Gnarly Sheen

Ship crashes in San Francisco Bay, leaks 58,000 gallons of oil

Posted at 12:46 PM on 08 Nov 2007

A container ship larger than the Titanic collided with San Francisco's Bay Bridge on Wednesday, tearing a 160-foot gash in its hull and spilling at least 58,000 gallons of oil. The leak nauseated some bystanders, closed down beaches and fishing, and could threaten the health of seals, birds, and other wildlife. The spilled substance, known as bunker oil, "tends to be rather heavy, and it doesn't float as well as other oil. It's harder to contain," says Wil Bruhns, supervising engineer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Several agencies are looking into the accident, including the Coast Guard. "By our guidelines it is a medium-sized spill," said Coast Guard Capt. William Uberti, captain of the Port of San Francisco and the investigation's chief federal officer. "But in the San Francisco Bay Area, that is a big deal." On a happier note, the bridge wasn't damaged. So nauseated commuters have got that going for them.

sources: San Francisco Chronicle, MSNBC

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (6 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Remember Exxon Valdez?

It is about time somebody does something to make freight vessels clean up their act.

This oil fuel leaks are unacceptable. This type of spill makes headlines because of where it happened. Only God knows what happens in the high seas.

Freighters are also a danger to marine mammals, particularly to whales. Far too many die as a result of collisions.

This needs to stop now!

Nicolas Canal

by viejonico at 4:29 AM on 11 Nov 2007

Interesting to note

Exxon still hasn't paid any damages for the Exxon Valdez spill.

Why? Because they don't want to set a precedent of actually paying for damages.

-David Ahlport

by GreyFlcn at 7:47 AM on 11 Nov 2007

Exxon Valdez damage-payments

GreyFlcn wrote: Exxon still hasn't paid any damages for the Exxon Valdez spill.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill#Litigation

Exxon spent an estimated $2 billion cleaning up the spill, along with a further $1 billion to settle civil and criminal charges related to the case.

Regarding the 1994 Baker vs. Exxon case (same link):

Exxon [...] appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which on October 29, 2007 has agreed to decide whether Exxon Mobil Corp. should pay the $2.5 billion in punitive damages. The case will likely be heard in the spring of 2008.

by Nucbuddy at 8:22 AM on 11 Nov 2007
[ Parent ]

Russian oil tanker breaks in two

In other news:
news.google.com/news?q=Russian+oil+tanker

Five-metre (16-feet) high waves smashed apart a Russian tanker on Sunday, spilling 1300 tonnes of fuel oil into the Black Sea in what a Russian official said was an "environmental disaster."

by Nucbuddy at 1:15 PM on 11 Nov 2007

Bunkers of biomass would only leave driftwood..

I was just thinking to myself.. Hmm- what else is risky about petroleum - ship collisions that spill it! And sure enough, here's another..
Bunker fuel is heavy stuff - come out near the bottom of the column in the refinery; it takes serious high-compression engines, and pre-heating just to run an engine on it.
Now, if that ship were powered by biofuel in its rawest form - lets say fuel pellets made from sawdust or switchgrass; or even just small wood chunks - what would be the worst? Lots of bits of driftwood? Hmm.. now there's fuel for thought!

by chuck kottke at 9:28 AM on 13 Nov 2007

Hybrid ships

If we're shipping stuff all over the world, and there's a steady breeze some days - why not put out some sails? I think, unless you're running a tight schedule, this makes good sense - save the energy for low wind days..
Yes, oil is risky stuff! If we factor in these ugly externalities, it might not look so cheap.. How do you undo the damage? No real way - once it's spilled; it's there. - better to not run the risk, and change sooner!!

by chuck kottke at 9:35 AM on 13 Nov 2007

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?