Readit News logoReadit News
bigwheels · 21 hours ago
Reminds me of the Shipbreakers article from 3 years ago:

https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/the-toxic-tide-of-sh...

The toxic tide of ship breaking https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34905496 - 30 comments

Unforgettable.

BLKNSLVR · 21 hours ago
The video used for this fan-made film clip is from a documentary called Working Man's Death about ship breaking:

https://youtu.be/KVm8G0ipETc

notatoad · 20 hours ago
so these ships are abandoned by the companies that own them, with the crew still on board? and then the crew is just stuck there with dwindling food supplies until somebody comes to rescue them?

in my head this seems like a problem that could be solved by getting on the radio to a nearby port and saying "hey, we've got a tanker carrying $50m worth of crude oil, you can have it if you let us dock", but obviously it can't be that simple if that's not happening. why not?

jgeada · 20 hours ago
This seems like one of those problems that arise when we let rich people and corporations arbitrage for the lowest possible legal consequences, in this case flags of convenience that have no standards.

There is always some poor or corrupt country willing to ignore consequences as long as they can make a buck. The profits are private, but costs and consequences always laid onto the public. Miserable way to run things.

notatoad · 19 hours ago
>There is always some poor or corrupt country willing to ignore consequences as long as they can make a buck.

this is basically what i'm suggesting as the solution here, rather than the problem.

if you're in command of a tanker carrying $50m worth of oil, and the company that technically owns it owes you and your crew $175k and doesn't want to pay, surely you're never too far from a country who would be happy to take that boat off your hands and cover the lost wages. how are these boats just waiting around in the ocean for a solution, when there's so much wealth on board?

JohnMakin · 20 hours ago
When you are flying a foreign flag docked in a port you are complex legal situation - in international law, you follow the laws of the flag country, in addition to being under local jurisdiction (most of the time). And if you’re flying a flag for a boat that’s not registered under that flag, which as this article explains is easily verifiable, who is going to buy the oil, and how? not to mention any possible international sanctions on the oil, customs, the crew getting paid and wanting to return home, wherever that may be, and you get situations that can last for a long time. For this case a boat to boat transfer may be the only real way.
segmondy · 19 hours ago
let the crew paint a new flag for the country they want to dock at.
curiousObject · 19 hours ago
Your comment hints at another problem, which is that allowing the cargo into a port possibly could be exploited as a loophole to break sanctions.

Yet another big problem is that cargo might be too low in value, or even undesirable. Like the cargo of Ammonium Nitrate that exploded in Beirut a few years ago (it had been taken off the docked ship which then sank in the port. The cargo was stored in the port, then stuck in legal and payment disputes, and the result was horrific).

pjc50 · 9 hours ago
They have control of the ship, but the ship doesn't own the cargo! It's not legally theirs to sell.

As staff who are presumably looking to eventually get another job in shipping, they have to follow the rules even if it's not clear what they are or the owner isn't following them.

The fact that the cargo is sanctioned makes it even more likely that a port will say "we're not touching that".

The "flag of convenience" situation .. well, it's a great way of evading legal responsibility, but it's also a very old one. That's going to persist for some time to come.

testing22321 · 7 hours ago
> As staff who are presumably looking to eventually get another job in shipping, they have to follow the rules even if it's not clear what they are or the owner isn't following them.

Interesting setup that the lowly crew have to follow the rules to stay in shipping but the owner doesn’t.

Usual story of the little guy getting screwed.

Much like hiring undocumented people for work, the rules need to be changed so the owners get immense fines in these situations.

thenthenthen · 5 hours ago
There was an artist in residency on a cargo ship that sounded really, interesting. It became even more interesting after the parent company went bankrupt: https://www.vice.com/en/article/how-one-artist-ended-up-stra...
mschuster91 · 20 hours ago
> so these ships are abandoned by the companies that own them, with the crew still on board? and then the crew is just stuck there with dwindling food supplies until somebody comes to rescue them?

