Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Japanese tanker spills more than 4,300 tonnes of crude oil
Canada.com ^ | 15 Aug 06 | Chisaki Watanabe, Canadian Press

Posted on 08/16/2006 7:51:02 AM PDT by GATOR NAVY

TOKYO -- A Japanese tanker spilled about 4,365 tonnes of crude oil in the eastern Indian Ocean near the Nicobar islands following a collision with a cargo ship, the tanker's operator announced Tuesday.

The spill is believed to be the largest involving Japanese-operated tankers, according a ship owner Mitsui O.S.K. Lines.

The Bright Artemis tanker spilled the oil following a collision with the Amar, a smaller cargo ship, Mitsui O.S.K. said in a statement. It said the tanker had manoeuvred near the Amar, which was in distress about 500 kilometres west of the Nicobars. Both ships are registered in Singapore.

The exact amount of the spill was not clear, the announcement said. The tanker was carrying about 227,000 tonnes of crude. It had left port in Oman, bound for the Japanese port of Chiba, near Tokyo, Mitsui O.S.K. spokesman Hidenori Onuki said.

There was no risk of further leaks and the tanker left the accident scene. It is seeking a port for repairs before continuing on to Japan, Onuki said.

There were no reports of injuries aboard the tanker, which had a Croatian captain and a crew of 23. A fire had broken out aboard the Amar and its crew was rescued by the Bright Artemis and other ships nearby, the announcement said. The accident occurred early Monday, local time, on the open sea.

The environmental impact from the spill, which occurred hundreds of kilometres from the nearest land, is believed to be limited.

The remote Nicobar islands are located off the east coast of India.

Mitsui said the spill had been reported to Singaporean and Indian Coast Guard officials. No further details were immediately available. © The Canadian Press 2006


TOPICS: Japan; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; environment; india; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: highbottom

"Measurement" ton of 100 cubic feet is the unit used in recording the volume of enclosed space in a vessel. It has no relation to the ton weight. (Freighters)

long ton =2240 lbs
metric ton (tonne) =2204.6226218 lbs


confused? there's more
Gross registered ton (volume)
Net registered ton (volume)
Deadweight capacity (weight) (all those trains with capa city on them are not all going to the same town)
Displacement tonnage (weight)


21 posted on 08/16/2006 9:47:08 AM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: highbottom

It is when it is given in "tons" (100 cubic feet). In this case, however, it is given in "tonnes" which specifically refers to metric tons.


22 posted on 08/16/2006 9:53:17 AM PDT by Junior (Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: HEY4QDEMS; highbottom
You are both correct, sort of.

A ship's displacement, or tonnage, is defined as the weight of the water the underwater portion displaces. This weight is equal to the weight of the ship plus the cargo.

The volume of the underwater portion of the hull, in cubic feet, is equal to the gross weight in pounds divided by 64. A cubic foot of seawater weighs 64 pounds.

The volume of the enclosed portion of the hull above the waterline, in cubic feet, times 64 is the reserve displacement.

Hope this helps.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

23 posted on 08/16/2006 10:01:42 AM PDT by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HEY4QDEMS

If you like larger numbers for whatever dumb reasons, why don't you convert them to quarts and even pints! Tons suits me just fine, and I can make a better representation of the size of the ship.


24 posted on 08/16/2006 10:03:02 AM PDT by Tangaray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tangaray
If you like larger numbers for whatever dumb reasons, why don't you convert them to quarts and even pints!

I have lots of dumb reasons for allot of things.

Tons suits me just fine, and I can make a better representation of the size of the ship.

If the size of the ship is important to you for whatever dumb reasons, that's OK with me.
As for me I'm more concerned with the amount of oil that went into the ocean environment and how much damage it caused. The size of the ship is totally irrelevant to me, or to this story for that matter
25 posted on 08/16/2006 10:27:22 AM PDT by HEY4QDEMS (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Tangaray
BTW, would you be so kind as explain how knowing that 4365 tonnes of crude oil being spilled can in any way represent the size of the ship that spilled it.

Yesterday I dropped a quarter. Do tell, how big is my pocket??
26 posted on 08/16/2006 10:31:48 AM PDT by HEY4QDEMS (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: joan

Don't recall, but it sounds about right.

But if these guys were drunk, the natives probably saw them coming before they even woke up. By the time that they did come to, they were likely the ones being "nailed to trees" by the natives!


27 posted on 08/16/2006 12:07:03 PM PDT by Bokababe ( http://www.savekosovo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: HEY4QDEMS

Knowing the size and tonnage of the ship can tell me how much more oil could conceivably be spilled, if their emergency measures don't work. You gotta look at the whole picture.


28 posted on 08/16/2006 8:28:13 PM PDT by Tangaray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Tangaray; HEY4QDEMS

Who cares how much oil could be spilled? There were human lives at risk, which is why there was a spill in the first place. The Croat Captain was in an a real bind: If he failed to render any and all assistance possible in the effort to preserve lives, he would have lost his license, and also had to live with the knowledge that he could have tried to save the other crew, and didn't.
In opposition to that, the new belief that the accidental spillage of oil is more important than human lives has prompted to make the accidental spillage of oil a criminal act, according to some nations. In which case the Captain could also lose his license.
Some dilemma!

BTB, the fact that a *Very* small portion of his cargo was lost, and that those losses were minimized through rapid action on the part of the crew... well, it speaks well of the captain.

How much oil in the water do you trade for one human life saved? Would that figure change if one of the sailors on the imperiled ship was your father?


29 posted on 08/17/2006 12:58:45 PM PDT by capt.P (Hold Fast! Strong Hand Uppermost!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Junior

It gets even more complicated: Gross registered tonnage refers only to income-producing area on a vessel. In other words, if you can't seal an income-producing area tight (if it had sliding doors, say, or panels that you could unbolt if you wanted to and make another exit from the space) it's not necessarily income-producing space, even if you fill it with cargo or passengers.


30 posted on 08/17/2006 1:05:02 PM PDT by capt.P (Hold Fast! Strong Hand Uppermost!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson