Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Development of ship-specific recycling plan to improve health safety

and environment in ship recycling yards
Anand M. Hiremath, Sachin Kumar Pandey, Shyam R. Asolekar*
Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The recycling of end-of-life vessels has been identified as a key economic activity for sustainable
Received 16 June 2015 development. India is the world's leading ship recycling (i.e. breaking, dismantling) country working on
Received in revised form the principle of waste to wealth. However, the nature of operations carried out at ship-recycling facilities
26 December 2015
has raised concerns relating to occupational health, safety and environment (HSE). Though the efforts
Accepted 4 January 2016
made by both Hong Kong Convention (HKC) and European Union (EU) legislation on safe and environ-
Available online 11 January 2016
mentally sound ship recycling are commendable, there exists no standard example or case report showing
how to prepare the ship-specific recycling plan (SRP). Also, a clear guidance does not exist on preparation
Keywords:
Ship recycling
of the “ship-specific recycling plan” required for the three-step risk assessment method (reported in our
Hong Kong Convention earlier research).
Health safety and environment Nearly 80% of the vessels dismantled in Alang ship recycling yards in India include bulk carrier,
Inventory of hazardous materials container and general cargo ships. Therefore, two bulk carrier ships, two general cargo ships and two
What-if-Analysis container ships were tracked (one ship at a time) from beaching to complete recycling in this study and
Ship-specific recycling plan the life cycle of recycling process was investigated in-depth aiming at articulating the so called “ship-
specific recycling plan”. At the outset, it was understood that the lateral knowledge of experts involved in
risk assessment exercise needs to be complemented with the causeeeffect relationships. Therefore,
what-if-analysis was employed to articulate the HSE issues associated with the above six ships selected
for investigation. In addition, the inventory of hazardous/non-hazardous wastes generated during the
course of recycling of six ships under investigation were classified as per the Inventory Guidelines pre-
scribed by International Maritime Organization (IMO).
It was observed that bulk carrier, general cargo and container ships were broken in a similar manner.
There are certain limitations with respect to the number of workers that could be engaged and size of the
ship that could be beached in a given yard for recycling resulting from the physical size of the yard and
fluctuations in the price of steel in international market. It was articulated that, on an average,
1.762 ± 0.026 man days would be required to dismantle one LDT of a given ship. The number of man days
required for complete recycling of a given type of ship can indeed be used as the most important
parameter while developing and planning for recycling of a given ship. The ship-specific recycling plan,
what-if-analysis and wastes inventory developed in this research will further strengthen the three-step
risk assessment method. Also, it is hoped that the results of this research will play a major role in ful-
filling the legal obligations and eventually help in achieving the safe and environmentally sound ship
recycling as desired by HKC and newly passed EU legislation.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction such a huge magnitude impose heavy burden on environment in all

Global steel production has reached approximately 1607.2 Mega
tonnes in the year 2013 (World Steel, 2013). As steel production at
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ91 22 2576 7867.
E-mail addresses: hiremathmanand@gmail.com (A.M. Hiremath), asolekar@iitb.
ac.in (S.R. Asolekar).
its phases, it's essential to lessen the burden on natural resources
and maximize the steel recycling and find all the possible sources
for secondary steel production. It is interesting to note that one
such potential secondary source of steel is ship recycling industry.
It is well known that ships are an integral part of world trade
and serve as a key link in world manufacturer's global logistical
chain. Approximately 90e95% of international commercial goods
are transported by sea routes (Demaria, 2010; Chang et al., 2010;

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.006
0959-6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
280 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
Neşer et al., 2012; Hiremath et al., 2015). According to the study
carried out by International Maritime Organization (IMO) in the
year 2010, total 104,304 merchant ships were found to be involved
in trading activity (IMO, 2012). Such huge number of ships needs to
be disposed off from the ocean at the end of their useful life.
Typically, the need for breaking and recycling of a ship arises
under two conditions. First, when the cost of operation of the ship
becomes greater than the revenue which it can generate, and sec-
ond, when the age or market conditions make a ship not-profitable
to operate for the owner (Moen, 2008). It is to be noted that recy-
cling of end-of-life vessels is an inevitable activity which reduces
the maritime burden of ships after their profitable operation
(Deshpande et al., 2012). Ship contains more than 95% of steel and
the scrap value usually depends on the price of steel in the market
(Reddy et al., 2003; SRIA, 2014; Demaria, 2010; Deshpande et al.,
2012).
