Baltimore and Lessons Learned

The tragic event in Baltimore, while rare, is something that we should be paying close attention to. While it will take time for investigators to build and flush out the timelines of events, identify root causes, and communicate those publicly, we owe it to those affected to take the time and look to prevent future occurrences.

This comes in two parts.

General

First, we must look at the facts the investigations will eventually identify and communicate. Given the breadth and severity of this event, the investigation report should most certainly be a public document. Given that the affected families require closure, investigations should proceed with a sense of purpose to meet all the criteria of thorough, supportable, relevant, timely, and impartial. There is no reason to think this will be otherwise.

Second, we need to maintain level heads. We have already seen the outraged social media posts blaming one party or another. While this is natural, the nature of social media can very quickly build echo chambers that compound views based more on the reaction to the event than the event itself. While challenging in an age where many outlets look to “publish first,” the gravity of this event should compel people to wait for the facts to come out.

Some Questions or Thoughts

To date, some of the questions that the Association is considering include the following:

• Many bridges were built decades ago. If we look at the evolution of container ships (and likely others), there has been an increase in the size of the early container ships from 500-800 TEU (twenty-foot equivalents) and a size of about 137m x 17m x 9m from around 1960 to almost three times that size when considering the UCLS that carries between 18000 to 21000 TEU and has a size of 400m x 59m x 16m today. This is not to say that common sense would not prevail (i.e., a ship being told to sail through a space where it cannot fit) when considering port operations, but should these ships also include “buffer zones” that consider these kinds of events?
• Should the design of any bridge or any significant upgrades include a point where tugs could be positioned to deflect the ship away from directly impacting the bridge? This is not quite as simple as it sounds. The first question would be the kind of tug (conventional, tractor, or azimuthal stern drive) would be most appropriate. The second involves deploying and operating those tugs in a way that is safe for the tug operators, the vessel, and efficient for port operations. 
• Should bridges include rock islands or similar barriers that protect the bridge from impact? This is another complex engineering challenge because of the numbers involved and secondary risks. One challenge is the design of the islands in such a way that the ship is deflected but the energy from the deflection does not cause the failure of the bridge. Another challenge involves the design of the barrier in such a way that safe navigation is maintained (i.e., these barriers take up space that would likely affect the space available for safe navigation). Also, there would need to be an understanding of how these would affect factors such as currents that could affect the ability to assure good control over the vessel. Other questions would likely arise.
• Should the design of bridges include shear points that would prevent the total collapse of the bridge? Many buildings have done to protect against total failure under certain blast conditions. Again, this is not a simple question and would require some significant engineering by those that have knowledge about the various forces (such as sheer and torsion) on bridges and how to manage them. The goal would be to prevent the collapse of all spans if an impact did occur.
• Should any bridge where people traverse also have a warning system installed on the bridge (such as a highway sign and siren) that can be used to announce the emergency situation to those on the bridge and prompt them to evacuate? This might be under the control of the Port and operated as part of the coordinated emergency management efforts with those responsible for the road networks. Additional questions that come to mind if this approach is taken is how to deal with circumstances where the bridge becomes congested and traffic cannot move.

To be clear, these are questions that arise because of the situation in general, not because of any specific issues in Baltimore specifically. Nor are they intended to cast light or blame in any direction. They are part of the questions that we need to ask ourselves as we work towards preventing similar events in the future.

What we can hope for is that the families affected in the tragedy are supported, that the investigation and recovery proceed smoothly and safely so that the Port and its community returns to the best conditions possible after such an event.

A Less Comfortable Thought

When considering what information should be publicly released, there is an uncomfortable fact to consider. This concern is based on something that occurred in 2013-2014 in Canada. In 2013, Lac Megantique suffered a terrible rail disaster that left over 40 dead and over 30 buildings either destroyed or significantly damaged. A detailed investigation was conducted into the causes of the event and its aftermath. Shortly after that report was published, however, images and details of the publicly-released report appeared in a known terrorist organization’s publication that was encouraging attacks of a similar nature. Establishing the right balance of publicly released information and withholding information potentially useful to hostile parties is a difficult balancing act but can be done if it’s considered at the early stages of drafting the report.