290
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A large cargo ship with a fire in its hold is being kept 2 miles (3.22 kilometers) offshore of an Alaska port as a precaution while efforts are undertaken to extinguish the flames, the U.S. Coast Guard said Saturday.

There were no injuries to the 19 crew members aboard the Genius Star XI, which was carrying a load of lithium-ion batteries across the Pacific Ocean, from Vietnam to San Diego, the guard’s Alaska district said in a release.

The fire started on Christmas Day in cargo hold No. 1, a spokesperson for ship owner Wisdom Marine Group said in a statement. The crew released carbon dioxide into the hold and sealed it over concerns of an explosion.

Ship’s personnel alerted the Coast Guard early Thursday morning about the fire. The Coast Guard said it diverted the 410-foot (125-meter) cargo ship to Dutch Harbor, one of the nation’s busiest fishing ports located in Unalaska, an Aleutian Islands community about 800 miles (1,287 kilometers) southwest of Anchorage.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 95 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I ordered 23 tons of burning batteries on Amazon, but it's running late. I wonder if this is related.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago

I had 40 tons show up last night and only ordered 17, I think I got yours.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Burning batteries and the right?

You must pee the bed at night.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Your comment gave me quite the fright.

But, your rhyming game is outta sight!

[-] june@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I actually didn’t even catch it

But both of you have earned the title ‘poet’

[-] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.dbzer0.com 67 points 10 months ago

An expert hired by the Taipei, Taiwan-based Wisdom Marine Group “is working diligently to create contingency plans, arrange for a firefighting team, and ensure the necessary equipment is in place,’ the group said in a statement.

Yeah right. They're frantically trying to figure out how to dump the container overboard and whether the penalties would cost less than losing the boats cargo.

[-] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

Dumping it in water will not stop it from burning, and will probably make things a lot worse for the crew.

[-] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 10 months ago

If they could dump it overboard they absolutely would not care whether it continues to burn.

[-] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

I think you mistake how much people like a steady paycheck and want to do their jobs how they're supposed to be done.

I mean sure, if tossing it into the ocean as a last resort is in the SOP and we had MSDS saying go ahead as long as you can get three miles away...

[-] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 10 months ago

I think you mistake how companies work.

When there's many millions of dollars on the line and you're an easily replaceable deck hand the SOP is to do whatever the fuck the special consultant tells you to do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If the container would melt and need dumping, then it would likely melt throught the ship hull as well if not jettisoned.

And then every other polutant on board is in play as well as the lithium fire.

So dumping the container is probably the least damage scenario of the things are out of control scenarios.

[-] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I believe that lithium ion and lithium iron phosphate fires are generally put out by lowering the temperature of the reaction to the point that it can't self sustain. Dumping it overboard in a vast supply of frigid water actually would put it out, provided it sinks.

It's also a really really bad idea environmentally.

[-] tpihkal@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Nah, someone already commented that they've towed it outside of the environment.

[-] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 10 months ago

I applaud them for doing that before the front fell off this time. Hope they don't encounter any waves out there.

[-] theluckyone@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Oh, yeah. At sea? Chance in a million!

[-] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

Wouldn't the sodium contents of the sea react explosively though? I was under the understanding that batteries + salt is a super bad combination

[-] GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I don't have a definitive answer for that, even good Google results evade me. What I do know is that lithium batteries, lithium ion batteries, and lithium phosphate batteries are all slightly different things with different material properties.

You are in the right for thinking that elemental lithium batteries are generally very reactive to water, and air for that matter. But I know that lithium phosphate fires, which are the batteries that power most electric cars, have to be cooled with a lot of water to try to stop the reaction. I also recently saw a technique for conserving water when putting out an electric vehicle fire, it was to crane it into essentially a shipping container full of water.

So while I know lithium + water = bad, and lithium phosphate + water = ok for quenching, I actually can't find any definitive results for lithium ion + water. I'm also assuming that the ship is carrying just lithium ion or lithium phosphate batteries, since they are by far the most common. (After going back and rereading the title, it seems ion alone)

[-] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

thank you for the answer, I to tried consulting the almighty google which brought no good luck either!

