This oil spill -- and the next
There's a lot that can be done to make shipping in the Bay safer

EDITORIAL The first headline the San Francisco Chronicle ran after the Cosco Busan crashed into a Bay Bridge protective fender Nov. 7 implied that nothing terrible had happened. It read, almost comically, "CRUNCH!" Initial reports suggested that only a few hundred gallons of fuel oil had spilled from the gash in the 810-foot freighter's hull. Caltrans assured the public that the system had worked: the fender had absorbed the blow, the bridge had suffered no damage, and motorists had no cause for concern.

It wasn't until much later in the day that the public learned just how big an ecological disaster was unfolding in the bay. And the most disturbing evidence is only now becoming clear: this was an accident waiting to happen. The regulations and processes in place to prevent a catastrophic oil spill in the bay — where thousands of ships with tanks carrying foul and toxic fuel oil sail through a fragile ecosystem every year — were, and are, tragically inadequate.

Just look at the record so far:

The Coast Guard's Vehicle Traffic Service on Yerba Buena Island, which has extensive radar and electronic tracking devices, was clearly aware that the container ship was heading for a collision — but was unable to stop it.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T


The fog was thick, and the ship, which had just made a wide S turn out of the Port of Oakland, was far from the center of the 1,200-foot-wide channel under the bridge. The Coast Guard could hardly have missed what was going on.

In fact, according to news reports, a VTS staffer radioed the bar pilot at the helm of the ship minutes before the crash and warned him that he was on an errant course. "Your [compass] heading is 235. What are your intentions?" the VTS staffer asked (essentially saying, in nautical-radio speak, "What the hell are you doing?"). The pilot, John Cota, insisted he was heading right for the center of the span and not to worry, his lawyer told reporters.

Imagine, for a moment, what would happen if air traffic controllers at San Francisco International Airport saw a commercial jet flying off course in zero-visibility fog and heading for the top of San Bruno Mountain. The controllers wouldn't ask the captain what his intentions were; they would announce an imminent crash and order him to immediately increase altitude, change course ... whatever was necessary. The captain wouldn't argue that his or her instruments said everything was fine; the airliner would change course at once and sort out the question of instrument accuracy after it was out of harm's way.

But traffic regulators on the bay operate under different rules. Even a minor course change would have prevented the accident — but according to VTS rules posted on the Web, the Coast Guard has no authority (other than in times of national-security alerts) to directly order preventative action. Under centuries-old rules of the sea, the captain of a ship is in total control and can't be told what to do, even if a disaster is looming — and modern safety regulations haven't caught up to that tradition.

The ship was sailing under terrible conditions, with almost zero visibility, and even some bay captains say running a 70,000-ton vessel in an area like this in fog that thick is a bad idea. But the shipping companies have so much money on the line that nobody wants to slow down the schedules.

It's ...

Read more... Page: 1 | 2 | 3

( 1 comment | Comment on this article )
jdhlax on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 04:29 PM
Your comment on the inevitability of the current economy that caused the latest oil spill is as telling as it is damning. ("Shipping is part of the lifeblood of the local economy, and everyone who lives in the Bay Area has to live with the fact that giant steel vessels loaded with toxic fluids are going to be passing through a diverse and easily damaged ecosystem every day of every year for the foreseeable future.")

This attitude, evinced by using the term "lifeblood" to describe the movement of money, is fundamentally at odds with preserving and protecting our natural environment. Industrial shipping is not a "lifeblood" of anything, and is actually a death knell instead. Just how do the birds, marine mammals, and fish benefit from shipping? "Lifeblood" should be used for natural processes, not perverted into propaganda by using it for consuming and burning oil in order to move needless cheap garbage around the world.

So long as we have an oil economy, we will have oil spills, along with destruction of natural ecosystems from drilling oil and pollution from burning it, including global warming. Instead, we should take the attitude that the natural environment is far more valuable than any amount of money or number of jobs. By causing the greatest rate of extinction since that of the dinosaurs and global warming that will cause even more extinctions, humans are clearly at a major crossroad in our existence. We can choose to prioritize the natural environment or continue to prioritize the economy. So far, the vast majority of people, even here in the supposedly environmentally friendly Bay Area, have chosen to prioritize the economy. If we don't reverse this immoral choice, we've just seen our future and that of much of the rest of the planet.

Comment on: This oil spill -- and the next

In order to comment on an article, you must Log In.

SFBG Classifieds