The magnitude of items recovered from ship recycling varies
from valuable machineries and equipments, household accessories
to things that are as trifling as screws and nut bolts. Ship recycling
industry can also be considered as a green industry as almost entire
product can be reused, recycled and resold (Sarraf et al., 2010).
Ship recycling industry provides direct and indirect job oppor-
tunities to approximately half one million workers in both India
and Bangladesh. Country like Bangladesh is scarce in terms of Iron
ore. In the year 2004, Bangladesh ship recycling industry contrib-
uted as high as 80% to the country's ever increasing steel
demand (Kumar, 2013).
In case of India, ship recycling activity contributes to approxi-
mately 1e2% domestic steel demand e which is approximately 28%
of country's total imported ferrous scrap (Ravichandran et al., 2012;
Mikelis, 2013). Therefore, ship recycling activity, if promoted, can
become a great tool to fill this void of steel demand.
1.1. Issues associated with ship recycling
The recycling of end-of-life vessels has been identified as a key
economic activity for sustainable development. However, the na-
ture of operations carried out at ship-recycling facilities has raised
concerns relating to occupational HSE. The reason is twofold. First,
in addition to economically re-usable materials such as steel, ves-
sels also contain hazardous materials such as heavy metals,
asbestos, glass wool, thermocol, oily rigs, oily sludge, oily sand,
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),
and organotins like tributyltin (TBT) etc., to which the workers get
expose during breaking process as well as fraction of hazardous
wastes may get release into the surrounding environment (Reddy
et al., 2004; Asolekar, 2006; Neser et al., 2008; Mahindrakar
et al., 2008; Demaria, 2010; Chang et al., 2010; Deshpande et al.,
2012, 2013; Kusumaningdyah et al., 2013; Hiremath et al., 2014,
2015; Garmer et al., 2015). Second reason is, due to the structural
complexity of ships many physical risks to workers takes place
during recycling activity leading to severe injuries and even fatal
accidents. For example, Demaria (2010) reported an average annual
incidence of fatal accidents in the Alang ship recycling industry in
India as 2.0 per 1000 workers (based on official data from 1995 to
2005).
1.2. Ship Recycling Regulations and guidelines
The Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) was set
up by the IMO, the United Nations legislator of the shipping in-
dustry to address the environmental issues relating to ship recy-
cling and addressing the violations of the 1989 Basel Convention on
the Control of Trans-Boundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes
(Chang et al., 2010). However, ship owners from developed nations
find ways to evade these regulations by selling ships to flag states of
convenience, from where they are eventually sent to ship recycling
companies located in Asian countries (Garud, 2012).
The International Labour Organization (ILO) published a report
entitled: Safety and Health in Ship Breaking: Guidelines for Asian
Countries and Turkey in 2004. The guidelines are designed to
follow the ILO standards, codes of practice and other guidelines on
occupational safety and health and working conditions. The
guidelines contain practical recommendations for use by all those
who are responsible for occupational safety and health in ship
recycling operations.
The Hong Kong Convention (HKC) held in May, 2009 aimed at
ensuring that ships being recycled do not pose any unnecessary
risks to human HSE and highlighted the importance of inventori-
zation of hazardous materials, development of ship recycling plan,
authorization of ship recycling facilities and safe and environ-
mentally sound recycling of ship. The HKC addresses issues of
environmentally hazardous substances like asbestos, hydrocar-
bons, ozone-depleting substances etc. The HKC is currently being
negotiated based on the draft formulated by the IMO under the
auspices of United Nations Organization (Deshpande et al., 2012;
IMO, 2013).
The European Commission has also passed a new legislation
entitled: “Ship Recycling Regulation” e which was published in an
Official Journal of the European Union on 10 December, 2013 (EU,
2013). As per this regulation all ships entering European Union
(EU) ports as well as EU-flagged ships should have an inventory of
hazardous materials (IHM). Ships departing for recycling should
have an IHM as soon as the EU list is published, but not before 31
December, 2014. The requirements for an IHM are expected to be
detailed than for the Hong Kong Convention's IHM, specifically
concerning accuracy and comprehensiveness.
Even though the share (%) of wastes is minimal compared to the
size of the ship, the wastes magnitude is huge (Hiremath et al.,
2015). Therefore, HKC and EU regulations have highlighted the
importance of preparing an inventory of the hazardous materials in
the vessel. The literature review suggests no published case study
so far on recycling of particular type of ship - which may become
the basis for assessing the potential damage that can be caused by
recycling obsolete vessels.
