Big ships are sturdy, but they're not immortal. Over time their maintenance costs soar until, after 30 years or more, they become more valuable as recycled metal and are sold to a scrapyard.
What happens next will surprise you…
At the murky end of our supply chains lies this: The Chittagong breaking yards in Bangladesh, one of many places where old ships go to die.
But how is shipbreaking done, what are the consequences, and is there a better way?
A thread.
By last year, the world's combined merchant shipping fleet reached a total of 2.3 Billion deadweight tons. 85% of this is massive bulk carriers, container ships and oil tankers. That's a lot of metal that needs recycling or disposal.
So: Do you break them, or scuttle them?
In somewhere like Chittagong, the breaking yard will provide a special pilot for the last trip it ship will make: Drained of most fuel & ballast, emptied of cargo and riding as high as it can on high tide, it is driven up the beach until it can go no further.
Chains & cables are fixed and the vessel is slowly pulled further up the beach. This is the most dangerous part of the operation: Chains and cables breaking or becoming decoupled under tension is extremely dangerous for people on the ground.
Before breaking begins, the tanks must be completely drained to prevent fire or explosion risk. One practice is flame-cutting a path into the bunker fuel tanks at low tide and then allowing successive tides to ‘rinse’ the remaining residues. This practice is not universal.
Initial scrapping commences: Scrappers take over the vessel and locate items of particular interest that can be stripped and re-sold: Wiring, plumbing, machinery, electronics, furniture etc.
Hazardous chemicals will also be marked and removed before breaking starts.
Labourers with grinders, torches and plasma cutters, plus heavy equipment and winches start cutting and ripping the superstructure, section by section, moving down the ship.
As it lightens, sections may be towed higher up the beach for heavy lift cranes to continue.
When the superstructure is sufficiently disassembled to reveal heavy equipment such as engines and generator systems it may be removed for re-use or recycling as well, depending on engineering assessment.
There are regulations or safe dismantling of a ship: The Hong Kong International Convention for The Safety & Environmentally Sound Recycling of The Ships, 2009, was enacted to safeguard human and environmental safety, but in some breaking yards this is merely given lip service.
Shipbreaking is one of the world's most dangerous jobs. As well as high mortality rates and brutal conditions in some yards, chronic issues persist: A 2008 study on Chittagong scrappers showed 80%-90% with eye or respiratory problems from powders, fumes, asbestos and toxins.
Additionally, despite all on-site precautions, direct breaking on a beach with permeable ground means unavoidable environmental contamination from toxins, oils and powders.
Yet recycling re-uses up to 95% of a ship, which is admirable.
Are there better ways?
At the opposite end of the scale is dry dock breaking, the cleanest & safest breaking method, with a good environmental record.
It is, however, uncompetitive and very expensive, as day rates are high and labour costs expensive in countries with surplus dry dock capacity.
So are there other ways to break a ship?
Here, for comparison, is a ‘model layout’ for environmental containment in shipbreaking according to the 2004 Basel Convention.
Obviously, this is near impossible with a beaching approach, so what else is there?
Pier/ alongside breaking.
The vessel is moored pierside while a crane disassembles it from the top down, starting with upper superstructure, then decks, engines etc until light enough to remove wholesale for cutting. Common in China and at some yards in Turkey.
Slipway.
Used where tidal ranges are minimal: The vessel is moored onto a concrete slipway extending into the sea and is then torn apart by mobile cranes or barges and successively towed higher as it lightens. A jetty or temporary quay may be used with heavy lift assets.
Scuttling.
Why not take a different approach entirely? Sink the ship offshore in the right place and it can become an artificial reef, stimulating coral growth, sea life and fisheries.
It sounds simple too. Is It?
For scuttling, the ship needs to be cleaned of chemicals, loose items and hazardous materials at a recognised facility then towed, monitored and sunk with explosives.
Unsurprisingly, this is not as economical as just selling it to a scrapyard.
Upgrading existing piers and slipways to model ship recycling facilities is possible, albeit expensive. Several Asian countries have expressed interest in, or have previously performed ship recycling and could improve facilities for this.
But beaching still out-competes them.
Despite the alternatives, low labour cost and scrap value is a strong lure, and the breaking industry remains concentrated in India & Bangladesh's tidal beaching yards, with their attendant human and environmental cost.
But things have been getting better…
In Alang, the biggest such yard, heavy lift cranes, vessel-specific training and impervious floors with drainage have been installed, and compliance has started to be demonstrated to recognised international recycling standards.
That's not every yard, but it's an improvement.
Labour makes up only 2% of the cost of revenue in such yards, with ship purchase being up to 69%: Up to $400 per ton! This industry might only fully clean up if workers become richer.
That's a white pill of a sort: Progress brings more progress.
Let's make the world richer!
If you liked this, feel free to subscribe to my X or my ‘stack (linked below) for deep dives on a variety of technical subjects, delivered regularly. It can be free, or cost less than a cup of coffee, so give it a try either way!
There are approximately 14.6 million working-age people with STEM degrees in the United States, plus arrivals from outside. There are 29 million in the EU & UK.
But this is a sideshow to the real action in the East…
I used Grok Expert to create a series of estimates for STEM educated populations across the world, excluding social sciences, then used population data to predict changes over time. I analysed USA, China, EU+UK, India, Russia & Japan.
