The newbuilding market has picked up the pace over the past week. In its latest weekly report, shipbroker Allied Shipbroking said that the “newbuilding market activity moved on a very positive tone during the last week, recording a strong performance in terms of the volumes of fresh orders coming to light. The ‘’Lion Share’’ was taken up equally between Gas carrier and the Containership sectors. The majority of Gas contracts were placed on behalf of the Qatar project. On the containership front, after a long period we saw an inspiring flow of fresh projects coming to light. There was an absence this week of new orders emerging for the tanker and dry bulk sectors, with the former going against the expectation that has been driven from the improved freight market conditions of late. In the case of the later, things are expected to remain muted for the time being especially when given the sharp correction noted in earnings over the past month or so. All-in-all, what we see is that despite the overall current market uncertainty accompanied by high inflations, considerable fluctuations related to the commodities prices and currencies , it appears that for the time being buying appetite is still holding buoyant, while owners have adopted a more ‘’wait and see’’ attitude regarding any newbuilding investments”.

Banchero Costa, added in a separate report this week that “Evalend Shipping placed an order for 3 + 2 VLGC carriers of 88,000 cbm to be built at Hyundai. The price reported to was around $96.6mln each and deliveries of the 3 firm units are in 2024 and 2025. The Finnish owner Langh Ship made an order for 3 x 1,200 teu feeders. The vessels are TIER III, dual fuel, scrubber fitted and with batteries for port operations. The vessels will be built by Paxocean Zhoushan and will be delivered during end of 2024 and beginning of 2025. U-Ming Transport confirmed an order for 2 x Ultramax in China. One vessel will be built at New Dayang and the other subcontracted to Sumec. Vessels will be delivered during 2025 and were priced $34mln each”.

Meanwhile, in the S&P market this past week, Allied commented that “on the dry bulk side, things moved on an extremely uninspiring tone during this past week, reflected in the low volume of transactions that appeared in the market. What contributed mostly to this sluggish pace has certainly been the dramatic drop in earnings noted over the past month which has left an overwhelming feeling that asset values are about to follow in the same direction. Although it is very difficult for the time being to see any quick recovery taking place, things are looking a bit more optimistic to some extent for the smaller size segments, given the softer drop and limited freight market volatility that this segment has experienced.

On the tanker side, the momentum still remains strong for yet another week given the increased vivid activity that took place during this period of time. Given the overall positive momentum that prevails in the freight market as of late and the fervent buying interest that has emerged, there is an anticipation of a good flow of transactions being developed during the upcoming weeks”.

Shipbroker Banchero Costa also noted that “few ships were inviting offers last week and several will also call for bids this week; interesting to follow the activity on the drybulk front. On the tanker the momentum keeps building with a large number of units out for sale and several private deals being concluded. A major deal on VLOC was negotiated with Berge Bulk purchasing enbloc from Cara Shipping the sisters STELLA DAPHNE (2017) and STELLA ISABEL (2015) about 250,000 dwt for enbloc price of $98mln, both ships are BWTS fitted. There were 2 interesting deals on modern, eco type Ultramax with Ultrabulk selling the ULTRA TRUST 61,000 dwt built 2015 Tadotsu (bwts fitted and scrubber fitted) to Eagle Bulk for a price around $28mln and with Nisshin Shipping selling 2 Ultramax eco type to Jinhui, namely HANTON TRADER I and WESTERN SANTONS 64,0000 dwt built 2014 Hantong (BWTS fitted) for a price of $25.375mln each. The Imabari 2006 built Supramax MEDI BANGKOK around 53,000 dwt (BWTS fitted) is reported sold for a price of region $17mln for delivery November.