As stated earlier, the cost of obsolete vessel highly depends on
the price of steel and scrap value in the international market. The
costs associated with improving health of workers, safety related
equipments in yards as well as environmental degradation caused
by ship recycling, however, is not included while estimating the
cost of obsolete ship. It is to be noted that both HKC and EU legis-
lation understood and reported the importance of improving HSE
conditions at the yards for achieving sustainability of the sector.
Thus, internalizing the HSE costs needs thorough knowledge of
ship-specific recycling plan, occupational risks posed to workers
and surrounding environment along with the quantity and location
of wastes in a given ship.
Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB), Government of Gujarat, ad-
ministers and regulates ship recycling activity in Alang from last
two decades. There are two landmark regulations made by GMB to
make ship recycling activity environment friendly 1) “The GMB
(Prevention of Fire and Accidents for Safety of Workers and Pro-
tection of Environment During Ship-breaking Activities) Regula-
tion, 2003” and 2) “The GMB (Conditions and Procedures for
Granting Permission for Utilizing Ship Recycling Plots) Regulation,
2006”. The GMB regulations, 2003 regulates ship recycling activity
and its safety, hazardous waste management, beaching permission,
etc., while GMB regulation, 2006 contains the terms and conditions
that are required for getting ship recycling plot and renewal of
existing plot.
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
Apart from these two regulations, the Supreme Court of India
has passed the order in the year 2007 which recommended di-
rections for beaching, anchoring and ship recycling in India. Ac-
cording to the ruling of the Supreme Court of India, order dated 6th
September, 2007 (Supreme Court of India (2007)), before
commencing the breaking and recycling process, the recycler (yard
owner) shall submit the ship recycling plan e which should have
“two components i.e. Ship-Specific Recycling Plan and Recycling
Facility's Management Plan”. Typically, ship recyclers submit only
the proposed ship recycling schedule (time required for cutting
holds, engine room and cabin of the ship). The GMB, Government of
Gujarat has been engaged with us because they are desirous of
receiving more detailed and structured plan from the yard pro-
posing to dismantle and recycle a given ship.
The three detailed guidelines were provided by IMO (2015),
namely: 1) Guidelines for the Development of the Ship Recycling Plan
adopted by resolution MEPC.196(62); 2011, 2) Guidelines for Safe
and Environmentally Sound Ship Recycling adopted by resolution
MEPC.210(63); 2012 and the 3) Guidelines for the Authorization of
Ship Recycling Facilities adopted by resolution MEPC.211(63); 2012,
though there efforts are commendable, there is still no clear un-
derstanding in any of these documents on how to prepare the ship
recycling plan. It is hoped that the results and framework presented
in this research will help in fulfilling this gap.
In our earlier research, reported in Garmer et al. (2015), a three-
step risk assessment methodology for ship recycling yards was
developed and validated aimed at minimizing the occupational and
environmental risks in this sector. Still two significant limitations of
the three-step risk assessment method were observed from Alang.
First, the “step-1” of the three-step risk assessment method
should be articulated based on in-depth understanding of the type
of ship to be dismantled. Interestingly, no published literature is
available even today except the typical ship recycling plan reported
by Hiremath et al. (2015). Even the international conventions (IMO,
2012; EU SRR, 2013) expect the yard owner to submit the SRP
pertaining to the specific ship to be dismantled.
Second, the method assumes that the risk assessment team can
undertake the assessment based on the lateral experience in
different industrial sectors. For that reason, a checklist approach
was adopted (in ‘step-2’ of the methodology). The listings focussed
on the variety of hazards to be incorporated in the risk assessment
process.
1.3. Site description
India is the home for the world's largest ship recycling industry,
responsible for nearly 47% of all end-of-life vessels recycled annually.
Nearly 160 active ship recycling yards at Alang are engaged in recy-
cling more than 350 ships annually (approximately 2.7 million tonnes
of recycled steel). The gentle slope of beach (100) with hard bottom
sand makes Alang as a final destination for different types of end-of-
life vessels including passenger ships, general cargo, container, bulk
carrier, oil tankers, reefer and cruise ships (Deshpande et al., 2012;
Hiremath et al., 2014, 2015; Garmer et al., 2015).
