance to prevent this kind of thing happening, and for the full weight of the true cost to be placed on those responsible when it does happen. As Nader demonstrated decades ago in the US, it is the nature of commercial entities to shirk their wider responsibilities when it is cheaper to simply insure against the occasional catastrophe than to take real steps to prevent it ever happening.
CBoots


----------



## Cisco (Jan 29, 2007)

I blame the consumer myself... without people wanting to buy more and more 'stuff' we wouldn't have these evil ships motoring hither and yon as they do.

Hold the 'consumers' responsible... they are the real villains....


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

doyll said:


> The danger of the Ammonia Nitrate is not it's explosive use, but as fertilizer.
> 
> 
> Don't try to tell them that in Texas City.


----------



## MARINEJOCKY (Nov 25, 2007)

Binnacle said:


> doyll said:
> 
> 
> > The danger of the Ammonia Nitrate is not it's explosive use, but as fertilizer.
> ...


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

MARINEJOCKY said:


> Binnacle said:
> 
> 
> > What was added to it in Texas City to make it blow up, I am sure it was not sea water
> ...


----------



## doyll (Mar 9, 2007)

MARINEJOCKY said:


> Binnacle said:
> 
> 
> > What was added to it in Texas City to make it blow up, I am sure it was not sea water
> ...


----------



## Four Bells (Aug 9, 2008)

*Qld oil spill Latest*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/03/2534117.htm?section=justin


----------



## shamrock (May 16, 2009)

*Swire Shipping at odds with Queensland over oil spill clean-up costs*



> The shipping company responsible for one of Queensland's worst environmental disasters says it never promised to pay the full cost of the clean-up.
> 
> Both the Queensland and Federal Governments are demanding Swire Shipping pay the $34 million it cost to clean up a massive oil spill from the ship Pacific Adventurer earlier this year. ..cont../..


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/05/2617195.htm


----------



## McFlett (Mar 17, 2007)

I would just like to add to my previous postings on the Swire Shipping/Pacific Adventurer incident. Swire Shipping not only acted incompetently by operating an unseaworthy ship captained by someone whose seamanship was obviously severely lacking. They now appear to be doing the *DIRTY* on us QLD taxpayers.
http://www.shippingindustry.com.au/article/swire-shipping-refuses-to-pay-full-clean-up-bill-for-sunshine-coast-oil-slick/489357.aspx


----------



## McFlett (Mar 17, 2007)

Like I said - about us taxpayers/ratepayers being out of pocket. Well dodged with the help of your slick lawyers *SWIRE SHIPPING*.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25819834-2702,00.html


----------



## shamrock (May 16, 2009)

Update

http://www.thedaily.com.au/news/2009/jul/22/bligh-meets-swire-shipping/


----------

