Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:
Journal of Ocean Technology, 5, 4, pp. 1-12, 2010-10-01
READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE.
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright
Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la
première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.
Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at
PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.
NRC Publications Archive
Archives des publications du CNRC
This publication could be one of several versions: author’s original, accepted manuscript or the publisher’s version. / La version de cette publication peut être l’une des suivantes : la version prépublication de l’auteur, la version acceptée du manuscrit ou la version de l’éditeur.
Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at
Avoiding the next Titanic: Are we ready for a major maritime incident in
the Arctic?
Boileau, Renee; Mak, Lawrence; Lever, David
https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits
L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.
NRC Publications Record / Notice d'Archives des publications de CNRC:
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=a9e9b29f-918f-4918-8e70-c7768fd8ebc0 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=a9e9b29f-918f-4918-8e70-c7768fd8ebc0
Introduction
As the Earth has been mapped and travelled, the Arctic remains as one of the few
wilderness areas left to explore. Early polar explorers were considered heroes, and their exploits are legendary. The discovery of lost ships and expeditions continues to capture the imagination. Ordinary people long to experience that spirit of adventure.
For the purposes of this essay, we consider the ‘Arctic’ to be those regions of land and sea where average temperatures for the warmest month are below 10°C. Until recently, the Arctic was largely untravelled except by those few native peoples, the odd research vessel and Coast Guard or military patrols. Since the mid-1980s when the MS Lindblad Explorer launched tourism through the Northwest Passage, a flurry of northern adventure cruises has changed all that. This year, an estimated 1.5 million cruise ship passengers will have travelled on expeditions into the Arctic – a
sizeable number when compared to the total population of the Arctic, estimated at 4 million.
With this increase in popular activity comes the possibility of a major incident involving hundreds of lives. Ironically, after nearly four decades successfully cruising polar waters, the M/V Explorer was ultimately the first cruise ship to sink in the Antarctic Ocean in 2007. Fortunately, all 154 passengers and crew were rescued by another cruise ship. This year alone, three vessels (two tankers and a cruise ship) ran aground in Canadian Arctic waters. Attributed in the press to errors in navigation and out-dated charts, these incidents depended on fair weather and the eventual assistance of other vessels days away for their fortunate outcomes – no lives were lost. In spite of the expected delay in assistance, cruise ships do not, as a rule, travel in convoys.
What-if Scenario
Let’s say that you are dreaming of a cruise
EMMA J. STEWART, LINCOLN UNIVERSITY, NEW ZEALAND
through the Davis Strait to Iqaluit. You take reasonable precautions and book a berth on a reputable cruise ship; you shop for the recommended foul-weather gear and purchase travel health insurance. A few days into the cruise, you are zipping across ice-dotted water in an open inflatable boat on an excursion to see walruses. Your experienced expedition leader has checked over your clothing and given you a lifejacket. Looking back at the ship, you can see the life raft stations and
large deck boxes storing more lifejackets. You haven’t seen another ship since you pulled anchor in Eclipse Sound. You wonder – “If
the ship had to be abandoned, do I remember where the assembly station is from my cabin? How long will it be until a Coast Guard vessel or Canadian Forces helicopter could evacuate my fellow passengers and me? How long before I succumb to the cold?”
Besides the usual culprits of human error and equipment failure in marine accidents, there are hazards unique to the Arctic. With the receding ice sheets, ships are beginning to ply waterways that have never been charted for depth or whose charts are outdated or issued only as supplements. The break-up of ice creates a slalom course of smaller ‘bergy bits’ all but invisible to radar and the casual observer. Extreme and unusual weather conditions prevail over ships and crews accustomed to southern climes: sub-zero temperatures frost surfaces and affect machinery performance, powerful katabatic winds like the
Piteraq of eastern Greenland that sweep down
glaciers and steep valleys without warning – turning a mild sunny Arctic day into a shirt-ripping gale that can drive a boat off its course.
