WesWorld

If the Indians managed to dump 100% of the cargo of 7000t oil while they tried to tow it clear, that's an oil slick approximately 36 miles wide. Within a few hours a large percentage would turn to the gaseous state and evaporated. In the shallower waters, particulates in the water would absorb the oil and then sink to the bottom. With the water temperatures being warm in this area, the spill would rapidly see evaporation. Microbial action driven by sunlight would break the oil down into more water-soluble elements resulting in dissolution through the water table. A small percentage of the oil would persist as tarballs for between 1-12 months as a result of aggregation, but most of the oil would be dispersed quite rapidly.

If the Indians managed to dump the entire load evenly over as much area as possible (ie, intentionally), the slick could cover a maximum of 32,410 square miles with a depth of 1mm.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
If the Indians managed to dump 100% of the cargo of 7000t oil while they tried to tow it clear, that's an oil slick approximately 36 miles wide. Within a few hours a large percentage would turn to the gaseous state and evaporated. In the shallower waters, particulates in the water would absorb the oil and then sink to the bottom. With the water temperatures being warm in this area, the spill would rapidly see evaporation. Microbial action driven by sunlight would break the oil down into more water-soluble elements resulting in dissolution through the water table. A small percentage of the oil would persist as tarballs for between 1-12 months as a result of aggregation, but most of the oil would be dispersed quite rapidly.

If the Indians managed to dump the entire load evenly over as much area as possible (ie, intentionally), the slick could cover a maximum of 32,410 square miles with a depth of 1mm.

Good to now there is no major environmental damage. And it was accidental. The personnel that made the contract with the company didn't inspect the ship before leasing, the ship been met in open sea. The oilers coming straight from Persian Gulf and meeting the Shah Jahan and escorts on transit. (read Indian news)

I didn't say there would be no environmental damage, I said the majority of the oil would disperse naturally in a week or two.

Not inspecting the tanker is a bit irrelevant, considering that the classification societies would be responsible for inspections. That's what classification societies such as Lloyd's Register and Det Norske Veritas are there for, after all - providing data to insurance companies. Port authorities would have inspected the ships and would have provided a classification rating.

Presumably either India's leasing agents didn't take into account the ship's poor classification (or the ship was improperly inspected by the Indian classification society), or the shipowners were perpetrating insurance fraud on the Indian classification society and their insurers. That would likely have been discovered the first time the ship put into a non-Indian port and received an inspection. A third alternative is that the Indian classification society doesn't have strict enough construction standards. (Classification societies don't make any comments on seaworthiness, merely on construction and compliance with the construction and maintenance standards.)

If the tanker was improperly inspected by the Indian Classification Society, or worse yet improperly rated by means of bribery or fraud, Atlantis might be justified in requesting all Indian-flagged tankers, regardless of their rating, to be barred from docking until inspected by a trustworthy third-party classification society such as Lloyd's, Det Norske Veritas, Bureau Veritas, or Germanischer Lloyd. Similarly, if fraud is found, India's insurance companies could potentially have some serious claims versus their classification society.

--------------------

In case you're curious, Chile's classification society (part of DIRECTEMAR) uses Lloyd's Register's surveyors for inspecting merchant ships entering Chile, and shares information with Det Norske Veritas and the American Bureau of Shipping. Ireland complies with Lloyd's ratings but their open-register/flag-of-convenience laws means Ireland does their own inspections. Bulgaria uses Société Générale de Surveillance (which is Swiss).

If Canada's delegate hadn't been recalled recently for 'important consultations';

He'd pointedly object to the concept of warships having any rights to interefere with civilian commerce in international waters, and soundly warn the Bharati delegate that any such attempt to intimidate or interefere with a Canadian flagged vessel will be regarded as a Hostile Act.

But he's not here, so perhaps a similar statement would come from the Aussie delegate.

Quoted

We ask for a vote of censure to our nation while at the same time we ask for voting for a Clean Ocean Act to ensure events like this don't occur again.

Italy votes not to care. The League doesn't have any actual powers, and shouldn't acquire any.

Brazil's delegate stands:

"We agree with the Italian delegate, the Assembly does not have the power to implement a Clean Ocean Act. Although the merits of such an act can be debated on in the Assembly, and of course the League could promote such an Act, it does not have the power to force other nations to sign on even if a majority rule in favour of it. Such a Treaty it is advised would be best discussed amongst the foreign ministers of the various powers who are interested in such a Treaty, to be signed and its terms promoted by them."

"Brazil is very concerned about this oil spillage, after all the mouth of the Amazon River, the second largest in the world is more or less directly southwest of the island of Lyria, and we are concerned on the impact this could potentially have on fishing in the Amazon River basin, and therefore the food supply of the native peoples living in the Amazon River Basin Area should the oil leak that far. (1)"

(1) unlikely, but in 1939 do they know that, and would they know how large the slick would be? They likely would know what happens to fish in water where there is large amounts of oil though.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
(1) unlikely, but in 1939 do they know that, and would they know how large the slick would be? They likely would know what happens to fish in water where there is large amounts of oil though.

From my research, it wouldn't get half the distance to Brazil.

You know that Brock, and therefore I know that, but would they know it in 1939?

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
You know that Brock, and therefore I know that, but would they know it in 1939?

Probably experientially. This wouldn't be the first time in history that a tanker got emptied into the ocean.

Then just chalk up the Brazilian response to irritation and bluster then

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
Then just chalk up the Brazilian response to irritation and bluster then

Wouldn't be the first time a politician had made a rash comment based on poor information, either.

I actually seriously doubt that you'd manage to get the full cargo into the water - there are sound constructional and operational reasons why tankers have multiple tanks, and usually at least one longitudinal bulkhead running the length of the cargo compartments. It's quite likely that the grounding would rip open two or three cargo tanks, maybe all of them down one side, but ripping open the entire ship, even with poor construction standards, isn't that likely. Of course, there's still likely to be a continuous leak from the broken tanks. In any case, this is actually smaller than a historical spill of 1937, when the SS Frank H. Buck and SS President Coolidge collided - that resulted in 8,870 tons finding its' way into San Francisco Bay.

Quoted

Originally posted by RLBH
I actually seriously doubt that you'd manage to get the full cargo into the water - there are sound constructional and operational reasons why tankers have multiple tanks, and usually at least one longitudinal bulkhead running the length of the cargo compartments. It's quite likely that the grounding would rip open two or three cargo tanks, maybe all of them down one side, but ripping open the entire ship, even with poor construction standards, isn't that likely. Of course, there's still likely to be a continuous leak from the broken tanks. In any case, this is actually smaller than a historical spill of 1937, when the SS Frank H. Buck and SS President Coolidge collided - that resulted in 8,870 tons finding its' way into San Francisco Bay.

I'd agree.