As the Suez Canal incident demonstrated only too well, ever-increasing vessel sizes continue to pose a disproportionately large risk with costly groundings, fires and record levels of container losses at sea” (Allianz, 2021). This statement is only one general but also a recent objective aspect that illustrates how the shipping industry, especially container vessels, has evolved over the past half-century. Considering that according to UNCTAD (2021) more than 90% of global trade is moved by sea, the industry permanently seeks to increase speed in every part of the worldwide supply chain, sacrificing safety on behalf of volume. Is there any breakpoint in the gigantism phenomenon? What needs to happen to finally stop increasing the size of the vessels before the consequences of future accidents get to the point of no return?

This academic essay aims to critically discuss and analyze issues that can be seen as safety risks of “super-sized” vessels based on recent incidents, statistics, and scenario analysis. Therefore, the essay will be divided into four main parts to develop the analysis accordingly. Part one will analyze the historical evolution and recent relevant incidents related to gigantism in vessels. Subsequently, part 2 will discuss the new risks regarding the trend of keeping bigger vessels versus the safety issues linked to these new “XXL” ships and the challenges facing the global supply chain. Part 4 will describe Chile’s national situation and challenges in this regard. Finally, the conclusion will co-relate the topics addressed in each of the two parts to provide a common ground focus on the best development patterns for shipping and how both states and stakeholders should internationally address those patterns to be more efficient and safer regarding maritime trade.

Endless gigantism over the last half-century and incidents in the containerized transfer of cargo by sea:

Understanding that the shipping industry and container vessels have only increased their size over the past 50 years is essential. The cargo capacity started at 1,530 TEU by 1968 to the impressive current record (soon to be broken once and again) of 24,000 TEU by 2021. In other words, there has been a 1500% increase in the size of container travel capacity over the past 50 years. Considering the increased ratio from the last decade and the new orders to build bigger mega-sized container ships, the question is if this gigantism phenomenon will ever stop.

As published after the incident of the MV Ever Given in the Suez Canal (Allianz, 2021), insurance companies have been observing the new risks associated with bigger ships and the eventual consequences of an incident affecting them while operating at sea, especially in relevant narrow areas around the globe. In this case, hundreds of vessels were delayed, impacting the global logistic chain heavily. Moreover, to give context to this, the Suez Canal blockage was responsible for a delay in about 12% of total international trade, with an associated daily cost of about 9,6 bn. (Allianz, 2021).

Nevertheless, the causes of the MV Ever Given accident are still not fully confirmed. Still, analysis up to date provides reasons similar to regular incidents at sea, like low visibility, strong winds, and, of course, human error. However, what makes the more significant difference and gives more relevance to this specific incident is not the reasons for the accident itself but its consequences on the global supply chain. Luckily, the vessel was refloated and rescued, making everything “go back to normal” in days. Nevertheless, at the same time, this accident was a real eye-opener for the international shipping community and all of its stakeholders. The Suez Canal Incident showed the consequences of uncontrolled gigantism in container ships. Consequently, the new risks arising from these super-sized vessel operations must be addressed strongly and, more importantly, “proactively” before even more complicated incidents happen around the world´s oceans.

Lessons not learned and need of global proactiveness for a safer future of shipping 

On a historical approach, since the first SOLAS version was approved in 1914 and even until the implementation of the ISPS Code in 2004, international Safety regulations have come after massive incidents/accidents that changed the shipping industry (and sometimes even world history) forever. This way of developing rules based on “lessons learned” also shows how, instead of being proactive to risks coming from super-sized vessels, the shipping industry is still willing to sacrifice Safety over profit. The MV “Ever Given” incident was indeed an “eye-opener,” but the issue itself prevails. Is the International Maritime community brave enough to address the growing risks associated with this phenomenon, or are they waiting for a “new Titanic” to react (lessons not learned)?

Building on Allianz’s (2021) statement that “bigger ships create bigger problems,” what kind of new risks have been observed over the last few years? Using the Suez Canal Incident as the primary reference, some early conclusions can be presented.