Navigation
This year Canada enacted Northern Canada Vessel Traffic Services (NORDREG) to keep track of who is using the Arctic, where they are travelling and how they are outfitted – all ships over 300 tonnes must report their travel plans before entering Canada’s northern waters. NORDREG (Figure 2) promotes safety by ensuring appropriate ship construction for expected ice conditions, by providing up-to-date ice information to prevent collisions and by monitoring ship locations for effective emergency response. Yet a major weakness is that modern navigation charts are available for less than 10% of Canadian Arctic waters, and many of the existing charts rely on observations and depth soundings made in the 19th century.
Besides navigation and weather risks particular to the Arctic, evacuation of a large group from this region is more challenging than in other, less-remote areas. In the event of an emergency, because of the vast distances, sparse traffic and lack of local infrastructure, assistance may still be days away. The philosophy of search and rescue in Canada is one of self-reliance:
TRANSPORT CANADA Figure 2: NORDREG zone map.
according to the 1992 Auditor General of Canada Report, “Although individuals are primarily responsible for their own safety, all levels of government, as well as members of the public, respond when people are in distress.” What level of responsibility is expected of cruise lines that operate beyond the limits of regional search-and-rescue (SAR) resources?
Emergency response
Cruise ships can carry hundreds or even thousands of passengers. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the Canadian Forces anticipate it may take up to five days to evacuate a “large group” (defined as over 24 people, the maximum capacity of a Cormorant helicopter airlift). Five days is optimistic, as the allocation of the Cormorants to Trenton Joint Rescue Coordination Centre, responsible for a large section of the North, is delayed until 2014, limiting their direct response to the Griffon, which can only carry 8-10 passengers or six stretchers. Evacuation would rely on multiple air- and sea-craft to ferry passengers to a major aircraft-landing site, which are few and far between above the 60th parallel. The
Canadian Forces may use major air disaster kits stored in Trenton, Ontario, to support survivors until they can be evacuated from a remote location. In total, the kits include warm clothing, tents and survival rations for 320 people. Equivalent supplies are cached among seven Arctic airfields; see Figure 3. Typical aircrew assembly and transit times to the Arctic are 12-24 hours, assuming fair weather and a suitable drop site for SAR technicians to jump with the kits.
Whether or not the accident site is accessible for airlifting supplies, the ship’s crew will have to support passengers with training that includes evacuating to life rafts and lifeboats, but this does not prepare passengers for surviving the elements in the time lag between evacuation and rescue.
Personal protection
Under the IMO International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), cruise ships must carry lifejackets for every soul on board, but only enough thermal protective aids (insulation) for 10% of the passenger and crew
capacity. How is this insulation rated and for how long will it keep you alive? The evacuation craft (which can be open lifeboats or even life rafts under current regulations) are packed with rations and “personal survival kits” to last a few days, but there is no requirement for tents, cook-stoves or heaters. You lose heat 25 times faster if you get wet, which is very likely if you are sitting on the floor of a life raft adrift in wind and waves, yet immersion suits are not required. At this time, Transport Canada is considering adopting SOLAS to replace Canadian regulations. While the Canadian regulations were tailored to meet the challenges of Canadian conditions, these generic international rules are by their nature a compromise. For example, current Canadian regulations for immersion suits set insulation values for northern water temperatures, while IMO is based on a warmer global average temperature.
Are we waiting for a disaster to trigger changes in regulations and habits? Lessons learned from the sinking of the Titanic and other disasters motivated the creation and strengthening of maritime regulations to protect human lives. But these rules were written to cover well-travelled shipping lanes and commercial air routes.
The Arctic is still wilderness and represents an unknown area for both the cruise line industry and responders alike. What unforeseeable challenges will a ship’s crew face with emergency equipment and response systems that have been developed to operate safely in, say, the Caribbean Sea? For example, responsible cruise lines that will typically arrange accommodation for stranded passengers in a nearby harbour will not find the capacity to house and care for hundreds of passengers in the meagre infrastructure and cached supplies of small northern communities. They will in fact be in competition for fuel and essential supplies with the responding SAR resources.
