Disaster Brazil Wants to Abandon a 34,000-Ton Ship at Sea. It Would be an Environmental Disaster

Article Archive

Brazil Wants to Abandon a 34,000-Ton Ship at Sea. It Would be an Environmental Disaster​

BY CIARA NUGENT

Somewhere in the South Atlantic ocean right now, a 34,000-ton, 870-ft. aircraft carrier is floating aimlessly on the waves. The vessel, caught in an international dispute over its toxic contents, is about to become one of the biggest pieces of trash in the ocean.

The São Paulo, as the ship is known, has been stuck in limbo for five months. Brazil’s navy sold the 60-year-old vessel—the largest in its fleet—for scrap to a Turkish shipyard in 2021, and in August 2022, it set off for Turkey from a naval base in Rio de Janeiro. But while it was on the move, Turkey rescinded its permission to enter, saying Brazil hadn’t been able to prove that the São Paulo was free of asbestos—a toxic mineral used in the construction of many 20th century ships. So, the boat turned around.

Brazil doesn’t want it back, though. In September, a port on the coast of Pernambuco state blocked the ship from docking. The port argued there was too big a risk that the ship would be abandoned, leaving port authorities to pick up the tab for moving it and dealing with the asbestos. That left the São Paulo circling off the Brazilian coast, until Jan. 20, when Brazil’s navy announced that it had pushed the ship out to international waters, where it remains. The navy says it had to do so because the aging ship, which incurred damage to its hull during its odyssey, could have run aground or sank on the Brazilian coast, threatening other boats and coastal wildlife.

It appears the navy’s solution is to abandon the São Paulo at sea. Military sources told Brazil’s Folha de São Paulo newspaper on Saturday that sinking the vessel—using explosives—is the only way to put an end to the controversy surrounding it.

The ship’s saga is set to become an extreme case of vessel abandonment—a problem that plagues marine conservationists and coastal communities around the world. Ocean watchdogs say sinking a boat as big and old as the São Paulo would be an environmental disaster; according to the Basel Action Network (BAN), an NGO, the ship contains thousands of metric tons of asbestos and other toxic substances in its electrical wiring, paints, and fuel stores.

Abandoning it at sea would constitute “gross negligence” and violate three separate international environmental conventions, says Jim Puckett, BAN’s executive director. “We’re talking about a ship containing both hazardous materials and valuable materials—it’s supposed to be brought into the territory of Brazil and managed in an environmentally sound way,” Puckett says. “You can’t just sink it.”

Approached for comment, the Brazilian navy directed TIME to its official announcements, which say only that the navy will not allow the São Paulo to return to Brazil. They do not address where it will go instead.

It’s not uncommon for boats to be abandoned. Because they are expensive to maintain and to dispose of properly, tens of thousands of unwanted vessels—normally much smaller than an aircraft carrier—are left in harbors, on beaches, or at sea every year. In Nigeria, thousands of wrecked cargo ships and commercial fishing vessels litter the coast, destroying beach ecosystems, worsening coastal erosion, and making waterways dangerous to pass for local communities. In Venice, around2,000 abandoned small recreational boats are clogging up a local wetland. In the U.S., the Government Accountability Office estimates that from 2013 to 2016, there were 5,600 boats abandoned in U.S. waters—likely a very lowball estimate, according to Nancy Wallace, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s marine debris program.

The problem is, what’s left onboard those boats doesn’t stay onboard. “Anytime there’s a vessel that’s left at sea, the first thing to think about is toxic chemicals, which can be very impactful to wildlife,” Wallace says. Abandoned boats of any size can cause oil spills and leach paint chemicals and microplastics into the water, while debris such as nets can come loose, trapping fish.

Older vessels also often contain so-called PCBs, a group of highly carcinogenic chemicals that were often used in electrical wiring before the 1970s and were globally banned under the 2001 Stockholm convention. When dumped in the ocean, scientists say PCBs work their way up the marine food chain, affecting everything from small crustaceans to orcas. BAN estimates that the São Paulo, which was built in France in the 1960s, contains around 300 metric tons of PCBs, based on analysis of its sister ship, the Clemencau. The NGO says leaving the vessel at sea would violate both the Stockholm convention and the 1996 London Protocol.

In Brazil, the face of the ship abandonment problem is Guanabara Bay in Rio de Janeiro state, where some 200 vessels, including cargo ships and oil tankers, have been left to rot by owners caught up in financial or legal troubles. Local NGOs say the resulting oil and chemical pollution has dramatically reduced native mangrove, tortoise, and dolphin populations, and has hurt the livelihoods of local fishermen. The bay made national headlines in November, when a storm caused a 660-ft. cargo ship to come loose from its moorings and crash into the Rio-Niteroi—Latin America’s longest over-water bridge.