Yes, basically. The situation is really really nasty, every year thousands of sailors are stuck aboard abandoned ships [1][2]. Sometimes, crews get stuck for years [3] - and the situation is made worse by the fact that leaving ship means forfeiting payment.

[1] https://www.voanews.com/a/fleet-of-abandoned-ships-is-growin...

[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3r4nr2zy2do

[3] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56842506

PearlRiver · 18 hours ago
I remember with COVID a lot of sailors got stuck and nobody felt responsibility to do anything for them.
thrance · 19 hours ago
Thanks, that was very interesting. Another reminder of how fucked up our world is.
3eb7988a1663 · 18 hours ago
Is there such a thing as mid-ocean fuel transfer? I can imagine some intrepid individuals strike up a bargain to siphon the fuel off of the abandoned ship onto one with the appropriate paperwork.
closewith · 18 hours ago
Yes, although it's expensive so eats up a lot of margin. It's one aof the common ways sanctioned oil is whitewashed.
shmerl · 17 hours ago
Probably fear. Putin's nazi mafia could dispose of the crew or target their families if they do that.
SanjayMehta · 17 hours ago
Or Trump's pirate navy could call them drug dealers and blow them out of the water.
Ms-J · 16 hours ago
If the crew is mistreated they should sell the boat and all of the contents, including the oil.

Yes, many countries don't have the capacity to refine a large amount, but there are many simple techniques such as even heating the oil that any country can do.

There are always buyers up the chain and in neighboring countries that will buy it. Even arrangements from buyers across the world.

People ignore sanctions all the time. It's part of a free world and free trade. Similar to the legacy laws on the books that everyone and their mother ignores. It is much easier to simply go on with your life and when everyone ignores the law, it gets removed. Politicians don't want to be seen as weaker than they already are so they remove the law very quickly.

Panzerschrek · 16 hours ago
You can't just sell a whole tanker of oil without proving it's yours. Nobody (or almost nobody) want to risk doing such purchase.
randycupertino · 16 hours ago
When my dad passed away somewhere along the years of various moves and owners of the boat my mom or my uncle of my brother in law had lost the title to the boat and it was such a huge family debacle for YEARS because no one could prove who the owner was and they had to go through the estate to contact each owner of the boat through all the years since it was made every single person who ever had possession of the boat before it could be given away or sold to make sure it was not stolen it was the biggest headache for my mom and sisters and I to deal with. Also the hull, trailer and motor all had separate titles.

Now whenever I see an abandoned boat somewhere I'm like... they must have illegally dumped it because they lost the title and couldn't handle the administrative burden!!

Ms-J · 16 hours ago
There is always buyers or ways to utilize the cargo. There are many countries that would happily take in the oil for a sizeable discount.

Groups also when the host country wants a layer of deniability.

ggm · 21 hours ago
This problem is one of the reasons Maritime unions worldwide have been significant and strong players in national labour relations.
burkaman · 21 hours ago
This kind of thing seems to be pretty core to the oil industry business model. In the US when they don't want to deal with an oil well anymore they have whatever fake shell company owns it declare bankruptcy and then they don't have to deal with cleaning it up (https://www.propublica.org/article/oil-orphan-wells-cleanup-...).
Spooky23 · 20 hours ago
This is a feature of all resource extraction industry. I live in New York - we have 100+ year old oil related hazards in western NY to this day. My folks had a gravel mine near their home that would occasionally cause issues relating to flooding and some sort of contamination that was there.

IMO, these industries need to be heavily taxed if not owned by the government.

samplatt · 19 hours ago
Western Australian here confirming all resource extraction does this. Woodside and Adani are the most egregious that come to mind but they all do it.
Sabinus · 14 hours ago
>IMO, these industries need to be heavily taxed if not owned by the government.