Many such questions are arising as the IMO and other regulatory bodies tackle changes to rules for operating in this new and inhospitable region. The IMO, Transport Canada and
classification societies that insure vessels all provide advice on safeguarding critical machinery and life-saving equipment, but they still take a prescriptive approach (versus the arguably more functional “performance” approach). Before codifying generic guidelines, some of these agencies are funding and
collaborating on scientific studies to answer questions that stretch the limits of human subject testing.
Collaboration and a System-of-Systems Approach
A ship is like a floating city – a complex infrastructure of navigation, power, evacuation and many other systems that must interact effectively with the crew and passengers and external systems (harbours and reporting agencies, local and national emergency responders). Because of this, the solutions for safe mass travel in the Arctic must take a
system-of-systems approach.
Many stakeholders, from cruise operators and local communities to international regulators and insurers, have vested interests in ensuring safe operations in this new environment. Collaboration between all stakeholders can ensure that different aspects of the problems are considered in developing solutions.
Some of the key needs for transporting passengers through the Arctic are:
• changes to the regulations governing training and equipment for the Arctic • developments in advanced thermal protection and other survival technologies
• understanding human physiology and survival psychology in long-duration cold exposure
• a change in philosophy for businesses who want to cross a hostile frontier
There are knowledge gaps that need to be filled before decisions are made. Scientists are researching the answers to specific questions, such as:
factors and cognitive psychology, search and rescue, emergency response and survival research in maritime and Arctic regions, computer modelling, laboratory experiments and field trials, industrial materials and engineering.
The team has access to major facilities through its collaborating organizations, including low-temperature environmental chambers, physiological, psychological and human factors test laboratories, thermal and floatation manikins for measuring heat flow, protective clothing prototyping facilities, and the National Research Council Institute for Ocean Technology’s Ice Tank and Thermal Measurements Lab.
MASSERT projects
Funded through Transport Canada and the National Search and Rescue Secretariat New Initiatives Fund, MASSERT is undertaking a number of projects that collectively impact Arctic marine safety by addressing important knowledge gaps that can help to advance relevant science; developing performance or risk-based criteria and objective methods for approval testing and evaluation to advance regulations and standards; and developing measurement and prediction tools to aid SAR planning and define Arctic performance criteria for protective equipment in extreme conditions when the use of human subjects is not
possible. The team uses an integrated system-based approach to make recommendations to the industry for development of advanced protective clothing and emergency equipment.
To date, MASSERT has investigated life-saving equipment and human physiology and
psychology in several multi-year projects. This work is summarized in the following paragraphs.
Thermal protection in life rafts
In a study on life rafts in cold environments, the goals were (i) to develop thermal protection criteria for unprotected occupants in inflatable life rafts; (ii) to propose an objective
methodology for testing inflatable life raft thermal protection performance; and (iii) to develop tools for SAR planners to predict • On a cruise ship with a typical population
of inexperienced, elderly or physically handicapped passengers, how long will it take to assemble everyone, don lifejackets or immersion suits and evacuate to boats or rafts?
• How much insulation do passengers representing a wide range of age, fitness and health conditions need to survive for days in typical Arctic conditions?
• How much heat can shivering produce, and how much food is required to maintain shivering for five days?
• How will lifeboat or life raft occupants control ventilation to maintain a breathable atmosphere without losing too much heat?
But data simulating realistic scenarios are scarce and good science must be crafted to systematically answer the questions above, while adhering to strict human ethics. The need for combining physiological and environmental data with engineering design adds to the complexity of the problem. Collaboration between different disciplines and stakeholders is essential. One model for collaboration is a research group that is working on some of the questions impacting Arctic travel.