Removing such vessels is a major headache for governments. Hauling them out can cost anywhere from $8,000 (the per-boat cost for 14 recreational boats recently lifted out of the water in South Carolina) to $1.8 million (the cost for removing an 83-ft. fishing boat in Saipan in 2021, which had been degrading a nearby coral reef in the Northern Mariana Islands for six years after a 2015 storm left it too damaged for its owners to repair.)

But, thankfully, it is highly unusual for a ship as large as the São Paulo to be deliberately abandoned. That’s because large boats like cruise ships, container ships, and aircraft carriers contain vast amounts of high-quality valuable metals, especially steel, which can be salvaged and resold. (Recycling is also beneficial for the environment, since manufacturing new steel is extremely carbon-intensive.)

Puckett, from BAN, says the idea of sinking the São Paulo doesn’t make financial sense for Brazil. “It’s got millions of dollars worth of steel to be recycled, which far outweighs the cost of managing those hazardous materials,” he says. “I’ve never seen such a valuable ship being deliberately sunk.”

BAN is calling on Brazil’s new leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to step in. To comply with international treaties, including the Basel Convention restricting the export of toxic waste, Puckett says the navy must tow the São Paulo into a naval base, repair the damage to the hull, and then offer the recycling contract to new shipyards in Europe, which can safely remove the asbestos before dismantling the ship.

Lula’s government has privately expressed concerns about the environmental impact of abandoning the ship, according to Folha de São Paulo, the Brazilian newspaper. But it is unwilling to start a conflict with the navy because Lula’s relationship with the armed forces is under severe strain following recent civilian calls for a military coup. So, with little sign of an about-face from the navy, it looks like the São Paulo is heading for a toxic watery grave.
 
Hell, look at Ironbottom Sound, home to the wrecks of two Japanese battleships (Hiei and Kirishima), a fuckton of destroyers and cruisers and God knows how many dud torpedoes, shell fragments, cartridges and tons upon tons of military material. If that area's not an envorinmental disaster, this ship won't make a lick of difference 🤷‍♂️


Nature will be fine. Torpedo that bastard somewhere over one of the abyssal plains and in a few months nobody's gonna care about an aircraft carrier at the bottom of the most unexplored surface on earth

map-iron-bottom-sound-shipwrecks.jpg
 
Oh no, they may end up sinking a ship and [Checks Notes] Creating a new major reef ecosystem like every other ship of the era does when sunk. Ecosystem is give and take, any addition is a harm until its adapted to, then its a boon. Environmentalists harping on this are like the "No Take, Only Throw" meme.
Artificial reefs are literal hulls with everything down to the last electrical wire ripped out, and sunk in relatively shallow water. This is a big dirty great boat full of nasty shit that'll poison anything living in it. It's not going to turn the entire ocean into toxins but we shouldn't be letting third world shitholes like Brazil dump their unwanted trash wherever they like.
 
Well, these were PLANNED sinkings, in fact, there was a cutesy little name for the whole program: Operation CHASE

Which was an acronym for, I'm not making this up, Cut Holes And Sink Em'


Sure, if you want a partially-stripped-out ex-French Carrier (Sao Paulo was originally MN Foch) that was laid down in 1954........ and then sold to Brazil in 2000..... whereupon she never saw service for more than 3 consecutive months until some manner of mechanical problem put her back in the dock.....

I'm just saying, not that I advocate dumping WW2 levels of trash into the sea, but we're warned that sinking this one boat will destroy the planet, when that level of scrap hitting the ocean floor in the 1940s would have been considered a slow day.
 
Artificial reefs are literal hulls with everything down to the last electrical wire ripped out, and sunk in relatively shallow water. This is a big dirty great boat full of nasty shit that'll poison anything living in it. It's not going to turn the entire ocean into toxins but we shouldn't be letting third world shitholes like Brazil dump their unwanted trash wherever they like.
If the ship had any copper wiring left aboard it would be stripped before sinking. Asbestos is the main “toxin” they’re worried about and that won’t hurt anything. Especially underwater.
 
I'm just saying, not that I advocate dumping WW2 levels of trash into the sea, but we're warned that sinking this one boat will destroy the planet, when that level of scrap hitting the ocean floor in the 1940s would have been considered a slow day.
That was my point too, they're acting like this is a leaky nuclear sub when it's just a rusty hull that, while it technically wouldn't pass EPA muster to have in your backyard, nothing on it will kill you or anything else unless you purposely rolled naked on it every day for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius
That was my point too, they're acting like this is a leaky nuclear sub when it's just a rusty hull that, while it technically wouldn't pass EPA muster to have in your backyard, nothing on it will kill you or anything else unless you purposely rolled naked on it every day for years.

*cancels bid on ebay auction for rusting WW2-era hulk*
 
Nah, it's a massive pile of shit. It was old when brazil bought it, they were barely able to use it period the entire time it was in their navy.
In 1976, I was on the USS America and we sailed down to Brazil to do Ops with the Brazilian Navy. Sitting in the harbor in Rio were two WW2 straight deck (like Wasp or Hornet era carriers) that hadn't moved in years.

