The nuclear icebreaker 50 Let Pobedy collided with a cargo ship in the Kara Sea at the end of January. Hervé Baudu, professor of nautical sciences at the École Nationale Supérieure Maritime and member of the French Académie de Marine, explains the incident to us on his return from the polar seminar co-organized by the Arctic Council and the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
The collision between the cargo ship Yamal Krechet and the Russian escort icebreaker 50 Let Pobedy in the Kara Sea on January 26 has caused quite a stir on the networks. What do you think?
Here, it’s a simple collision. There’s an impact at the bow and at the crane, probably due to an error on the part of the icebreaker, but in the end it’s just crumpled metal. Did it pass too close, was it to late to reverse? The impact on the Russian icebreaker must have been quite severe. You can see that the ice was broken in the freighter’s wake, which quickly closed up again. I think the freighter was being escorted and ended up being braked by too much pressure from the pack ice. I wonder if there weren’t several boats in the convoy, but the story doesn’t say. All we can see is that the freighter is immobilized.
To free the vessel, the escort either passes close by on a parallel course to break the ice and relieve the tension on the hull, or, if that’s not enough, turns around the immobilized vessel. When he turned up, his course was very convergent, either because he didn’t apply enough helm angle, or because the ice was too thick, or because he was surprised and couldn’t put the engines astern in time.
In the Baltic, such incidents are not uncommon. They are simply maneuvers that are the result of sailors’ know-how. They don’t necessarily lead to new regulations, but at best to nautical investigations by flag states. For the Arctic Council’s Working Group on Safety of Navigation and Protection of the Marine Environment in the Arctic (PAME), of which I am a member, this is a non-issue.
You have just returned from a seminar on polar navigation held on January 23 and 24 at IMO headquarters in London. Are there any new developments concerning safety at sea in polar areas?
Nothing really new. Just a few discussions about where to turn for accident data. Cruising was not particularly targeted. On the other hand, a working group is proposing a revision of the Polar Code to extend ice navigation training to certain operational and engine personnel.
What are the guidelines adopted by the IMO for polar zones?
The seminar took place ahead of the change of chairmanship of the Arctic Council. Next May, Norway will give way to Denmark. The time has therefore come to take stock of the projects carried out within the working groups, and to open up new ones. This has enabled some of them to be re-launched in plenary to raise awareness at IMO level. Just as the working group did last year with the introduction of measures to ban sulphur emissions and the use of heavy fuel oil.
It’s good to see that the IMO is in tune with the projects of the Arctic Council’s working groups, and relies on them to push issues forward. When the IMO is interested in the polar regions, it knows where to look, and PAME is a good breeding ground. Often, our working group is an earpiece for the IMO, and sometimes it’s the same people from PAME who represent their country at the IMO. There’s a symbiosis here, and it was good to see people live. There were over a hundred of us, representing a wide range of countries and institutions. The Koreans, Chinese and Russians also came.
You mentioned environmental projects. Are IMO and PAME opening new files?
The regulation of black carbon is not new, but it is interesting to note. It’s a bit of a recurring issue, but it’s gaining momentum. The Clean Arctic Alliance is pushing for the reduction of soot emissions in the Arctic. Could this be a sign of IMO’s desire to take a greater interest in the issue? It’s making slow progress, but we still need to be convinced of the scale of its impact on the pack ice.
Then there’s another subject that has a direct impact on local communities, namely the nuisance caused by radiated noise. A project is financed by the PAME working group. Several studies are being carried out to provide serious, credible measures on the impact of these nuisances on narwhal breeding grounds, for example, by targeting areas that will lead to concrete action. The creation of a corridor with speed reduction for ships transiting through it, for example.
The project is promising because it has a direct impact on the uses of local populations. It’s inspired by what’s already happening along the road leading to the Mary River iron ore mine. There is a passage near the small port of Pond Inlet, where the locals hunt narwhal, and traffic speed is limited to 10 knots.
Interview by Camille Lin, Polar Journal AG
Find out more about this topic: