- Casualties involving alternative fuels like ammonia present new challenges, particularly in terms of human health risks and response strategies.
- Responding to incidents involving alternative fuels requires different equipment, training, and approaches compared to traditional fuel spills.
- There is still much uncertainty and debate around how to safely manage these new types of casualties, especially near populated areas.
At the Nautical Institute (Singapore) Conference 2024, experts discussed the complexities of dealing with casualties involving alternative fuels like ammonia, reports Seatrade Maritime.
Challenges in Responding to Future Maritime Incidents
The discussions highlighted the differences in response strategies for incidents involving alternative fuels versus traditional ones, such as oil. Recent accidents involving fires, explosions, and oil spills have prompted the industry to consider what would happen if alternative fuels were involved in similar situations.
In March, the container ship Dali lost power while sailing from the Port of Baltimore and collided with the Baltimore Key Bridge, destroying it within seconds and resulting in six fatalities. Mark Cameron, Managing Director (Asia) for Ardmore Shipping, shared concerns about the frequent power losses ships experience and said,“If you think ships don’t lose power in today’s world you’re living in a fool’s paradise – ship’s lose power all the time.”
He added,“And that means in a future world where when we’re talking about a nice sustainable environment and everything is good and cosy, it’s great when things are going well, but when things go wrong what are we going to do?”
Alternative Fuel Spills Demand Advanced Equipment
The approach to handling an alternative fuel spill differs significantly from dealing with traditional oil spills. David Campion, Senior Technical Advisor for ITOPF, explained that alternative fuel spills require more advanced, expensive equipment and greater expertise.
“If you have an HNS spill, obviously, the capabilities are different. The equipment that people require is a lot more expensive. It needs a lot more testing in order to ensure that it’s still up to spec and ready to go into the environment. And the people that are using that equipment need to know how to use it properly and also understand the risks they’re walking into and make sure they have the right equipment for the potential pollutant. That’s not cheap, and that’s not easy to it to put in place,” he noted.
Responders also need to be thoroughly trained and understand the risks posed by these fuels. Capt. Jereon Mooji, Master Mariner and Operations Manager with SMIT APAC, highlighted that while current equipment for handling oil spill casualties would still be needed, different equipment would be required for dealing with alternative fuel spills. He emphasized that salvors would need to invest significantly in both equipment and training to effectively manage these new types of incidents.
Ammonia Safety Concerns
Ammonia is seen as a promising alternative fuel but raises significant safety concerns due to its high toxicity. Cameron voiced his personal reservations, saying, “On a personal level I will say I am not supporter of ammonia.” He also added, “I know that ammonia is a big part of the conversation, but you’re talking about seafarer interests and seafarer safety, I myself cannot resign myself to understand that this is the solution. I absolutely understand its part of the mix and we’re going to be moving more ammonia around the world and we’re going to be burning more, but to me it’s the devil in disguise.”
Despite his concerns, others, such as Ros Blazejczyk, CEO of Solis Marine,said, “From our point of view at the moment we are of the opinion that ammonia is the only really valid option as a zero-carbon fuel for long haul [shipping].”
Solis Marine is involved in designing ammonia-fuelled vessels, although the company remains open to other fuel options.
Understanding and Managing Risks
When dealing with an alternative fuel spill, the primary concern shifts from environmental damage to the safety of human life. According to Campion,“With spills from alternative fuels and other HNS that changes the risk there is to human health and that is the foremost priority, and that’s really where the focus needs to be.”
This represents a major shift in how responders approach such incidents. “If one of these alternative fuel cargoes escapes, they are extremely volatile, they’re going to be gone in a very, very short period of time, and it’s just about understanding what those consequences are going to be and trying to minimise the overall damage. I think what we need to be prepared to do in event of future incidents is ready to stand back and be able to watch It. And look at the scale of it and understand at what point it’s then safe to re-enter and try and ensure the stability of the situation,” Campion explained.
Focus Shifts to Testing Over Major Events
Capt. Jereon Mooji explained that handling alternative fuel spills would require new equipment and substantial investment in training, beyond the existing resources used for oil spills.
Solis’ Blazejczyk, said, “I think it potentially changes the whole way we respond to casualties because that risk to the environment has largely disappeared, potentially, even by the time you’ve arrived at the vessel. You might end up with some highly localised effects on sea life but that’s probably the worst effect, aside from the potential risk to human life if you’re in the vicinity of populated areas.”
During the conference, the issue of alternative fuel spills near populated areas wasn’t fully addressed. An audience member questioned what the impact would have been if the June 14 collision at Pasir Panjang Terminal, Singapore, which caused a 400-tonne bunker spill, had involved an ammonia bunker tanker. However, this concern remained largely unanswered.
There are many unknowns regarding alternative fuel casualties, and current planning mainly focuses on testing equipment and bunkering procedures rather than preparing for major casualty events.
“I think most of the risk assessments right now are, ‘What if a hose bursts?’ or ‘What if a pump fails?’, but what if there’s a bulbous bow sticking through your bunker room? Those are the scenarios, those are the risks that I think are not being addressed enough at this particular moment,” commented Mooji from SMIT.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Seatrade Maritime