The Brazilians flew and landed their old Grumman S2 (Stoofs) we had relegated to mail delivery and light cargo years ago aboard the America. Everybody had a good time. Rio was great, the Brazilians loved us, and the wimmens were smoking hot!

Go read what happened to the America. It was towed off the Virginia coast from the Philly shipyard and they ran a SinkEx on it. Took 'em three weeks of everything they threw at it and she still stayed above the waves. They finally brought in a demolition crew in and blew her apart from the insides. Very little known, the America was the only aircraft carrier ever built with a double hull. They had zero idea what it would take to sink her.

Very interesting read about her history. RIP, my lady.

Also, the information on that SinkEx remains classified, even today. But it ain't like one aircraft carrier sunk in deep-water is gonna cause Climate Godzirra to rise from the ocean and seek revenge. That only happens to Japan.

Go, go Godzirra!
 
OK going to pause here for a minute to point out how much I fucking hate this kind of fallacious FUD and overdramatization. Eco tards love to claim this about so many things, some of which even more silly than this. From cars ("a car") rusting away in the woods to small boats sinking. It's always plainly fucking absurd in its claims, but always treated as fact.. Worse yet is government bureaucrats tend to treat it as such as well.

No, a fucking car rusting away, or a small boat sinking is not a disaster of any kind! For some reason (greens and eco extremists) when it involves the environment, all sense of perspective and sanity goes out the fucking window.

The "environment" wont even fucking notice this!
 
Leave it anchored in international waters and let me start a seastead on it.
 
I would say tow it to a already nasty part of the ocean and do some live fire testing, see what it takes to sink something that big. The US learned a ton when we did that.
It'd be neat to see a sinkex done against something as big as a carrier. Test all the new shit out against a real target instead of a steel plate at the end of a track.
 
That was my point too, they're acting like this is a leaky nuclear sub when it's just a rusty hull that, while it technically wouldn't pass EPA muster to have in your backyard, nothing on it will kill you or anything else unless you purposely rolled naked on it every day for years.
Most nuclear subs leak, they just leak at a level that's diluted to environmentally friendly radiation levels.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius
Because India and Bangladesh cracked down somewhat on some aspects of that. Safe disposal is a bitch, and one of the reasons that the US navy no longer can sell ships for scrap value, but instead pays people to scrap them.
I’m pretty sure scrap companies still bid on these ships. Scrap metal is worth a lot of money— or at least more than many people might think. It’s actually one of the largest US exports to other countries.

A lot of the ships go to Bangladesh and India because yeah they have shit labor laws but also because both of them have huge and growing steel (and other metals) industries. At the same time, both are also scrap deficit markets because their economies aren’t developed enough to generate that much scrap metal domestically. That’s why the largest scrap exporters are in North America and Europe. Metal-containing consumer goods have been around long enough in both regions to have gone through multiple life cycles and grow the pool of available scrap.
 
The problem is all the scavenger graveyards are in the Pacific or Indian Ocean. The Sao Paulo is in the Atlantic, and a ship without its own power cannot transition the Panama or Suez Canals. And no way would this derelict abomination survive a trip around either horn.
Maybe Neptune (via whatever rough seas he can provide) will resolve this matter then.

It could. The US recently moved one of its decommissioned carriers larger than this one around South America.
The US could. Brazil cannot, and Macron might have many problems, but this carrier isn't one of them. Again if only Lula had just conquered his aversion to the US and taken something that wasn't a floating wreck. If the retired USS JFK had had issues, Uncle Sam would've looked after it for political reasons (and Mr Burns would so advise) and it'd be cheaper than other foreign things.
 
I'm just saying, not that I advocate dumping WW2 levels of trash into the sea, but we're warned that sinking this one boat will destroy the planet, when that level of scrap hitting the ocean floor in the 1940s would have been considered a slow day.

Oddly a lot of the arguments that the anti sinking lobby use it's refits and service history an requirements as a reason it can't be dumped, the problem is a lot of what was acceptable was deamed forbidden so to have the same properties they use insanely hostile chemicals - most "no or low" oil lubricans are seriously toxic and leach into water more than naturally sauced oils and hang around.

If the ship had any copper wiring left aboard it would be stripped before sinking. Asbestos is the main “toxin” they’re worried about and that won’t hurt anything. Especially underwater.

Oddly from my understanding it's not the copper here it's the low Nuclear steal - Copper is a secondary concern, but the Abesdos concern is a real one, but not in the way you'd think Asbestos tends to take up Cadmium and turn it into a radiological sink, there are animals that thrive but they become cumulatively damaging, this is why Japan is trying to rehabillitate radiation and nuclear in there media post Fukishima.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Lowlife Adventures
Back