Overview of MASSERT
MASSERT is the “Maritime and Arctic Survival Scientific and Engineering Research Team,” a unique multi-disciplinary group of international specialists drawn from academia, industry and government agencies. MASSERT performs research necessary to enhance safety, operational performance and survival for people working and travelling in the Arctic, contributing to Canada’s ability to meet future challenges and advancing knowledge in the international community.
The team members have vested interests in improving survival technologies and in making legislation reasonable and feasible. They have expertise in complex adaptive systems, system-of-systems integration, human thermal and work physiology, human protection, human
survival times of life raft occupants in cold environments; see Figure 4.
Key findings of this work were provided as guidance to training authorities and manufacturers. Most notably, the research highlighted the need for a thermal protective aid or abandonment garment for every evacuee, especially when the evacuee might get wet.
The study also found that a life raft floor insulated with closed cell foam and an inflatable life raft floor when inflated retain a significant amount of heat. Practical trials with fans showed that a covered life raft, although naturally ventilated in windy conditions, accumulates carbon dioxide in still air with the flaps closed. So a strategy for using active and passive ventilation is critical to control carbon dioxide build-up while maintaining a habitable temperature.
The data from this study were used to develop a life raft occupant heat loss model in the Cold Exposure Survival Model used by Canadian SAR agencies to predict survival in Arctic rescue scenarios.
Thermal protection in lifeboats
Following the life raft study, experiments were undertaken with a SOLAS-approved lifeboat to assess the thermal protection and ventilation rate in a simulated Arctic environment and to establish realistic criteria for lifeboat thermal protection and ventilation performance.
While offering a more durable shelter than a life raft, it is clear from the findings of this study that lifeboat vents are not adequate to provide the minimum ventilation rate for maintaining a safe atmosphere in a fully occupied boat, even in windy conditions.
Figure 4: Volunteer test subjects in life raft.
Counter-intuitively, not just hypothermia, but
heat stress and carbon dioxide poisoning may
affect occupants depending on the weather and sea state, the number of lifeboat occupants and individual metabolic rates and levels of clothing. This study emphasized the need for a compromise that balances ventilation rates to maintain a breathable atmosphere with thermal protection to ensure the ability to carry out survival tasks.
Evacuation craft alone cannot provide enough protection – ultimately survival depends on the properties of the entire survival system, including clothing and emergency wear. Although personal thermal protection and immersion suits are not required for every passenger, the importance of staying dry and maintaining core temperature directed MASSERT researchers
toward measuring how much protection an immersion suit can provide from hypothermia.
Thermal protection of immersion suits
Members of MASSERT approached the problem of personal thermal protection starting with the current standard emergency apparel. The goals of this research were to (i) measure the insulation of immersion suits and helicopter transportation suits using humans and thermal manikins; (ii) assess differences between different manikins and between manikins and humans to assist the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Thermal Manikin Working Group to apply manikins in ISO standards for immersion suit approval; and (iii) to make recommendations toward the development of the immersion suit standard (ISO-15027). The study found that whole body
Figure 5: On field trials: lifeboat navigating in ice. NRC-IOT
insulation for humans and manikins agreed within about 18%, but local values (for hands and feet, for example) varied more. The research also found that differences between human subjects were as great as between humans and manikins; see Figure 6.
MASSERT researchers are presently involved in an ongoing project with a broader scope and effect that considers not only mass passenger rescue from ships travelling in the Arctic but also the potential for a major air disaster in the Arctic. Since new trans-polar routes were introduced in the 1990s, jumbo jets, each carrying hundreds of airline passengers over vast inhospitable territory, also present a potential for a remote, large- scale rescue scenario. Transport Canada estimates 430,000 passengers will fly on polar routes in 2011.
Thermal requirements for surviving a mass rescue incident in the Arctic
The goals of this research are (i) to investigate whether current thermal protective equipment and preparedness available to people travelling through the Canadian Arctic by ship or air are adequate for surviving a major disaster and (ii) to identify the minimum thermal protection criteria for survival. It is anticipated that this work will lead to a better understanding of the likelihood of survival with current equipment available to accident victims in the Arctic, which will, in turn, lead to recommendations for improved clothing and equipment to enhance survival. The data will also be used to improve survival prediction tools.
