The "Prestige" sank

RE: The

Keltic,

I stand corrected.

RE: The

Nothing to do Arthur. There´s no major ilegal refueling facilities in Ceuta or petrol harbour. I have been in Ceuta, I have been in Gibraltar, and we can´t hide facts or the sun with a finger. I have myself have to see many times in the “Linea de la Concepción” (opposite GIB) all the polution casued by the constant fuel leaks and tankers tanks cleansing from all tankers which are on the bay.

RE: The

It´s not unknown that one of the main business on the rock,
is ilegal fuel traffic and that hundreds of “dustbins” come
to Gibraltar either to leave fuel or refuel. So appart from
uncontrolled cheap traffic (thats why they use unsafe and
old ships, in order to keep fuel´s price low), it´s a big
petrol station. What this bring it that, being Gibraltar a
keypoint in the tankers traffic, it seems that´s the only
place for old tankers to refuel in the route from Northern
Europe to Asia or others.

There is another port on the Western end of the Med doing exactly (and i mean exactly the same’)… Ceuta.

RE: The

Making the tankers sail far from the coast would make no difference. I spent three years having marine biology rammed down my throat until I choked, and we did endless things about ocean currents, tides and waves. The stuff would still end up on the beaches (how do you think rubbish from boats gets washed up onto beaches?)
Vote Brunel for Greatest Briton.

RE: The

I feel very sorry about this. Not only because I spent a lot of days in that beaches as a child, but because that coast was very untouched by men (if you compare with the mediteranian coast). A good way of avoiding these kind of things would be to make tankers (an other dangerous cargo ships) sail far from any coast. In the other hand, they would have to reach the coastline in order to drop the oil so maybe it´s not a good idea. Anyway, with tankers far from any coast, better SAR teams would be needed. What do you think?

Regards

Jorge

RE: The

>>
>It very much suits the interests of the Blair-Aznar axis to
>try and pin something on Gib and I hope people will not be
>fooled by this. Please remember that a loose coalition of
>Blair-Aznar-Berlusconi was seriously mooted as a weapon to
>fight the Chirac-Schroeder axis within the EU.

Well, I don´t who is responsible. I suppose this doesn´t help. I am not sure if the Gib authorities would follow Blair advises, and if Blair dares to make laws to be fulfilled. In any case, I have to admit that the Spanish Authorities are just using Gibraltar as a rod to hit Gibraltar and as squid with its ink to divert their own responsabilities in the caothic rescue. Today it has been confirmed, by the Letvian authorities that this “junk” was specially prepared to serve as refueling tanker, and as an old ship, wasn´t able to sail in high seas any more. She had the duty to refuel all river barges at St Petersburg. The Latvian authorities said she wasn´t equiped for sea sailing. And this upset quite a lot, taking into account that they were awared of that, and allowed it to operate in their habours…..too late.

RE: The Prestige sank

Unfortunately they did it again.
We have experienced this kind of event especially in Britanny.
Look :

– 18 march 1967 : Torrey Canyon (Liberia) Land’s End (UK) 119.000 tons of oil

– 20 mars 1970 : Othello Tralhavet Bay (Sweden)60.000 to 100.000 tons of oil

– 19 décember 1972 : Sea Star (Coréa) Gulf o’Oman: 115.000 tons

– 12 may 1976 : Urquiola (Sapin) La Corogne 100.000 tons

– 25 féb 1977 : Hawaiian Patriot (Liberia) Noth Pacific: 99.000 tons

– 16 march 1978 : Amoco Cadiz (Liberia); 223.000 tons In Britanny(France)

– 10 july 1978 : Cabo Tamar (Chile) 60.000 tons in Chile

– 31 déc 1978 : Andros Patria (Greece) Cap Finister(Spain); 47.000 tons

– 28 april 1979 : Gino (Liberia), 41.000 tons Ouessant Island (France)

– 20 july 1979 : Atlantic Express Trinidad-et-Tobago andAegean Captain, 276.000 tons Caraïb Islands

– 23 feb 1980 : Irenes Serenade (Greece) 102.000 tons in bay of Navarin (Greece)

– 7 march 1980 : Tanio (Madagascar) Britanny (France).(18.000 tons

– 29 march 1981 : Cavo Cambanos (Greece) in Corsica France: 18.000tons

– 5 aug 1983 : Castillo de Bellver (Spain) Cap Town (South Africa); 250.000 tons

– 7 jan 1984 : Assimi, 51.000 tons off shore of Oman

– 24 march 1989 : Exxon Valdez (USA) in Alaska (prince William bay). 40.000 tons on 1.744km of coast lines

– 19 dec 1989 : Kharg-5 (Iran) Safi (Morocco); 70.000 tons

– 29 dec 1989 :Aragon (Sapin) 25.000 tons north of Madere Island

RE: The

i wouldn’t blame gibralter – its the fault of the world shipping body (part of the UN) that hasn’t oulawed single hulled tankers

rabie :9

RE: The

As a general rule, the British government despises Gibraltar. The foreign secretary even said that the notion that a referendum in Gibraltar should have legal force is “eccentric”.

The British government is responsible for regulating Shipping, Customs and Financial Services on the Rock. Any blame (if there is any) is therefore with the British, not Gibraltar.

It very much suits the interests of the Blair-Aznar axis to try and pin something on Gib and I hope people will not be fooled by this. Please remember that a loose coalition of Blair-Aznar-Berlusconi was seriously mooted as a weapon to fight the Chirac-Schroeder axis within the EU.

RE: The

>.
>
>2. The EU transport commissioner (Loyola de Palacio?)
>claimed the boat had docked in Gibraltar and should have
>been impounded there. The UK government denies that it was
>in Gibraltar any time in the last 5 years.
>
>

The documents of the ship has been seized by the Spanish authorities and has been showed, and clearly indicates that it was heeding to Gibraltar. The captain and owner have also clarify this issue,as well as the French maritime authorities. The real issue, is not her going to Gibraltar but why she going for. I went to Gibraltar once and it was surprising to see dozens of rickety tankers on the bay at two hundred meters from where I was. What were they doing?. It´s not unknown that one of the main business on the rock, is ilegal fuel traffic and that hundreds of “dustbins” come to Gibraltar either to leave fuel or refuel. So appart from uncontrolled cheap traffic (thats why they use unsafe and old ships, in order to keep fuel´s price low), it´s a big petrol station. What this bring it that, being Gibraltar a keypoint in the tankers traffic, it seems that´s the only place for old tankers to refuel in the route from Northern Europe to Asia or others. Any other european port allow these ships to enter. However I think the Spanish authories and media are using Gibraltar as a distraction, for the Spaniards not asking them for responsabilities. I feel that in this tragical thing, there´s a wide net of responsibles. Direct and indirect. I think that the British goverment, due to the current political Gib rigmarole, is not really fond of imposing Gib sanctions or controling this activity. But I feel that´s really harmful for everyone, since the next tanker could explode in front of the British coasts.

RE: The

Wellm I think there should be a UN standard for seaworthiness, not just an EU standard. Anyway, this has turned into a political fistfight:

1. The CEO of the Dutch salvage company was interviewed on the BBC last night. He claimed that they wanted to tow it into shallow calm water, but the Spanish authorities forced them to tow it into deep choppy water which “definitely” damaged the hull. The Spanish authorities forced the convoy towards Portugal, until a Portuguese Naval gunboat told them to turn East, into worse water.

2. The EU transport commissioner (Loyola de Palacio?) claimed the boat had docked in Gibraltar and should have been impounded there. The UK government denies that it was in Gibraltar any time in the last 5 years.

3. The insurers (poor guys!) are British and I think the boat was registered in Nassau.

RE: The

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 20-11-02 AT 08:30 PM (GMT)]http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige002.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige003.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige005.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige008.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige010.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige016.jpg

http://www.standaard.be/Assets/Images_upload/prestige017.jpg

The pictures say it all …

RE: The “Prestige” sank

Well guys¡, Bad day for us. Last monday, as a Greenpeace colaborator I had gone to help (just an hour drive), and after almost breaking my back, I returned really depressed and helpless. You don´t know how fastastic is this natural coasline. Away from tourism it´s a paradise. We absolutely upset and some responsabilities should be claimed:
-The crew and owner as direct responsible, for having turned the engines off and abandoned the ship in a storm and letting it to get close to the coast.
-The local authorities for lacking means and having acted such in a foolish way.
-The statal goverment for not showing sensibility and not getting concerned….and allowing tankers to travel so close the coast in such a rough waters.
-The EU for not having stablished the double compartment tankers…..compulsary.
Now several natural parks damaged, the fishing industry almost destroyed and a time bomb in my homeland.

Attachments:

RE: The “Prestige” sank

An absolute environment catastrophe.We can only hope the worst od the oil slicks do not hit the Spanish coast.I feel extremely sorry for all the people who have near enough had their livliehoods ruined or damaged.
They even say as far as western Bretagne and the Channel Islands could be hit by some oil slicks if the currents change.I really do hope not.