Interesting to note the payment via letter of credit pushed the price higher. A vintage Handymax MARVEL around 49,000 dwt built 2001 IHI is reported sold for a price of $10.5mln, similar to AMBER L 47,000 dwt built 2000 Oshima (BWTS fitted on delivery) which was sold on subs at $10mln basis delivery Med fairly prompt. Tsuneishi design AQUARIUS 77 around 35,000 dwt built 2016 Tsuneishi Cebu (BWTS fitted) is rumoured committed at $21mln. A smaller Handy the ALAM SERI about 29,000 dwt built 2011 Shikoku (BWTS fitted) was also calling offers on the 8th September, hearing now she is under negotiation at the levels of mid-high $13s mln. The 2 sisters aframax ALBA and PIPER 115,000 dwt built 2005 Samsung were inviting offers. The ALBA being ice class 1A and scrubber fitted was rumoured around $31/32mln, whilst the PIPER scrubber fitted non ice class was under negotiations below $30mln. In the MR sector Gotland sold on subjects one of their GSI built GOTLAND CAROLINA 53,160 dwt built 2006 at $18.5mln to a KS; the HYDE 47,000 dwt built 2007 HMD (scrubber fitted and BWTS fitted) is rumoured sold basis SS due at price in excess of $22mln. The Handy tanker BALTIC MONARCH 37,000 dwt built 2006 HMD (ice class 1B) got sold to Greek Buyers for a price a tick over $15mln. In the smaller chemical tanker sector, the CELSIUS MEXICO around 20,000 dwt built 2008 Shin Kurushima (BWTS fitted) was sold for region $15.5mln”, the shipbroker concluded.
Nikos Roussanoglou, Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide

Source: https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/newbuilding-activity-increases-after-the-summer-holidays/

It is both good news and a recognition of a long-felt need that a powerful consortium of technical expertise is being put to work to address the worrying problem of fires in containers. There is, apparently, a serious conflagration in a container about every five weeks while there are fires that are easier to extinguish on a more frequent basis. So, there is some enthusiasm that the European Maritime Safety Agency, the Danish Institute of Fire and Security Technology, along with the considerable muscle of Bureau Veritas and the support of the Research Institute of Sweden and the University of Southern Denmark are collaborating to deliver a Formal Safety Assessment Study on containership fires. It will be completed by the beginning of February next year, so they are moving fast.

It seems that this vexed subject has been on the agenda for decades, without seemingly much progress, while the scale of the problem has grown exponentially along with the size of container ships. I attended a seminar held by one of the classification societies at least twenty years ago, when there seemed to be an almost fatalistic attitude exhibited by some of the participants, notably those representing the sea carriers. Since then, there has been some progress, notably in the shape of clamping down on the failure to declare dangerous goods and even more recently, with some brave carriers even fining those who take their obligations lightly as regards declarations.

“There has always been something about sealed steel boxes that defies common sense.”

But there has been no great technical breakthrough that enables pitifully small ships’ crews to tackle fires, while the number of boxes at risk in a single ship has hugely increased. Insurers, P&I clubs and salvors, along with fire safety experts, have periodically expressed their concern, but the fires continue, with everyone, it seems, just hoping that the odds will remain on their side in a percentage game.

To someone brought up in pre-container days, with cargo care beaten into our skulls by our senior officers, there has always been something about sealed steel boxes that defies common sense. Who recalls, for instance, the strict injunctions stencilled on packing cases to “stow away from boilers”. It is perhaps a redundant instruction these days, if you think of the heat that can be built up in a steel container, whether it is deep in a hold or perched on the top of the stack under the blazing tropical sun. When I recall the efforts we made with fans and ventilation and fanatical attention to the temperatures and dew point, it is obvious that outside the reefer trades, cargo has to just sweat it out.

Then with the explosion in ship sizes, we have seen the huge globalisation in the production of goods that never were traded in great quantities until the advent of cheap container shipping. It is not surprising that fires break out with some regularity in cargoes of cheaply manufactured and badly packed basic chemicals or stuff like charcoal, which is notorious for overheating. Maybe the recent sudden spike in shipping costs, allegedly making people think afresh about the need to ship this rubbish over thousands of miles from the other side of the earth, will have an effect on the incidence of fires. But already rates are falling from their unprecedented peaks, so good intentions may be forgotten.

