brand logo

As the Pearl burnt in the Indian Ocean

04 Jun 2021

By Dulki Seethawaka   Recently, there were many complicated situations that occurred in Sri Lanka, especially relating to the ultra-rapid spread of Covid-19 and cyclone “Yaas” creating havoc inland. If one may wonder whether the situation can get any worse than this, it just did, with a ship containing tonnes of chemicals burning in our waters. Leaving aside hundreds of questions that are pertinent, such as who authorised the Pearl to enter into Sri Lankan waters and the Colombo Port, why would the authorities allow it in our waters when reportedly two other ports had already refused, who is responsible to pay for the damages, and how much damages can we claim, the most important question is, can this compensation help us to recover the destruction that is caused to the marine ecosystem? Whether we would receive answers to any of these questions, is an answer we already know.    A bit of background about what happened  The vessel MV X-Press Pearl was sailing under the flag of Singapore when the unfortunate incident took place. According to the website named VesselFinder, the container ship left Port Jebel Ali of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on 10 May, Port Hamad of Qatar on 11 May, and Port Hazira of India on 15 May before entering Sri Lankan waters on 19 May. According to the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) officials, they were informed of the acid leakage on 20 May, while the ship was waiting for approval to enter the Port at an anchorage about 9.5 nautical miles. This was soon followed by a fire, and on 25 May, a massive explosion erupted in the vessel. Even though the emergency operations had controlled the fire, on 2 June, The Morning reported that the ship had started sinking. At the time of writing, no official statements were released on what the ship contained, but The Morning stated on 26 May that there were 1,486 containers on board, which included harmful chemicals and cosmetics among other goods.    The harm caused to the environment  The Morning also reported that the initial plan of the Sri Lankan authorities was to tow away the Pearl at least 50 nautical miles into the deep seas, to minimise the environmental harm that may occur. However, the ship could not be towed until the fire was brought under control, which was impossible due to several reasons including the highly inflammable chemicals that were on board and the adverse weather conditions of cyclone “Yaas”. The sea was extra rough and the heavy winds just kept the blaze up, making it difficult to extinguish the fire despite the joint efforts of the Sri Lankan Navy and Indian Coast Guard. The fear of explosions prevented the firefighters from entering the ship. Therefore, the mission had to be carried out by dropping chemicals from the air and using water jets from other vessels to balance the temperature of the ship and containers.  The tremendous harm caused to the environment by this unfortunate incident can be discussed in detail under three different sections.    1) Toxic flames from the burning of the ship  The burning of destructive chemicals released many harmful fumes and acid particles into the atmosphere, causing major air pollution. Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA) Chairperson Dharshani Lahandapura told The Morning that there is a risk of “acid rain” developing in the skies above Sri Lanka. She further explained that when nitrogen oxide gas is emitted into the air, it will mix with water particles in the upper atmosphere to produce nitric acid, which is known as acid rain. Acid rain can be harmful to both nature and man-made structures. There is also the possibility where the smoke carried through air currents may enter the Sri Lankan atmosphere. If people inhale this toxic air, it can cause breathing difficulties.    2) Oils and other chemicals that were released to the ocean It was reported that the ship also contained 300 tonnes of bunker oil, which was supposed to be used as fuel. Bunker oil is considered a “heavy oil”, which remains as a thick black liquid until it withers. If bunker oil is spilled in the sea and/or land and not removed using proper methods, they can persist in the environment for months to years (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NOAA Office of Response and Restoration/OR&R, 4 May). Even though heavy oils are considered as less toxic compared to light oils such as gasoline, they can still be deadly to sea birds if these oils get onto the feathers of the birds, which would result in death by hypothermia. Since it is reported that the Pearl has started sinking, there is the dreadful possibility of an oil spill.  Such an oil spill, together with chemicals in this particular case, is lethal for the marine creatures due to its poisonous chemical constituents which can enter their bodies either through internal exposure such as ingestion and inhalation or through external exposure such as skin and eye irritation (NOAA OR&R, 4 May). The direct victims are fish, sea turtles, and sea birds. Furthermore, there is the risk of these chemicals destroying the eggs of marine species. Already, many marine creatures have been found dead in the nearby coastal areas, which means that the destruction has begun.  Also, sea water mixed with various chemicals can be harmful for the coral reefs and seagrass meadows. The coral reefs are considered the most sensitive ecosystems, which can easily get affected by chemical reactions. These spills can also damage the coastal ecosystem. It was reported in The Morning that the shoreline from Wattala to Negombo is heavily polluted. The MEPA predicts that, in this situation, it is most likely that the spill would move towards the Negombo Lagoon. If that happens, it would not only destroy the mangroves, but also affect the lives of fishing communities.    3) The debris of the containers and the ship  Plastic pellets that were released from the containers are already draining the life out of many marine species including fish and sea turtles. There are two fatal possibilities that these animals may face, which is either that they eat these pellets or the pellets get trapped in their gills, causing them to suffocate. Millions of such tiny pellets are found not only in the water, but also on the beaches. Apart from these, burnt metal scraps, containers, and plastic and polythene waste were also found abundantly in the shorelines. Cleaning this waste will require a considerable amount of manpower and restoring the coastline to its original state will prove to be a tough challenge.  It was also reported that people living in the coastline have collected the wreckage that was washed ashore. Such offenders must be subjected to strict punishments for not adhering to the specific instructions and advise given throughout news telecasts and other media. It was stressed that the effects of the chemicals that were stored in the ship, could be either immediate or long term and that people must not touch these wastes. However, there are many incidents of people collecting toxic waste that are washed up ashore despite strict instructions.     Steps for the future: Immediate and long-term responses How we prepare ourselves to respond to such accidents can either be immediate responses which are essential to manage this urgent situation, or long-term responses which will be useful for the future.    