Let's get into it…
USA!
14.6 million.
A low volume of engineers at about 3.7-5.6 million (depending on definition) is powerfully made up for in the sciences, particularly biology & biomedical (2.9 million) and computer science & IT (4.1 million).
It's the greatest story never told: It's the story of how a frugal county in the North of England invented the modern world.
Put on a flat cap and call up the whippet, because this is a thread about my home county, and the inventions that came out of Yorkshire!
Steel!
Benjamin Huntsman invented high homogeneity crucible steel in Sheffield in the 1740s, firing with coke to fully melt the steel and homogenise the carbon content.
This became used… everywhere, and supercharged the ongoing industrial revolution.
Steam trains.
Steam locomotion had been in development for some decades by 1812, but arguably the world's first commercially successful steam locomotive was Matthew Murray's Salamanca. To him, we owe speed.
A liquid rocket boost stage needs to pump fuel and cryogenic oxidiser to the combustion chamber at a rate that beggars belief: The 33 engines on the boost stage of SpaceX's monstrous ‘Superheavy’ booster each chew through about 700 kg of propellant every second. Put all those engines together and the flow rate of liquid fuel & oxygen would be sufficient to empty an Olympic swimming pool in under 2 minutes, if you could find an Olympic swimming pool for cryogenic propellant.
Can you think of any conventional lightweight pump that can do this? Me neither. You need something special…
The turbopump comprises a typically-axial turbine powered by hot, pressurised gas flow that powers centrifugal compressor pumps that pump the colossal quantities of propellant required and pressurize it to, potentially, hundreds of standard atmospheres.
It's a handy, lightweight way to provide pumping power, but it does require that you have a source of hot, high-pressure gas to work with.
Now, where would you find that in a rocket engine?
Indeed. In order to burn fuel, we must pump it. In order to pump it, we may have to burn some of it.
Um…
The Gas Generator Cycle.
A small quantity of the pressurised fuel & oxidiser flows are tapped, brought to a small combustor, vaporised, ignited then expanded through a turbine that powers the fuel and oxygen compressor cycles.
Inevitably the gas generator can't run with a completely nominal fuel:oxy mix, as it would get so hot that it would melt the turbine blades, so typically a gas generator will trade off some efficiency and run fuel rich to power the turbopumps.
-Why not oxy rich? Because fuel has a higher specific heat at constant pressure (Cp) and so you need less mass flow through the gas generator if it's fuel rich than oxy rich, meaning more useful propellant goes to the main combustor & nozzle that moves the rocket.
So the upside of a gas generator cycle is relative simplicity and robustness, which is why it's used on the most reliable rocket motors around, the SpaceX Merlin. The downside is that you trade away efficiency by throwing away some of your propellant, meaning that the tyranny of the Tsiolkowsky rocket equation will kick you where the sun don't shine.
Staged combustion attempts to address this, by taking either a fuel rich or oxy rich preburner, operating at a much higher flow volume than a standard gas generator, and routing the hot gases that leave the turbine straight to the combustion chamber so that they're not lost. This not only increases the average propellant exhaust velocity (since none of it is lost) and therefore efficiency, but also allows a lower average temperature in the preburner and turbine, since there's a higher volume throughput instead.
On the flipside you must deal with hugely increased engineering complexity, an increased potential for feedback control problems between the different parts of the engine, and also a much higher pressure preburner, since it will still need to deliver high working pressures to the combustion chamber after the losses of the turbine and injectors.
The Soviets got there first, and some of their genius manifested in the Russian RD180 oxy-rich staged combustion engine, which was bought by the Americans and used in Atlas rockets for many years. Its unique oxy-rich staged combustion cycle was efficient but not without drawbacks, as high temperature gaseous oxygen is brutal to exposed metal surfaces, demanding an enamel coating on many parts of the engine.
Last month Rolls-Royce won the UK's small modular reactor competition to develop and build SMRs in the UK. It could be a new dawn for nuclear power.
But who else was in the competition, what was special about each design, and which is your favourite?
An SMR thread…
What's an SMR?
A small modular reactor is a way of beating the brutally high capital costs of building nuclear power: By simplifying assembly (modularity) and minimising subsystem size so almost all of it is factory built you harvest industrial learner effects and low costs.
Boiling water vs pressurised water reactors.
All designs in this list are either PWRs or BWRs, the most common reactor styles today. I've a thread on the basics if you need it, but otherwise on with the show!
In April on a mountain in Chile the Vera Rubin observatory gathered first light, and this telescope will be world-changing! -Not because it can see the furthest… but because it can see the fastest!
The Vera Rubin telescope thread! The value of speed, and unique technology…
Who was Vera Rubin?
She first hypothesized the existence of dark matter, by observing that the rotation speed of the edge of the galaxy did not drop off with radius from the centre as much as it should. The search for dark matter, and other things, will drive this telescope…
Does it see a long way?
Yes, but it’s not optimized for that: The battle of the big mirrors is won by the Extremely Large Telescope which, yes, is meant to see a long way. Vera Rubin is not that big, but that doesn’t matter because it has a different and maybe better mission.