Fears are mounting of a potential environmental disaster off the coast of Britain after a cargo ship carrying toxic chemicals smashed into an oil tanker transporting jet fuel for the US military.
The crash ignited a huge fire, which is still burning in the North Sea, about 10 miles off the coast of Hull, a busy port and fishing center.
Dozens of people were rescued, but one crew member is unaccounted for, according to British authorities.
Meanwhile, environmental groups have warned of potentially harmful consequences for marine life as questions swirl over how the collision could have occurred in broad daylight.
Here’s what we know.
What exactly happened?
The alarm was raised by the British coast guard at 9:48 a.m. Monday (5:48 a.m. ET) after the Solong, a Portugal-flagged container ship, careered into the Stena Immaculate, a US military-chartered oil tanker anchored in the North Sea.
Video showed black plumes of smoke billowing high into the air following an explosion caused by the crash.
At least one of the vessels was seen engulfed in flames, prompting a dramatic rescue mission involving Britain’s coast guard and Royal National Lifeboat Institution.
The Solong was en route from a port in Scotland to the Netherlands. All but one of its 14 crew members were brought safely to shore, the vessel’s owner Ernst Russ said in a statement.
By Monday evening, an “extensive” search for the missing crew member had ended, the coast guard said.
All 23 crew members aboard the Stena Immaculate were safe, according to a statement from Crowley, the US logistics firm that manages the vessel.
Maritime experts questioned how the collision could have happened despite the safety and navigation features common to such vessels.
“What we need to understand is that there are international regulations that dictate how ships can be maneuvered at sea,” said Matthew Schanck, an emergency response expert and founder of consultancy group International Maritime Search and Rescue.
Both ships should have had at least one crew member on duty in their respective control rooms, he said.
“Somebody should have been in charge of both vessels. And so, the fact that this has happened in quite a well-known area for traffic and shipping movements is quite extraordinary,” Schanck said.
What were the ships carrying?
The Solong was transporting an unknown quantity of alcohol and 15 containers of sodium cyanide, according to maritime intelligence company and shipping journal Lloyd’s List.
Sodium cyanide releases hydrogen cyanide gas, a highly toxic asphyxiant that can quickly prove fatal to those exposed, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The chemical can also turn into hydrogen cyanide on contact with water.
It remains unclear whether any cyanide has entered the sea.
As a fire precaution, the Solong would likely have carried its cargo at the front of the vessel, away from the accommodation block and engine rooms, Schanck said.
“The hope would be that these steel containers would protect (against) any spill of cargo,” he added.
The Stena Immaculate was carrying 220,000 barrels of jet fuel in 16 segregated cargo tanks, Crowley said in its statement. It is not clear what volume of fuel may have been released because of the incident, it added.
How hazardous are the chemicals?
Experts say jet fuel spills tend to impact the environment less than crude oil spills.
The jet fuel is “light oil” and “is in stark comparison to the images that we see sometimes of wildlife and the marine environment with thick black, crude oil,” said Schanck, who nevertheless warned of an environmental impact.
“The fire is burning off this jet fuel, which is highly flammable on the surface of the sea. (This) is good for the marine environment (but) not necessarily for the smoke that’s produced,” he said.
Mark Hartl, a marine ecotoxicologist from the Centre for Marine Biodiversity and Biotechnology at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, said “most of the jet fuel will evaporate very quickly.”
“Whilst the images look worrying, from the perspective of the impact to the aquatic environment it’s less of a concern than if this had been crude oil,” he said.
However, advocacy groups including Greenpeace UK warned of potentially widespread damage to the environment and wildlife.
“We are extremely concerned about the multiple toxic hazards these chemicals could pose to marine life,” said Paul Johnston, a senior scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at Exeter University. “The jet fuel that entered the water close to a breeding ground for harbor porpoises is toxic to fish and other sea creatures.”
Oceana UK campaigns director Alyx Elliott said they are “keeping a close eye” on the incident.
The aviation fuel “can cause a huge amount of damage to wildlife as well as fish populations … it can impact breeding seal colonies of which there are many nearby,” she said. “The potential damage is huge.”
What happens next?
An investigation is likely to be carried out to determine what went wrong, according to Martyn Boyers, chief executive of the nearby Port of Grimsby East.
Meanwhile, an assessment of counter pollution response is being carried out by the Maritime and Coastguard agency, the coast guard said.
Crowley, the oil tanker manager, said it is supporting British authorities in their investigation of the incident.