In the first place, it is a fact that gigantic vessels generate an economy of scale, but at the same time, the associated costs and risks are way more significant. Groundings (like the one that affected MV Ever Given), fires, and collisions are just some of the dangers that have always been present in the vessels’ operations. Still, under this new dimension of sizes, the magnitude of its consequences is getting to levels beyond imagination. To be more specific, almost no one would ever imagine anything like the Incident being addressed in this paragraph, and it could have been much worse than it was.

Secondly, having more containers stacked on board makes them more sensitive to weather influence, both from oceans and winds (to name only two). Furthermore, this has become more recurrent in significant incidents and cargo losses at sea under bad weather conditions.

Another line of thought demonstrates how complicated it is to address the legal appliances regarding insurance and coverages after accidents. As published in pstriall.com (2022), insurance companies now see how significant claims involving more countries and stakeholders are becoming part of their daily operations. The Suez Canal incident will be one of the first legal precedents for this issue, but its accountability is still unclear. The affected international logistic chain is too large and involves many actors who are part of the legal processes.

Lastly, the machinery needed to take part in salvage operations of super-sized vessels is just not available on the world stage. The logistic means and technical qualifications required to rescue a ship like MV Ever Given are still “in the making,” leading to a high rate of “improvisation” when it comes to solving incidents like that one based on pressures of time and markets. Also, the port facilities can only sometimes handle these new cargo volumes simultaneously. Draughts at piers and berthing need to be increased sometimes, and operational limits are being forced beyond them, developing against complicated accountability challenges and requiring exceptions to manoeuvre proven studies for the benefit of time (and, of course, profit).

There is an imperative need to act at every level before another “Ever Given” incident happens again with an even worse outcome. Sadly, the evidence highlights that even 111 years after the Titanic accident, the shipping industry still needs to learn its lessons.

The national safety-cultural scenario

Chile is a purely maritime country that relies on its international trade by sea, as seen in Figure 2 (DIRECTEMAR, 2023). Therefore, the constant evolution/expansion of vessels involved in maritime trade affects the national port’s real-time operations, especially when bigger ships arrive at our coasts. Moreover, the ugly truth about this type of operation is that the speed of growth in size (draught, length, and displacement) is faster than local regulations, port studies, or regular authorizations.

Building on that idea, what cannot happen is to delegate the responsibility to resolve to local maritime authorities, with a “facilitating” focus on producing exceptional resolutions that allow manoeuvres from vessels that are bigger than their port’s limitations. It is an old practice that the maritime industry likes to utilize, but it’s been eradicated over the last few years.

Finally, the national pilotage service works differently compared to other parts of the globe. Notably, it designates the pilots for manoeuvres as a coastal state attribution. The way our country operates in this regard forces the shipping companies to work without having the chance to choose among private companies or pilot associations, as happens abroad. By doing this, undoubtedly, our country’s responsibility gets bigger after eventual incidents that could occur, resulting in harbour pilots’ responsibilities. Consequently, the critical lesson is to be proactive and develop the regulations and safety measures in advance.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is essential to consider that, as Guevara and Dalaklis (2021) stated, the SOLAS Convention and all its linked regulatory frameworks are a set of regulations under permanent evolution. Moreover, technological development in the shipping industry is much faster than it takes for international regulators to update a legal framework or standardized procedures. This phenomenon is perfectly described by looking at the trend of increasing the size of container vessels.

Historically, the regulations come from “lesson learned” processes, essentially based on major accidents that allow the international community to “identify and address” the risks involved by developing a new regulation and defining actions to be taken. So, the main challenge is to move from an “eye-opener” incident like MV Ever Given towards actual actions and proactive measures.

The evidence presented by The Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty “Safety and Shipping Review” (2021) has shown that bigger vessels undoubtedly come with more significant associated risks. Looking up to the future, especially toward the Automatization of maritime operations, it seems vital to make a “full stop” before it is too late. The real challenge is to be responsible for implementing newer technologies and capacities without sacrificing safety. Risks are always part of maritime operations. Still, effective mitigation, proper standardization, and preventive training will be the keys to safer, cleaner, more sustainable, and better shipping operations on a global and national scale.