In August 2020 I wrote about the FSO Safer, an offshore vessel rusting in the Red Sea since 1988, and in danger of spilling over a million barrels of oil. I wrote it under the title ‘under the title Over A Million Barrels Of Oil In A Rusting Hulk In The Red Sea Since 1988’ and you can follow this link to read it.

In April this year I wrote an update noting that the UN plan to offload the oil was foundering for lack of funds. The UN had gone so far as to ask individuals as well as countries to chip in to make up the shortfall. In the face of what stood to be the world’s biggest ecological disaster that could happen right now, immediately, it beggared belief that humanity could not take action to avert it.

Well now there is some positive news. The International Maritime Organisation reports that

On 30 May 2023 Boskalis’ multipurpose support vessel Ndeavor arrived at the site of the FSO SAFER with the salvage team and equipment onboard. Critical work will now start to assess the FSO SAFER, inert the oil tanks and ready the vessel for the oil transfer operation.”

Boskalis itself reports that

After Boskalis’ multipurpose vessel Ndeavor reached its destination offshore Yemen earlier this week, the colleagues of SMIT Salvage were able to board the FSO Safer on Wednesday afternoon. First, gas measurements were taken to assess the presence of toxic gas in and around the vessel. After the ship was declared “safe to access”, a number of operational steps were initiated. This included loading of mobile inert gas generators and conducting inspections of the FSO and its deck machinery as well as structural hull assessments. It is expected that the Ndeavor will soon be able to berth alongside the Safer after which further preparations will continue. 

All good news, but not home and dry yet. And as the IMO also reported

Additional funds are still needed to make up a shortfall in covering the immediate US$142 million cost of the emergency phase of the salvage operation. The second phase of the operation, including the removal and safe recycling of the FSO SAFER, is expected to cost an additional US$19 million.

What Could Still Go Wrong

Not knowing anything about the operation to transfer oil from one vessel to another, I assumed the new vessel would rock up, and offload. Now I understand that first the cargo has to be made safe by removing the risk of explosion from any build-up of gas.

So, US$19 million still short. It’s not pocket money.

Here is an extract from the report on the situation by Dr. Ian Ralby of I R Concilium published Jan 11, 2023

Floating in the Red Sea, attached to an oil pipeline that runs nearly 300 miles to the war-torn city of Marib, the FSO Safer was established as a Yemeni oil export facility in 1988. The massive converted tanker was due to be decommissioned and replaced by a land-based terminal when the Yemen civil conflict erupted nearly eight years ago. Owned by SEPOC, a company which itself is owned by the Government of Yemen, the Safer sits off the coast of Ras Isa, an area controlled by Houthi rebels.

The vessel is still loaded with 1.14 million barrels of oil. While roughly 15,000 barrels have evaporated over the last eight years, and a thin layer has polymerized, the majority of that cargo remains liquid and liable to spill. The portion of the pipeline that runs for five miles beneath the Red Sea has an additional 17,000 barrels of liquid crude in it. Without intervention, the Safer will either explode or corrode and spill its contents – and likely take the pipeline with it.

UPDATE PUBLISHED JUL 25, 2023 BY THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE: …The United Nations with its contractor Boskalis’ SMIT Salvage announced that the oil transfer from the derelict FSO Safer off the coast of Yemen has begun. UN officials said the pipes have been laid and the precautions taken and as of this morning at 10:45 a.m. local time “the pumps are on.”

I came across an article that started with this:

The law of diminishing returns is a concept from economics that indicates after a certain point, increasing only one input starts producing fewer returns.

I didn’t get to read the rest of the article because it was for paying subscribers only. But it’s enough of a hook to get me where I want to go, which is here:

The law of diminishing returns applies to so many kinds of satisfaction in this world that it should be prompting a question. Why is it a law? On what does it depend?

Take a meal – any meal that you like. Eat it. Now the cafe owner brings you the same meal again – from free because he is in the mood – and you just don’t have the appetite any more. It’s the same with everything you can imagine, as long as your direction is to satisfy yourself.

If, on the other hand, you shift your desire outside of yourself, to others and their needs – then the picture changes. Now you can forget about being full because you are never thinking about yourself.

