Shipbreaking

Post by samatman » Tue, May 21, 2024, 2:58 PM UTC

causal wrote: post #96

jabl wrote: post #87

A few comments here mentioned that old ships being broken up have a lot of asbestos. I would have assumed this would have been an issue on very old ships, but some cursory web searching suggests that it's still prevalent even in relatively new ships. IMO rules ( https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/Asbestos.aspx ) say roughly that: - Ships built before 2002 may contain asbestos, but it should be "managed prope…

Maritime regulation is hard when it operates in the space between states. Asbestos in particular is such a temptation in manufacturing because it's just so useful and cheap. An argument can probably be made that handled properly it saves more lives than it harms just because it's such a good fire resistant insulator.

Post by javajosh » Tue, May 21, 2024, 3:27 PM UTC

aloe_falsa wrote: post #40

Paolo Bacigalupi’s novel “Ship Breaker” deserves a mention here. It’s set in Paolo’s dystopian solarpunk universe, where old tankers are cut up to extract the last tons of fossil fuels from their hold, and it really emphasises how dangerous and unrewarding of a job it is.

Post by macintux » Tue, May 21, 2024, 3:30 PM UTC

samatman wrote: post #101

causal wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maritime regulation is hard when it operates in the space between states. Asbestos in particular is such a temptation in manufacturing because it's just so useful and cheap. An argument can probably be made that handled properly it saves more lives than it harms just because it's such a good fire resistant insulator.

This might be true in fact, if asbestos use is limited to applications where it's the obvious best choice. But it's uncomfortable to run a simple utilitarian calculus when, as in this case, the groups it benefits (sailors) and those it harms (shipbreakers) are disjoint. Leads one to want to find a solution which is more straightforwardly positive-sum.

Post by scarby2 » Tue, May 21, 2024, 3:33 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #99

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that might put the EU at an economic disadvantage; it's hubris to believe the rest of the world will bend backwards to meet EU's rules. I mean they do, see cookie banners/GDPR, Apple, etc, but still. I'm of the unsubstantiated opinion that all the laws make the EU a less desireable market. But that's a policy based on morals instead of economics / relentless capitalism.

> But that might put the EU at an economic disadvantage; it's hubris to believe the rest of the world will bend backwards to meet EU's rules. Actually, it will. RoHS and the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up influencing the whole world and making it a better place for everyone. The EU is a sizable market, and unlike the US with its constant elections and government shutdowns, it's politically relativel…

Post by withinboredom » Tue, May 21, 2024, 3:37 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #41

throw383y8 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, West should stop dumping their garbage to the rest of the world. It is easy to have strict environmental regulations, if they are not enforced, and negative externalities are exported.

> Well, West should stop dumping their garbage to the rest of the world. Actually the export of ships to be wrecked in Asia already is banned under EU law and international treaties - and sometimes, even company owners can and do land in jail for violating them, as it happened to Georg Eide [1]. The difficulty lies in the fact that many ships aren't registered in the EU countries, but in small countries like Antigua…