The Nautical Institute Seminar on Cargo liquefaction- Hazards and ...
Transcript of The Nautical Institute Seminar on Cargo liquefaction- Hazards and ...
The Nautical Institute Seminar
on
Cargo liquefaction- Hazards and
developments
London, December 3rd, 2012
Moin Ahmed, FNI
Issues to address
• What can liquefaction can do to a ship?
• Which cargoes are prone, from where?
• What can the Master do to minimise the risk?
• Can the ship safety verify a cargo is safe?
• What’s in the pipeline for IMSBC Code ?
• What is IMO doing about it?
Background
• Bulk carriers - the second largest part of the
world merchant fleet;
• cargoes carried by them does present a number of
risks that must be managed;
• one of the risks is cargo liquefaction;
• liquid-like behaviour of cargo can lead to the ship
listing and ultimately capsizing.
IMSBC Definitions
Cargoes which may liquefy means cargoes which contain a certain proportion of fine
particles and a certain amount of moisture. They may liquefy if shipped with a moisture
content in excess of their transportable moisture limit (TML).
Source: IMSBC Code 2012 Edition, IMO, Section 1, General Provisions 1.7.5.
Transportable moisture limit (TML) of a cargo which may liquefy means the maximum
moisture content of the cargo which is considered safe for carriage in ships not
complying with the special provisions of subsection 7.3.2 of the Code.
Source: IMSBC Code 2012 Edition, IMO, General Provisions 1.7.27.
IMSBC Code classifies bulk cargoes into 3 groups:
Group A consists of cargoes which may liquefy if shipped at a moisture content in
excess of their transportable moisture limit;
Group B consists of cargoes which possess a chemical hazard which could give
rise to a dangerous situation on a ship;
Group C consists of cargoes which are neither liable to liquefy (Group A) nor
possess a chemical hazard (Group B).
Source: IMSBC Code 2012 Edition, IMO, General Provisions 1.7.12 to 1.7.14.
Seaborne traded iron ore products
and the IMSBC Code
The IMSBC Code addresses iron ore products in Appendix 4, as below
Source: IMSBC Code 2012 Edition, IMO, Appendix 4, compiled.
Inherent hazards
Liquefaction process
Saturated materials Water pressure on particles causing them to be separated
Inherent hazards
Moisture migration and resulting liquefaction
Moisture and fine migration Cargo hold with ore giving off water
Operational hazards
Reported operational problems included:
• cargoes being mis-described to avoid application
of the Code provisions;
• certificates and declarations not being provided;
• inaccurate moisture content and TML certificate,
resulting in unsafe cargo being presented for
shipment;
Operational hazards
• commercial pressure on masters not to delay
shipment and to carry cargoes without the
provision of accurate certificates;
• restrictive clauses in the contract of carriage
(charterparties);
Operational hazards
• difficulties linking certification to a stockpile or
the source of cargo;
• only one certificate being provided when there is
more than one distinct source of cargo;
• moisture content certification being too old
(greater than 7 days).
Measures to improve safety
• Amendments to the IMSBC Code with a view to
categorizing both cargoes;
• Development at DSC 16 in September 2011-
agreement to the draft amendments on general
requirements to the Code and adding more
stringent measures;
Measures to improve safety
Development at DSC 17 in September this year:
1. competent authority to operate independently from the
shipper;
2. Shipper to provide certificate to ship, issued by an
entity recognised by the Competent Authority of the
port of loading;
3. procedures for sampling, testing and controlling
moisture content be established by shipper, with
competent authority‟s approval and their
implementation checked by that authority at the port of
loading.
Iron ore fines
• DSC 17 decided not to finalise a draft schedule
for iron ore fines this year.
• The Sub-Committee intends to finalise the draft
schedule at DSC 18 in September 2013, for
incorporation in the amendments 03-15 of the
IMSBC Code.
Nickel ore
• Nickel ore transportation - currently conducted
under the general provisions for cargoes that may
liquefy in sections 7 and 8 of the Code.
• DSC 17 agreed to develop a new schedule
indicating the specific characteristics of this ore.
Raising awareness
• DSC.1/Circ.63 in 2010, requesting that extreme
care be taken when handling and carrying iron
ore fines in bulk;
• DSC.1/Circ. 66 in 2011 was issued revising
DSC.1/Circ.63 ; and
• DSC.1/Circ. 66/Rev.1 in 2012 was issued further
revising DSC.1/Circ. 66.
Early implementation
• Amendments (02-13) to the IMSBC Code
containing provisions on measures on cargo
liquefaction will not enter into force until 1
January 2015;
• Therefore, development of an MSC circular for
early implementation of the amendments is in the
process.
Tests for Transportable Moisture Limit (TML)
The IMSBC Code suggests three tests available to determine TML:
Flow Table test:
Scope: IMSBC Code recommends this methodology for “mineral concentrates … with a
maximum grain size of 1 mm” recognizing that it “may be applicable for … grain size up
to 7 mm”, but “will not be suitable for materials coarser than this”.
Penetration test:
Scope: IMSBC Code recommends this methodology for “mineral concentrates and
similar materials up to 25 mm …”.
Proctor / Fagerberg test:
Scope: IMSBC Code recommends this methodology for “ore concentrates or similar
materials up to a top-size of 5 mm” recognizing that for application “to coarser materials
with a top-size greater than 5 mm … an extensive investigation for adoption and
improvement is required.”
Sampling, testing and certification
• The Sub-Committee agreed on the amendments
to the provisions of the Code for sampling of
stockpiles prior to loading on vessels.
• It has also agreed to the draft Guidelines for
developing and approving procedures for
sampling, testing and controlling the moisture
content of solid bulk cargoes that may liquefy,
subject to approval by MSC in June 2013.
Outstanding issues
Outstanding issues to address prior to the next
session:
• consider the adequacy of current methods for
determining transportable moisture limit (TML)
for iron ore fines and consider new and/or
amended existing methods to be included in
appendix 2 of the IMSBC Code, to be completed
by the end of May 2013;
Outstanding issues
• consider the evaluated and verified research into
iron ore fines – to be completed by the end of
May 2013;
• prepare draft individual schedule(s) for iron ore
fines and any required amendments to appendix 2,
taking into account the items above, and review
the existing iron ore schedule as necessary.
Capacity-building initiatives
In addition to developing international standards, the
IMO is keen to assist its Member States in
developing capacity to implement these standards
through its Integrated Technical Cooperation
Programme.
Non-governmental organizations’ role
• Non-governmental organizations having
consultative status with IMO viz. BIMCO, IACS,
ICHCA International, ICS, Int. Group of P&I
Club, Intercargo, ITF, have been playing active
role and contributing to these developments
process.
Non-governmental organizations’ role
• In addition, their role in motivating the ship
operators deserves particular mention, such as
issuing of circulars by P&I clubs, and the
“Intercargo Guide for the Safe Loading of Nickel
Ore”.
Industry’s Technical Working Group (TWG)
• Brazil and Australia collaborative working - major mining
companies in conjunction with National Authorities
• Formation of Technical Working Group (TWG) on Iron Ore Fines
TML and cargo stability
• Focus on agreeing on a new testing methodology for adoption at
DSC 18
• Share findings with independent peer reviewers – process
managed by International Group of P&I’s
• Involvement of key shipping industry NGO’s (ICS, Intercargo and
BIMCO).
Seaborne traded iron ore products
and the IMSBC Code (cont.)
IRON CONCENTRATE
IRON CONCENTRATE (pellet feed)
IRON CONCENTRATE (sinter feed)
Group
A
Iron ore products are also addressed in
Appendix 1 in the individual „mineral
concentrates‟ schedule.
Tests for Transportable Moisture Limit (TML)
Each of the currently available methods has inherent limitations when
applied to iron ore products (see examples below):
Flow Table
(example)
Penetration
(example)
Proctor /
Fagerberg
(example)
1.1.1 - The Flow Table is generally
suitable for mineral concentrates or
other fine material with a maximum
grain size of 1 mm
More than 70% of seaborne
traded Brazilian iron ores have
top size greater than 7 mm
1.2.3.2.2 - When the depth of
penetration is greater than 50
mm, it is judged that liquefaction
took place
There is no theoretical or
experimental information
to justify the value adopted
for this figure
1.3.1 - Test method for both
fine and relatively coarse-
grained ore concentrates or
similar materials up to a top
size of 5 mm
More than 70% of seaborne
traded Brazilian iron ores have
top size greater than 7 mm