cargo workshop: container ship fires
Post on 16-Oct-2021
8 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Cargo Workshop: Container Ship Fires
Introduction to Panelists
• Matthew O’Sullivan, Head of Motor & Marine for Zurich Australia• Based in Sydney
• Member of Global Marine Leadership team for Zurich
• Chairman of ICA Marine Standing Committee
• Sundeep Khera, Head of Marine APAC for AXA XL• Based in Singapore
• Master Mariner
• Holds MBA from University of Chicago
• Joern Groninger, Average Adjuster with Groninger Welke Janssen• Based in Bremen
• 5th generation average adjuster
• President of both German and Int. Assoc of Average Adjusters (AMD)
• Ian Lennard, President of National Cargo Bureau• Based in New York
• Qualified Lawyer
• Serves on the Council of Trustees of the United Seaman’s Service
How hazardous is a containership fire ?
• A fire broke out onboard the
‘KMTC Hong Kong’ while
berthed at Thailand’s
eastern Laem Chabang port
• At least 228 people were
rushed to hospital with burns,
eye irritation and breathing
difficulties.
25th May 2019
• The cause of fire was due to
mis-declared chemical cargoes
of calcium hypochlorite and
chlorinated paraffin wax
• The fire triggered an 18-hour
firefighting operation to
extinguish the blaze.Data source : Bankgok Post Newspaper published date 02nd June 2019
Video file source : Marine crew onboard vessel passing the port of Laem Chabang
How hazardous is a containership fire ?
• A fire broke out onboard the
‘KMTC Hong Kong’ while
berthed at Thailand’s
eastern Laem Chabang port
• At least 228 people were
rushed to hospital with burns,
eye irritation and breathing
difficulties.
25th May 2019
• The cause of fire was due to
mis-declared chemical cargoes
of calcium hypochlorite and
chlorinated paraffin wax
• The fire triggered an 18-hour
firefighting operation to
extinguish the blaze.Data source : Bankgok Post Newspaper published date 02nd June 2019
Video file source : Marine crew onboard vessel passing the port of Laem Chabang
Evolution of containerships , DG carriage & crew onboard
500
30
0 200 400 600
Approximate number of DG containers on board
Container vessels
23
25
22.5
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
Number of Crew onboard
Data source : Presenters past experience at sea and container stowage planning and varies on the trade lane of the vessels
X 42 timesVessel capacity increaseVLCS – Very Large Container Ship
ULCS – Ultra Large Container Ship
X 17 timesDangerous goods containers onboard
increased
- 8 % Crew manning levels
Image citation : Containership types , Author :Jean-Paul Rodrigue Ph.D , The Geography of Transport Systems Third Edition
Fires on board Containerships & Con-Ro vessel’s
MSC Flamina
Eugene Maersk
Hansa Brandenburg
Hyundai Fortune
APL Austria
MSC Daniela
Maersk Honam
Sincerity Ace
Yantian Express
APL Vancouver
ER Kobe
Grande America
Grande EuropaKMTC Hong Kong
Diamond Highway
APL Le Harve
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
-500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Ca
pa
cit
y o
f ve
sse
l(TE
U1/V
eh
icle
ca
pa
cit
y)
Number of days between vessel fire incidents
Fires onboard Containerships and Ro-Ro vessels(2012 – Aug 2019)
2012 2013 2016 2017 2018 2019
25 daysAverage number of days between 5 containership fire
incidents in 2019 (Jan-Aug)
2018 & 2019
2 VLCS & ULCS fires
US$415m 2
Approximate insured value (H&M and Cargo) Maersk Honam (ULCS2)
US$1.2 B/Year 1
Additional freight revenue for shipping companies carrying
Dangerous goods containers
3 ULCS fires x US$415m/ea ≈ US$1.2B/Year
400% increase In frequency of fires onboard containerships 2018 – 2019(Jan-Aug)
Data sources :
1. ICHCA - International Cargo Handling Coordination Association estimates 6million shipments of
Dangerous goods per annum in 2018 x an estimated US$ 200/shipment additional freight revenue for
each Dangerous goods shipment.
2. WKW estimate of H & M value to be US$ 110 million & Cargo value to be US$305 million
Vehicle carrier or Con-Ro vessel
Data credit :1Twenty foot Equivalent Units2ULCS – Ultra Large Container Ship
Typical Risk Zone set up on Container vessels
Low Risk High Risk
Image citation :
20,000 T.E.U* vessel load planning using A.IThis video shows a
container vessel stowage
planner using an Auto
planning software for the
purpose of ;
1. Risk Zone Selection
2. Stowage Criteria
Selection
3. Auto Stowage Planning
Look at the
bays/row/tiers being
loaded with
containers by an AI
Video citation :
Time taken for stowage
planning of a 20kTEU*
vessel ≈ 24min vs a few
hours in the past when
done manually* Twenty foot Equivalent Units
Questions: Do you see any developments in the container shipping industry that will help to alleviate the problems we are facing with Fires?