The results of MASSERT research efforts will provide a scientific basis for regulators as they improve guidelines and regulations. As with most science, the answers discovered as part of this work will lead sponsors of the studies in appropriate directions for further investigation.
Solutions on the Horizon
Governments, industry and other organizations using the Arctic are beginning to focus more on the gaps in the systems that are needed to improve survivability in this remote and
often harsh environment. Changes to practice, revised regulations and new technologies tailored for the Arctic are emerging.
The aftermath of the Titanic
The Commission into the Titanic resulted in the adoption in 1914 of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). This one set of regulations has enhanced shipping safety through:
• procedures for navigating in ice-covered waters
• regular aerial ice patrols and, more recently, satellite ship and ice tracking
• public address systems, enclosed lifeboats and new evacuation systems on board vessels
• lifeboat drills
Guidelines specific to operating in polar regions are being drafted and revised by regulators, classification societies and industry to reflect the changes in the theatre of operations as polar ice recedes and the season lengthens:
• IMO Guidelines for Ships Operating in
Polar Regions MSC/Circ.1056 - MEPC/
Circ.399 (2009) recommends personal survival kits, protective clothing and thermal insulation (without specifying how much insulation)
• IMO Guide for Cold Water Survival MSC.1/ Circ.1185 advises passengers of the effects of cold water immersion and how to protect themselves
• Lloyd’s Register Provisional Rules for
the Winterisation of Ships (2008) specifies
preventative maintenance for equipment, and advises that internal space heaters are needed to maintain habitable temperatures in lifeboats
• Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators Guidelines for Expedition Cruise
Operations in the Arctic reminds operators
of the limitations of SAR services and advises contact with local authorities.
The IMO Life Saving Appliances Code (2009) includes revisions for ice-covered waters, which are being actively discussed between industry and the SAR community.
Proposals that are under consideration include: • active ventilation systems and carbon dioxide absorption systems for enclosed lifeboats
• an international agreement to station more SAR resources in the Arctic
• a major maritime disaster kit for the Canadian Forces emergency response to the evacuation of a large passenger vessel in a remote area
• numerical models for SAR responders to track and deploy resources in a broad range of scenarios
The NORDREG reporting system became mandatory in the Canadian Arctic in 2010. Just this year and for the first time, the Arctic coastal states (Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Russian Federation and the United States) established the Arctic Regional Hydrographic Commission to collaborate on improving charts and facilitate maritime infrastructure development in the North.
Furthermore, interdepartmental and international agencies plan to cooperate in future SAR exercises in the Arctic. The eight states on the Arctic Council (Canada, United States, Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Sweden and Norway) are poised to sign a multilateral treaty defining roles and responsibilities in the Arctic. Indigenous peoples participate on the Council, providing local knowledge and balance to decisions. The Canadian Forces and Canadian Coast Guard along with all levels of the Canadian government are dedicated to improving SAR response and capability in the Arctic. They
will be testing existing and new equipment and recommending changes or modifications based on actual operational use.
In parallel, some researchers and survival suit manufacturers are also developing technical solutions, such as fabrics that could improve the habitability of life rafts by letting the canopy breathe, smart materials that passively regulate temperature and active immersion suit heating systems.
Whether these practices and technologies are adopted will depend heavily on the fore-sightedness of industry and regulators.
Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work
There is an economic rationale for increased Arctic activity as Arctic cruises expand to meet consumer demands and airlines adopt more efficient trans-polar routes for long distance travel. But with less than 2% of Canadian distress calls coming from north of the 60th parallel, resources are necessarily limited.