Immediate response   1) Protection from acid rain As it was already stressed, there is a possibility of acid rain in the surrounding areas since the air currents can move the toxic particles from the coastal areas into the country. It is important that people refrain from being exposed to rains directly for some time and use any means to protect their valuable outdoor structures or even vehicles from rain.    2) Prevent further damages from an oil spill  Even though there are no oil spills yet, it was reported that the MEPA has already initiated the first steps of the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan (NOSCOP) in preparation of any potential harm. The NOSCOP applies to oil spills which can damage the coastal and marine environment. The responses are classified into three tiers according to the size of the spills and the proximity to a response centre. It was also informed that the Government is taking steps to set nets and other protective measures that would prevent oil from entering the Lagoon and freshwater resources in the surrounding areas.    3) Removing debris that was washed ashore The first step is taking necessary steps to remove the waste to prevent further destruction. This is a collective effort, for which the Government and private stakeholders can work together. The general public can also be requested to volunteer since the impact is vast. However, if the public is participating in such activities, they must be well informed as to how to contribute without exposing themselves to danger and they must be carefully monitored by officials who can respond to any emergencies.  This can be followed up by handing over the junk that’s collected from the shorelines to the police stations, as has been already advised. People must understand that they have not only risked their lives, but also the lives of their family members by collecting this toxic waste. Upon any symptoms of reactions, they must seek immediate medical assistance.    Long-term response   1) Rapid response mechanism The value of this step is to find the means to mitigate the risks of similar incidents. Since Sri Lanka is located in a busy international shipping route, it is compulsory to have a rapid response mechanism to respond to such situations. This mechanism should include steps from extinguishing fires in vessels to removing oil spills within a timeframe. When a proper rapid response mechanism has been introduced, it is important to have drill exercises to ensure that the relevant actions are taken at the required phase. For instance, after the tsunami in 2004, there are drills that take place to ensure that people know how to react in actual events.   2) Bacteria that feed on oil spill The MEPA has specified about three kinds of oil-consuming natural bacteria. They are sulphate-reducing bacteria (SRB) and acid-producing bacteria which are anaerobic, while general aerobic bacteria (GAB) are aerobic. Many countries are carrying out research into this subject since this can be considered as the eco-friendliest method of removing an oil spill. Authorities should promote these ideas and support such research within the Sri Lankan education system.    3) Rebuilding marine and coastal ecosystems This important response is going to take several years from conducting research, evaluating what was destroyed, replanting corals and seagrass beds, reintroducing marine species to that system, restoring coastal and estuarine habitats, monitoring, and taking further steps to protect the marine ecosystem that was built. Therefore, it is a gradual process which will require plenty of resources and time.  Furthermore, it is necessary to train youths to have expertise in aquatic risk assessment techniques, contaminated sediment issues, and data interpretation. How our country responds to such emergency situations is considerably different from the reactions of other countries – they have proper plans, training mechanisms, and advanced equipment. Trainees in Sri Lanka must attend such workshops with international organisations for further experience and exposure.   4) Public awareness and active participation of general public This incident is a great example of how citizens respect and follow the laws in our country. Despite several warnings that the waste and the sea water could be contaminated with chemicals that are harmful, people living in coastal areas were seen collecting the debris. It is necessary to implement stringent laws to ensure that such irresponsible actions will not be repeated in a similar occurrence. Necessary steps must be taken to ensure that the citizens are aware of these laws and the outcome of breaching them.  People can be encouraged to help the authorities in addressing such emergencies. For instance, in most of the spills in the US, emergency bird and/or mammal rehabilitation centres are set up to care for the oiled animals (NOAA OR&R, 4 May). This is an initiative that can be introduced to Sri Lanka which would be helpful in the long term. It is advised that untrained people should not try to capture or tend to any oiled bird/mammal. Schoolchildren can be trained with volunteers to rescue and care for such animals which in turn would help to develop compassionate feelings towards animals in their mindsets.    5) Debris that is not harmful to the marine ecosystems This is not a step that must be taken as a country, but rather in the international context. The MV X-Press Pearl is not the first ship that caught fire and was destroyed and it is not going to be the last. Among thousands of ships that sail our oceans every day, there will always be the threat of a ship being destroyed and sinking. If the threat is so obvious, why are the packaging companies permitted to use such harmful plastic pellets? There must be some alternatives, which will not destroy the marine life and environment if they are exposed to destruction.  Research must be carried out to find such substitutes. Apart from that, laws must be implemented in the global context which will make the shipping companies liable for using harmful or unprotected ways of packaging. Also, if harmful acids and chemicals are shipped from one country to another, there must be special rules and regulations that the shipping companies must adhere to in order prevent any accidents.     The question remains as to whether this destruction could have been stopped from happening. If relevant steps were taken at the correct time, there could have been an opportunity. But, now that it has happened, who is at fault? Is it the owners of the ship, the staff who did not properly load the containers, the crew of the vessel, the ports authorities, those who tried to extinguish the fire, or is it those who can claim the damages? At the moment, the focus is on making new policies to claim higher damages which is similar to waiting for such accidents to occur and then preparing to take the maximum use out of it. Such actions cannot be justified because no matter how much money we may receive, it is not going to reverse the damage that has been caused to ecosystems. What is required is that we prevent the worst from happening and at least make our best efforts to minimise the damage to the environment. Therefore, who authorised the Pearl to enter our waters does not matter, since the fire has destroyed the ship and caused irreversible damage to the marine and coastal ecosystems of our country. This is the same ecosystem that we are pledging to protect for our future generations. Can we proudly claim that we are doing our best to fulfil our promises?    (The writer is an Attorney-at-Law and environmental researcher)


More News..