How prevalent is mis-declaration and wrongful stowage and the incorrect use of containers as causes of large container ship fires?
Recent developments - Ian
• Quantify the Problem
• Line Imposed Fines on Mis-declared
• Risk Based Stowage
• Cargo Screening Tool– Detects Potential Mis and Undeclared Cargo
Inspection Results
DG Total Failed Failure
rate
Failed
Securing
Failed
placards/mks
Failed Docs/
Misdeclared
DG Imports 158 109 69% 69 (44%) 61 (39%) 12 (8%)
DG Exports 105 40 38% 26 (25%) 16 (15%) 5 (5%)
Non DG Total Failed
Securing
Failure rate
Non DG Imports 187 96 51%
Non DG Exports 50 29 58%
Grand total Failed Failure rate Failed Securing
500 274 55% 217 (43%)
Results by regional load port
DG Non DG
Region # of
Inspections
Passed Failed %
Failed
USA
(Export)
105 65 40 38
Latin
America
28 5 23 82
Europe 9 4 5 56
India 45 6 39 87
Asia 68 34 34 50
Middle
East
8 0 8 100
Total 263 114 149 57
Region # of
Inspections
Passed Failed %
Failed
USA
(Export)
50 21 29 58
Latin
America
26 17 9 35
Europe 61 28 33 54
India 31 15 16 52
Asia 62 27 35 56
Middle
East
6 4 2 33
Australia 1 0 1 100
Total 237 112 125 53
# of
Inspections
Passed Failed %
Failed
105 65 40 38
U.S. DG EXPORTS
*NCB Container Inspections performed in the normal course of business failed at a 7.4% rate as compared to the initiative failure rate of 38% for DG export boxes from the US.
Line Imposed Fines on Misdeclaration
• Hapag Lloyd - $15,000
• Hyundai (HMM) - $15,000
• Evergreen - $35,000
• Maersk – unspecified
• OOCL – unspecified
• Symbolic or does it actually have teeth?
Risked Based Stowage of Dangerous Goods
• Participants in the Working Group
• Cargo Incident Notification System (CINS)
• Classification Societies – ABS, CCS and Lloyd’s Register
• Danish Maritime Authority
• International Group of P&I Clubs
• TT Club
• Exis Technologies
• National Cargo Bureau
Risked Based Stowage of Dangerous Goods
• Goals• Protect Life – No DG adjacent to accommodations
• Retain Main Propulsion – No DG near engine room
• Retain Structural Integrity - Avoid fire-prone DG under deck that cannot be extinguished by CO2
• Facilitate Fire Prevention - Segregate fire-prone DG from known ignition sources, protect from direct sunlight
• Facilitate Firefighting - Self-reacting commodities (including exempt DG) should be stowed in accessible positions and separated from fast-reacting commodities
• Facilitate Safety - The presence of mis-declared and undeclared Dangerous Goods should be taken into consideration
Cargo Screening Tool
• Scans a booking searching for un-declared or mis-declared DG –How does it work? Scans booking for:
• Declaration similar to DG (e.g. bleaching powder, water treatment compound, lime chloride)
• Documentation is incomplete
• New cargo or route for a shipper
• There is no Harmonized System (HS) code
• New customer
• Late booking
• Change of documentation
• Bill of lading discrepancy
Recent developments - Joern
Ashore:
• - IMDG Code – but lack of controls
• (Verified Gross Mass not controlled either)
• - remove incentives for misdeclaration?
On board:
• Container Ship Safety Forum (www.cssf.global)
• "members intensely discussed firefighting on containerships… are presently testing new firefighting equipment and will share their experience"
Question:How do other segments of the shipping industry, such as Average adjusters or Salvors view this issue?
Salvors’ Practical problems - Joern
• mix of numerous unknown different substances on fire
• mobilizing suitable material to possibly remote locations
• vessel dimensions (beam > 60 m; containers stacked in ten tiers)
• access to suitable ports of refuge (container handling equipment, free storage areas)
….more detail in other sessions!
Average adjusters’ views - Joern
• difficulties to obtain cargo manifests from various carriers involved
• security requested before delivery (or even oncarriage) of cargo
• salvage + G/A security „exceeding 100% of cargo value"
• lacking knowledge on the part of many people involved
• necessity to streamline the process
• improve the flow of information
• AMD currently reviewing problems with large containership casualties – in cooperation with IUMI, CMI, and others
Question: What can we do as an insurance industry to mitigate these developments?
Questions …
top related