The problem with this is that it adds cost to the commodity and now you can't properly compete on a world stage against extraction that comes from other jurisdictions that are paid enough to not care. The world free trade regime really needs a rethink if we are going to have proper standards for extraction like this. Say, a trading bloc of ethical commerce. If countries don't play ball then they're out, and unannounced compliance inspections should occur all over the trading bloc ran by an independent member-state multinational institution.

kmeisthax · 19 hours ago
What stops the government from doing the same thing as private industry?

My (insane) personal opinion is that resource extraction is inherently politically corrosive and we should start seriously thinking of a plan to sunset it. Resource wealth is inherently feudalist, the incentives it offers run contrary to any sane economic system, and any resource wealth that is extracted distorts the market.

mschuster91 · 20 hours ago
> IMO, these industries need to be heavily taxed if not owned by the government.

... or for every building and infrastructure, a bond needs to be placed with the government to be a safeguard for its demolition cost, and for projects that risk environmental damage (mining, oil drills), proof of insurance needs to be provided before the construction begins, and should that insurance ever lapse, the entire property gets seized by the government.

hshdhdhj4444 · 19 hours ago
Yeah, coal companies got out of a bunch of medical expenses they owed miners in the U.S. by bankrupting their subsidies.
culi · 19 hours ago
For some industries it seems crazy not to nationalize
hshdhdhj4444 · 19 hours ago
An easier solution would be to simply require companies to pay a bond for the cost of closing down operations before they’re allowed to start extracting resources.
PearlRiver · 18 hours ago
My own country was perfectly fine sacrificing a region for monetary gain. In fact most countries have nationalized their oil and gas fields.
forgetfreeman · 19 hours ago
given perverse incentives derive directly from profit motive it seems crazy not to nationalize just about everything.
delichon · 19 hours ago
There is a silver lining to this particular catastrophe. A large fraction of the abandoned tankers are a result of sanctions on Russia. It means they're working. Ukraine cares very much about these ships, having damaged a dozen tankers with their "kinetic sanctions" in the past year. They care because the oil is both a war material and a major source of Russian revenue. More abandoned tankers means a weaker Russia.
user205738 · 14 hours ago
And what is the positive effect here? This gives rise to escalation, harms the environment, and doesn't really help end the war.
gorgonical · 13 hours ago
At the risk of sounding pedantic, you're (I think, implicitly) claiming that reducing Russian oil revenues doesn't impact their war capabilities. Why would that be the case?

Dead Comment

BLKNSLVR · 21 hours ago
This is another one of those things that, having put no thought into it as something that has sat in the background of life since childhood, I had figured was better organised/protected against malicious, negligent and/or fraudulent behaviour.

The world is far more of a chaotic jungle than the facade makes it appear. There is yet much opportunity for mischief for those who dare and have the resources and lack of moral compass.

rramadass · 18 hours ago
Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined. -- Albert Camus

The ease/comfort of our so-called "Modern Civilization" is built on illusions constructed intentionally by people-in-power/govts-in-collusion. People are kept distracted and managed using techniques of propaganda and reflexive control.

The developed/richer countries take advantage of the developing/poorer countries by offshoring dangerous/poisonous/etc. industries/work onto them while mouthing platitudes and absolving themselves of all responsibilities.

If you start asking questions (and educate yourself) on how-a-thing-comes-to-be from first principles, what happens to it after its end-of-life, the effects on the people involved in the entire chain (from birth to death) you will rise up in arms to tear the system down and rebuild it all.

Here for example is a shocking article on waste tyres from around the world being sent to India to be disposed off and how the entire process literally poisons poor people forced to do that job; The Black Wind: How India is becoming the World's Waste Tyre Furnace - https://www.reporters-collective.in/trc/india-is-becoming-wo...

Traubenfuchs · 15 hours ago
Anyone wants to start an insurance startup for bringing stranded people home / to wherever they want with me?

(any human trafficking is purely conincidental and not supported by us)