[-] Im_old@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

That is not the point. The company has to evaluate if cleaning up properly costs more than the fines of dumping the cargo in the sea. They don't care about the batteries anymore, they just want to minimize losses.

[-] Ultragramps@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 10 months ago

According to the article it is near a major fishing area (Dutch Harbor), so dumping those batteries will do extra damage.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

But on the positive side, the electric eel population will get a much needed boost

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 65 points 10 months ago

"It's been towed beyond the environment."

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Id like to see the physics on this.

[-] theluckyone@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

No, it’s beyond the environment, it’s not in an environment. It has been towed beyond the environment.

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Does it require rigerous maritime standards, like at least 1 crew?

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Can i put a container of my stuff there?

Im tired of paying Public Storage's ratchet game.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Daxtron2@startrek.website 9 points 10 months ago

We turn off physics outside the environment to save clock cycles

[-] _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz 40 points 10 months ago

The crew released carbon dioxide into the hold

Apparently some larger airliners have a similar mechanism for the cargo hold of the aircraft. The system is sometimes referred to as "the puppy snuffer" :(

[-] rtxn@lemmy.world 30 points 10 months ago

If an onboard fire occurs, those dogs are dead anyway. Might as well try to halt the fire before it melts the airframe.

[-] kungen@feddit.nu 20 points 10 months ago

The "puppy snuffer" is the cargo heat outflow valve. Cargo isn't heated unless needed, for example where the manifest says there's animals there. It has nothing to do with fire suppression systems.

But no one should be flying with their pets anyways. Get a sitter, or if you're moving forever, drive there. Even if moving across the ocean, I'd rather spend over a week on a boat (or even give my dog up to someone else) than subject him all alone to the stress of an airplane's cargo hold.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Meh, they knock them out. I've done a 14 hour sold out commercial flight whacked out on Atavan and don't even remember the stopovers.

[-] Cheesus@lemmy.ca 9 points 10 months ago

Eh? My wife flew from the PNW to France with our cat when we moved. She gave her half a dose of the veterinarian prescribed knockout juice and she was completely fine. Of course, she wasn't in the hold, but still.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

I forget the details, but there was some alarming numbers about pet deaths specifically in the cargo hold. We opted to drive the kitty, with some meds bc he doesn’t really like being in the car.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

If your pet is small enough it can fly in the cabin, as long as it's in a soft crate.

[-] mo_ztt@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I'm not going to upvote this, because I can't bring myself to, but thank you for telling me.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 29 points 10 months ago

Who tf decided to ship burning batteries lmao

[-] WeirdAlex03@lemmy.zip 30 points 10 months ago

They were being sent to Springfield to upgrade and modernize the Tire Fire

[-] XTornado@lemmy.ml 15 points 10 months ago

I'm sorry it was a fire sale, I couldn't resist.

I will admit I misunderstood what they meant with the "fire" part of the sale.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago

This is not the future that EPCOT promised me.

[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago

Yo our shits on fire.

lol stay out there bro.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Better that than this.

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

Is this the shipment for the new Samsung Note?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Samsung Galaxy Smote

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

The Coast Guard said it diverted the 410-foot (125-meter) cargo ship to Dutch Harbor, one of the nation’s busiest fishing ports

Were there no other options?

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

It was burning, past tense, and besides, those batteries don't detonate. I'm pleasantly surprised they have a CO2 mitigation system and ability to seal the cargo hold. Had no idea that was a thing!

Get it into port where you got the resources to have a look, get the crew offboard, experts onboard. Sounds like a sane plan to me.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Is the fire out?

It does not appear so by reading the article.

First paragraph:

A large cargo ship with a fire in its hold is being kept 2 miles (3.22 kilometers) offshore of an Alaska port as a precaution while efforts are undertaken to extinguish the flames, the U.S. Coast Guard said Saturday.

Timeline - Fire started Monday. CO2 released then? Ship told Coast Guard on Thursday, divert order given then? Ship still burning offshore on Saturday.

Lithium car batteries supply their own oxygen so a simple gas smothering might not work.

[-] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Don't like lithium fish sticks?

(I probably wouldn't either)

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
290 points (98.3% liked)

News

23287 readers
1254 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS