I'd like to know what peoples opinions are on the US ships that were towed across the atlantic for dismantling in Hartlepool. After a environmental backlash the decision was made to allow the ships to dock only but they are due to be returned to the US.

I think that any financial benefit would be grossly outweighed by the environmental impact...but then it's easy for me to say that when I'm miles away in Sheffield.

I have no idea what the situation is further oop North...

Just another example of the poodle bending over for it's master and saying it doesn't mind because it got thrown a bone.

Originally posted by Lickszz
I'd like to know what peoples opinions are on the US ships that were towed across the atlantic for dismantling in Hartlepool. After a environmental backlash the decision was made to allow the ships to dock only but they are due to be returned to the US.

I bet you any money that they don't return.

Peter Mandleson, the MP for that area was quoted as saying it was better they come here rather than be driven onto the beaches of Bangladesh or some other third world country to be broken up.

What gets me is why there were allowed to travel at all. The US is much larger than the UK, surely there are companies there which can handle this job?

It's much more than just a distmantling job though. One of the ships has a cargo of asbestos, that is scheduled to be buried in a landfill site in that area.

It's bloody ridiculous - the ships come from the US so they should be the ones breaking them and disposing of the asbestos.

Some interesting points. Thanks.

After weighing up all the options I think the benefits outweight any negative impact. Hartlepool is a very run down place and this is a massive contract that will give a couple of hundred people jobs for at least a couple of years. Those people badly need those jobs. My advice would have been - Get stuck in people, by the kids some new shoes etc.

Now of course that doesn't look like happening. They have been breaking up ships in Hartleppool for years and this is one of the main reasons why they won the contract for this job because of their invaluable experience and excellent safety record.

The work would have brought life to a dead place. 'Can`t,' 'won`t,' 'don`t,' 'couldn`t,' and 'wouldn`t,' should be substituted by 'will' and the area should get the benefit. Those who would query either cost, or the risk when it happens to be hypothetical so far, should be reminded of the need.

Mandleson is up to his neck in this and I was looking and listening to his speech in the commons. Unfortunately it seems to have been a waste of time.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Some interesting points. Thanks.

After weighing up all the options I think the benefits outweight any negative impact. Hartlepool is a very run down place

Have you ever been? There is plenty of money in the marina and all the posh apartments that surround it.

Originally posted by alchresearch
Have you ever been? There is plenty of money in the marina and all the posh apartments that surround it.

Yes, I have been quite a few times and parts of it are a dump for want of better words. Yes, the Marina is another source of work which some have used in an arguement against this ship contract. Pure speculation of course.

It was suggested that rather than bring the ships here we could send the equipment and people (skills/knowhow) over there. This would have eliminated the risk of sending these rust buckets across the Atlantic and mean the toxic waste would be buried in it's country of origin.

Originally posted by Zamo
It was suggested that rather than bring the ships here we could send the equipment and people (skills/knowhow) over there. This would have eliminated the risk of sending these rust buckets across the Atlantic and mean the toxic waste would be buried in it's country of origin.

Suggested by who?

Originally posted by Lickszz
Suggested by who?
Don't remember, just remember reading it. It was probably one of the environmental groups prtesting about it. Sounds a reasonable solution though... unless you're an American trying to dump your sh*t in someone elses backyard!

Originally posted by Zamo
Don't remember, just remember reading it. It was probably one of the environmental groups prtesting about it. Sounds a reasonable solution though... unless you're an American trying to dump your sh*t in someone elses backyard!

I figured it might have been someone like that who would have suggested it. For me that defeats the object. The idea is to bring badly needed jobs to that region. That is work for a couple of hundred people for at least a couple of years. I don't think it's fair to expect them to travel to America for work.

Originally posted by Lickszz
I figured it might have been someone like that who would have suggested it. For me that defeats the object. The idea is to bring badly needed jobs to that region. That is work for a couple of hundred people for at least a couple of years. I don't think it's fair to expect them to travel to America for work.
Fair is, as fair does (sorry, I watched Forrest Gump last night!).

Some may say it's not fair risking the environment by bringing those rust buckets across the atlantic for the sake of a few jobs. Besides, I bet loads of them would have loved the opportunity to live and work in the States for a couple of years.

Originally posted by Zamo
Fair is, as fair does (sorry, I watched Forrest Gump last night!).

Some may say it's not fair risking the environment by bringing those rust buckets across the atlantic for the sake of a few jobs. Besides, I bet loads of them would have loved the opportunity to live and work in the States for a couple of years.

Well, I wouldn't like to comment on whether or not they would like to uproot to the states. With regards to the ships, they have already brought some across and these same people don't seem to be too concerned about the environment insisting on a unnecessary return journey for the vessels. The risks to the environment are mostly hypothetical but the jobs and the life it will bring to the community are real. Worth the risk? I think so.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Well, I wouldn't like to comment on whether or not they would like to uproot to the states. With regards to the ships, they have already brought some across and these same people don't seem to be too concerned about the environment insisting on a unnecessary return journey for the vessels. The risks to the environment are mostly hypothetical but the jobs and the life it will bring to the community are real. Worth the risk? I think so.
The risks aren't hypothetical. Many of the toxic substances (like the asbestos) from these ships that they plan to bury are not bio-degradable. Even if we assume there won't be any accidents during this process, we still leave a nasty inheritance for our off-spring to dig up a few generations down the road.

Originally posted by Zamo
The risks aren't hypothetical. Many of the toxic substances (like the asbestos) from these ships that they plan to bury are not bio-degradable. Even if we assume there won't be any accidents during this process, we still leave a nasty inheritance for our off-spring to dig up a few generations down the road.

But they have been Dismantling ships in Hartlepool for years. Why has this just become apparent then? I think that the fact of where these ships are from is the reason behind some peoples arguements.

Originally posted by Lickszz
But they have been Dismantling ships in Hartlepool for years. Why has this just become apparent then? I think that the fact of where these ships are from is the reason behind some peoples arguements.

Why should we be expected to bury someone elses asbestos in our country just so some company can make £11 million or so? We send asbestos removal teams to other parts of the world so why not send them to the US in this case?

Originally posted by Lickszz
I figured it might have been someone like that who would have suggested it. For me that defeats the object. The idea is to bring badly needed jobs to that region. That is work for a couple of hundred people for at least a couple of years. I don't think it's fair to expect them to travel to America for work.

Some asbestos workers travel across the world in their line of work. Same with mine sweepers and oil rig / oil well firefighters.

Originally posted by Lickszz
But they have been Dismantling ships in Hartlepool for years. Why has this just become apparent then? I think that the fact of where these ships are from is the reason behind some peoples arguements.

Yes I have been waiting for someone to make that argument.

People on Teesside are expert dismantlers, they do it for a living, ships like this regularly come in. How come suddenly everyone is an expert on this subject and dead against these ships in particular coming. As nobody has every minded before, then I have to assume that it is just another chance to have a go at the Americans.

There has been some appalling exaggeration about these ships and what they have in them too.

I would rather we did it here, properly and safely using the skills of the Teessiders, than let the ships wonder off to Poland or somewhere to be bodged up and pollute half of Europe.

Nobody dislikes American Foreign Policy more than me (okay, you know what I mean) but I dont then go on to hate everyone who lives there and everything they do and everything they say....

Now that really is racist, not that any of you are like that of course, but some people out there are.

(Funny seeing Tory's supporting Green Peace though....gives me quite a buzz)

Originally posted by alchresearch
Some asbestos workers travel across the world in their line of work. Same with mine sweepers and oil rig / oil well firefighters.

It's not about travelling across the world. It's about bringing the jobs to that region.

Originally posted by Zamo
The risks aren't hypothetical. Many of the toxic substances (like the asbestos) from these ships that they plan to bury are not bio-degradable. Even if we assume there won't be any accidents during this process, we still leave a nasty inheritance for our off-spring to dig up a few generations down the road.

Ummm... Asbestos is a natural mineral that is actually mined. Some types do have an unfortunate habit of causing lung probs' under certain circumstances, but on the whole it is very safe if left alone - half the factories in Sheffield have it on their roof and in their boiler rooms and no-one is up in arms.

Asbestos certainly cannot do anyone any harm if buried, and removal is very strictly controlled and regulated. Ergo - no danger to anyone, but maybe it isnt fashionable to say that.

Originally posted by Tony
Ummm... Asbestos is a natural mineral that is actually mined. Some types do have an unfortunate habit of causing lung probs' under certain circumstances, but on the whole it is very safe if left alone - half the factories in Sheffield have it on their roof and in their boiler rooms and no-one is up in arms.

Asbestos certainly cannot do anyone any harm if buried, and removal is very strictly controlled and regulated. Ergo - no danger to anyone, but maybe it isnt fashionable to say that.
"Unfortunate lung problems"? Oh, you mean asbestosis and cancer, which kills nearly 90% of sufferers within 5 years. Yes, that is unfortunate.

Asbestos may be safe if left alone but in this case they intend to dismantle the ships so it will not be left alone will it?

Burying it may make it safe during our life time and maybe even that of our children and our childrens children, but what about those who come after that?

IMHO I think countries should take responsibility for desposing of their own toxic rubbish and not be allowed to simply sell off the problem to poorer countries. I think that's exploitation.

Originally posted by Zamo
IMHO I think countries should take responsibility for desposing of their own toxic rubbish and not be allowed to simply sell off the problem to poorer countries. I think that's exploitation.

Yep, just like with Sellafield taking everyone's spent nuclear material.

Originally posted by Zamo
"Unfortunate lung problems"? Oh, you mean asbestosis and cancer, which kills nearly 90% of sufferers within 5 years. Yes, that is unfortunate.

Asbestos may be safe if left alone but in this case they intend to dismantle the ships so it will not be left alone will it?

Burying it may make it safe during our life time and maybe even that of our children and our childrens children, but what about those who come after that?

IMHO I think countries should take responsibility for desposing of their own toxic rubbish and not be allowed to simply sell off the problem to poorer countries. I think that's exploitation.
Come on Zamo - I didn't say "unfortunate lung problems" did I?

There is far too much hysteria around asbestos, full stop. It is totally inert when undisturbed, and like I said, the controls on dealing with it in this country make it perfectly safe under the relevant controlled conditions - which I am sure will be implemented by the dismantlerers. It doesnt just float into the air on its own and the MD of the shipyard won't just dig a big hole in a field in the middle of the night to get rid of it. There is plenty of toxic junk in the ground already without worrying about this tiny bit. I don't think that future generations will forget where it is, and you never know - they might find a way of dealing with it better than we do!

The asbestos will pose NO PROBLEMS AT ALL to anyone in this country.
The PCB's might be the same as those in your circuit breakers under the stairs.
They were even quoting LEAD BASED PAINT!!!!!!

However, there is loads of mind polluting hysteria whipped up by politicians of various persuasions for personal and political gain.

I do agree that the ships should have been dismantled in the USA though, but far better dismantled properly here than somewhere else under worse conditions.