Now the only question is whether you can do it. Can you actually think of others and to what is to the benefit of others (and not to self-benefit) at all? It’s a big ask. There are many pitfalls, such as the desire for recognition for one’s efforts. But the direction is invigorating. And in this world today, or at least in Western Europe and North America where the satisfaction of every desire surrounds us and ceases to satisfy, changing the course of your desires is exactly on point.

Again, that should be prompting a question. Why is it a law? On what does it depend? Well first of all, most discussions would say that it’s not so much a law based on theoretical premises, as it is a fact based upon experience.

If it is a law, then its origin has to come from something above sensory experience, that controls human experience. Answering that is a deeper question.

Here’s my article from August 10, 2020 Over A Million Barrels Of Oil In A Rusting Hulk In The Red Sea Since 1988

Now the ship to replace the FSO Safer has been bought by the UN, and it is on its way from China to where the FSO Safer is moored.

However, there is a catch. There isn’t enough money to complete the job. Here is the statement by Ambassador Woodward at the Security Council meeting on Yemen published by the UK Government on 17 April.

Finally,
We are at a critical moment to address the threat posed by the FSO Safer.
The replacement vessel has begun its journey to Yemen but there is not enough funding for the salvage operation to take place.
The costs of inaction are severe. This would devastate marine life and coastal livelihoods, disrupt life-saving humanitarian assistance for 17 million people, and cost the global economy billions in lost trade every day.
On 4th May, the UK is co-hosting a Pledging Conference with the Netherlands and in partnership with the UN.
This event aims to fill the shortfall and provide a long-term solution for Yemen.
It is on all of us, states, private sector and individuals, to step up and help. The time to act is now. We all have a stake in averting this catastrophe.

Why would I say this? That’s an easy one. Wasting energy is bad because: a) in the immediate future, energy suppliers may have trouble coping with demand this winter, and b) in the longer term, the more heat that escapes out of an open door, the more heat a shop has to use to keep the shop warm. And that’s a on a planet experiencing global warming.

It’s not just heating. Air conditioning in the summer months costs energy too.

Yes but do shops need to be told? Yes, because they do not close their doors. They do not close them because they are afraid shoppers will think they are closed, or because they imagine their competitors keep their doors open and so are afraid to lose customers to their competitors.

How Much Heat Is Lost – Is It Really A Problem? Cambridge University did a study in 2010, monitoring two shops. They found that:

The gathered energy consumption data indicate that an average savings of 30 % for Cambridge Toy Shop and 54 % for Ryman Stationery can be achieved during the heating season by keeping external doors closed.

That’s clear evidence that there’s a lot of waste.

What About A Voluntary Policy

Campaigns to get shopkeepers to sign up to keeping their doors closed have come and gone, and nothing has changed.

If you google for information about it, and you will find articles over the past fifteen years pointing out how much energy is lost by keeping shop doors open.

To those shops that have a closed door policy in their own shop — congratulations. But it is minimal — nearly all shopkeepers are just too worried about making the first move and fear losing out.

Speaking To Shopkeepers

My wife, Tamara, has been speaking to shopkeepers about the heat they let escape through the doors they leave open wide.

She has seen the attitude of shop managers change from the previous ‘who is this person coming to make my life difficult?’, to ‘I would, but…’

The climate risk is more well known now, and shopkeepers are more positive about closed doors. But they say that it is out of their hands, that head office insists they keep the doors open. Or they say it is a great idea but they are afraid their customers will think their shops are shut, so they can’t want to make the first move.

Now everyone knows there’s a global problem. But shopkeepers still worry about losing custom — and that is too strong a headwind for a voluntary ‘close the door’ idea to battle against.

Why Legislation

If there is an easier way, I would prefer it to legislation. But this problem is not going away and the amount of heat lost is costing everyone and warming up the planet faster for no good reason.

So instead of waiting for people to make the first move — just say that everyone has to keep their doors closed.

What Does The Petition Say

The petition says to the Government — please make legislation that everyone has to keep their doors closed, then no one should think they are at a disadvantage and everyone benefits.

If the petition gets enough signatures, government will debate this, and if they like it they will introduce legislation so all shops will have to keep their doors closed (that is, not fixed open) during shop opening hours.

Update 4 June 2023

The petition is now closed. It did not reach the number that would have prompted a Parliamentary debate – nowhere near.