“The FSA study on containership fires will have no shortage of topics as its work progresses.”

You have to hope that punitive sanctions on rogue shippers, better targeting of problematical cargo, along with greater vigilance might start to have an effect on the container fire statistics. The EMSA- BV consortium will address not just prevention, but fire detection, alarm systems, containment, and firefighting, and they will be including in their remit equipment suppliers, designers shipping companies and flag states that have experience to offer. In recent times, notably after the appalling Maersk Honam disaster, there were ideas proposed by salvors, for designers to consider the installation of fireproof barriers between deck stacks, at least around hazardous cargoes, but this has yet to be accepted by anyone. There still seems few practical solutions other than crews having to take fearsome risks pushing lances through the sides of burning boxes.

It is also worth noting the risks that ports are running with their need to keep large numbers of boxes safe while in their custody. There was a nasty reminder last year when a box being transshipped exploded shortly after it had been loaded on a feeder ship. The inquiry discovered that the box with its chemical contents had been “cooking” on the quay in the Gulf port for the best part of a fortnight, having been landed by the ocean carrier.

Source: https://www.bairdmaritime.com/ship-world/boxship-world/column-no-apparent-end-to-blazing-boxes-grey-power/

Joseph Hazelwood, the captain of a tanker that reportedly ran aground in 1989 off Alaska and resulted in one of the worst oil spills in history, has passed away at 75 after a battle with cancer.

Hazelwood’s family informed The Washington Post and The New York Times that the former captain passed away in July 2022 after his fight with COVID-19 and cancer.

An experienced sailor, Hazelwood navigated the Exxon Valdez when the vessel abruptly ran aground in Prince William Sound off Alaska on 24 March 1989.

The accident reportedly tore open the vessel and spilt about 11 million gallons of crude oil.

The spill devastated the area, killing wildlife that lived there, especially those that inhabited Prince William Sound.

It impaired approximately 1,500 miles of the Gulf of Alaska Coastline, killing almost 250,000 seabirds, 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbour seals, nearly two dozen bald eagles, and many killer whales.

Hazelwood was initially under suspicion of being intoxicated when the spill happened. Still, he was cleared in a trial that took place in 1990 in which eyewitnesses mentioned that he appeared to be sober when the ship ran aground.

Following the colossal spill, Exxon’s chairman said that the firm had made a “bad judgment” by allowing Hazelwood, who had been treated for alcoholism, to become the captain of the Valdez.

The chairman said someone in management should’ve been informed at that time. The policy wouldn’t have allowed the person to be back on the vessel.

The Exxon Valdez mishap led to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which strengthened the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to respond to and prevent oil spills.

Had a spill of an extent as the Exxon Valdez disaster has taken place off the US East Coast, the devastation would have stretched to the Chesapeake Bay from Cape Cod, Walter Parker, Alaska Oil Spill Commission’s head, wrote following the spill.

At that time, Hazlewood was acquitted of a felony charge for operating a ship when intoxicated but was reportedly convicted of his negligence. The court asked him to do 1,000 hours of community service and pay $50,000 as a restitute.

Thousands of plaintiffs later sued Exxon and claimed they were massively affected by this disaster.

Five years following the spill, an Alaska jury rewarded them with about $5 billion as punitive damages. The amount was, later on, cut in half.

The US Supreme Court again reduced the award to about $507 million in 2008.

Hazelwood was not on the bridge as the vessel ran aground, as he had left the third mate in charge.

The National Transportation Safety Board discovered that the third mate had failed to manoeuvre the ship owing to fatigue and extreme workload.

Investigators also said that Hazelwood was unsuccessful in offering proper navigation. Hazelwood was the only individual who was charged for the disaster criminally.

The Exxon Valdez spill was the worst in US history for over 20 years until it was surpassed by the disaster of Deepwater Horizon that took place in 2010, which again spilt nearly 170 million gallons of crude oil into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico — over 15 times the amount the Valdez spilt off 21 years ago off Alaska.

References: LA Times, UPI, NewYork Post