Although no major air or marine disaster involving passengers has occurred in the Canadian Arctic yet, the potential for a tragedy is growing. The science of survival can provide knowledge of human limits and better equipment to extend those limits, but the scope must be broad enough to help answer questions like: • What supplementary training do crews need for an Arctic evacuation and survival in escape craft and on shore for days?
• Should Arctic travel be restricted to people who have met some standard of health? • How much and what kind of thermal protection should be provided to evacuees? Should passengers be expected to purchase and carry their own?
More international coordination and collaboration on marine safety research is needed. The question is – Will a coalition of stakeholders emerge to identify and prioritize the needed research? u
Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 report
The Arctic Council
www.pame.is/amsa/amsa-2009-report
Grounding of the passenger vessel Hanseatic in the Northwest Passage (1996)
Transportation Safety Board Marine Report www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/marine/1996/ m96h0016/m96h0016.asp
Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters
International Maritime Organization
www5.imo.org/SharePoint/blastDataOnly.asp/data _id=6629/1056-MEPC-Circ399.pdf
Guidelines for the Operation of Passenger Vessels in Canadian Arctic Waters
Northern Canada Vessel Traffic Services (NORDREG) www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-cruise-ships-menu-495.htm
Report of investigation into the matter of sinking of Passenger Vessel Explorer
Commissioner of Maritime Affairs, Republic of Liberia www.photobits.com/dl/Explorer%20-%20Final%20 Report.PDF
SARSCENE 2010 proceedings
National Search and Rescue Secretariat www.sarscene.ca
Surviving disaster – the Titanic and SOLAS
www5.imo.org/SharePoint/blastDataHelper.asp/ data_id%3D3167/TITANIC.PDF Winterisation Rules Lloyd’s Register www.lloydsregister.se/documents/Winterisation.pdf
Further Reading
Renee Boileau is a Research Council Officer in the Marine Safety Group at the National Research Council Institute for Ocean Technology. She is a Professional Engineer with a background in mechanical and marine engineering. While on contract to BC Ferries, Ms. Boileau took the lead in solving emerging regulatory issues and supervising remediation. She also has experience crewing on board a variety of commercial fishing vessels and a Coast Guard patrol vessel.
Lawrence Mak is a Research Council Officer at the National Research Council Institute for Ocean Technology (IOT). He holds a master's degree in Ocean Engineering and a master of business administration. He has 21 years of experimental testing experience involving a variety of offshore structures and marine vessels and five years of experience in research with human subjects. He commissioned the world-class Offshore Engineering Basin at IOT and managed the software development and data analysis portions of testing for external clients such as Hibernia, Terra Nova and America’s Cup competitors. Mr. Mak has also managed wave research projects and has been involved in re-engineering analysis software and upgrading a wavemaker control system. He has managed three projects sponsored by the Search and Rescue Secretariat New Initiatives Fund. His projects include research into life raft and lifeboat thermal protection, establishing a thermal manikin calibration method with a full body water calorimeter, testing immersion suits with thermal manikins for the International Organization for Standardization and assessing the thermal protection of immersion suits with human subjects and thermal manikins. He is an adjunct professor at Memorial University of Newfoundland.
David Lever is the Standards Development Officer, SAR Programs Specialist with the Canadian Coast Guard in Ottawa. Mr. Lever is an experienced Ship’s Officer with fifteen years of commercial foreign-going and home trade, inland waters service in both the British and Canadian Merchant Navies. He also served twenty-seven years with the Canadian Coast Guard in multiple marine disciplines: as Senior SAR Marine Controller JRCC Halifax, working with both domestic and international SAR agencies and developing a seminar for offshore personnel to encourage information sharing and foster cooperation during an offshore incident; providing support to the Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine Toronto (now known as DRDC) for R&D, including development of the Cold Exposure Survival Model; and as the Coast Guard liaison to the offshore oil and gas industry. Mr. Lever was on board the M/V Claymore Sea when she rescued the crew of the oil rig Vinland after a wellhead blow-out in 1984.