The recycling process consists of approximately twelve broad
work activities, from vessel beaching to plate cutting and sending it
to re-rollling mills (Hiremath et al., 2015; Garmer et al., 2015). It has
been observed that 70% of the labour force employed at a single
yard is engaged in cutting of plates. Alang yards have broken more
than 6000 end-of-life vessels since from its existence (Deshpande
et al., 2013). It is to be noted that the weight of ship is typically
referred as Light Displacement Tonnage (LDT), which is defined as
the weight of the ship excluding general cargo, fuel, water, ballast,
stores, passengers, crew, but with water in boilers to steaming level
(George, 2005). One LDT of ship is equal to 1 ton.
281
In recent years, the sector has been the focus of discussion
because relatively greater numbers of ships were scrapped and
obsolete vessels were sent for recycling due to the bad national and
international market situations (Asolekar, 2012). Modernization of
ship recycling yards in Alang is essential as it is anticipated that for
coming next ten years, 10 to 15 million tons dead-weight of end-of-
life ships every year will end-up for recycling (Asolekar, 2012;
Deshpande et al., 2012; Hiremath et al., 2014, 2015; Garmer et al.,
2015).
As far as the cumulative output of approximately 160 yards in
Alang is concerned, statistically more than one ship is dismantled
every day. Table 1 depicts the statistics on the six types of ships
recycled in two consecutive financial years (1st April, 2011 to 31st
March, 2013) in Alang (data adapted from Hiremath et al., 2015).
Clearly, the general cargo, bulk carrier and container ships are the
three most predominantly handled ships in Alang (nearly 80% of
the vessels dismantled every year). Apparently, as reported by
Hiremath et al. (2015), these ships are often preferred by the ship
recyclers in Alang due to the relatively higher amounts of recyclable
steel potentially derived from them.
Most of the yards in Alang have 60 m width (some yards are
100e150 m wide) and have 100e125 m long work-areas between
high-tide line and exit gates. The schematic representation of a
typical yard with notional yard boundaries, gate and the ship
beached in inter-tidal zone (i.e. between the high-tide and low-tide
lines) is shown in Fig. 1.
As seen from the Figure, the ship recycling activities are con-
ducted in primarily four zones, namely: ship-cabin and inside of the
ship, inter-tidal zone, primary zone and secondary zone. The
intertidal zone is the wet area between high tide and low tide lines.
As far as possible, vessels are customarily beached during high tide
and are dismantled progressively slice-by-slice. The slices are cut-
away and separated from ship in inter-tidal zone during several
lowest tide periods (each period typically lasting for 1e2 h). The
large slice of vessel is referred to as “zadap” in local language.
The primary zone is the zone adjoining the inter-tidal zone on
landward side (see Fig. 1). Once the slice is separated away from
ship with the help of winches, it is dragged from the wet inter-tidal
zone to semi-dry primary zone for further clean-up, fragmentation
with the help of hand-held oxy-LPG torches. Specialized teams of
workers clean-up the slices and systematically separate the wastes,
pack them and store in segregated rooms near the exit gate.
Workers fragment the large slice of vessel into relatively smaller
pieces so that they could be lifted with the help of cranes and
placed into secondary zone for further processing.
In the secondary zone, slices were further cut into smaller
transportable sizes and the separated wastes are segregated and
temporarily stored so that it is periodically cleared by the dedicated
vehicles and transported to common hazardous wastes-treatment,
storage, disposal facility (CHW-TSDF) for treatment and disposal as
per the law.
1.4. Scope and objectives
As reported in Garmer et al. (2015), the three-step risk assess-
ment method was developed and validated using the pedagogic
approach and it is easy to learn, use and administer in ship recy-
cling yards. The so far gained experience of the three-step risk
assessment method indicates that this method could be a dialogue
tool for analysis team of e.g. production managers, safety officers
and safety supervisors and serve as a systematic method for risk
reduction to enhance health and safety in shipyards. However, the
real benefit of using “risk assessment as a tool for improvement can
be achieved when nearly all the potential hazards during the
282 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

Table 1
The statistics on the six types of ships recycled in two consecutive financial years (1st April, 2011 to 31st March, 2013) in Alang, India (data adapted from Hiremath et al., 2015).

Sr. No. Type of ship 1st April, 2011 to 31st March, 2012 1st April, 2012 to 31st March, 2013 Cumulative data 1st
April, 2011 to 31st
March, 2013

Number of ships Cumulative LDT of ships Number of ships Cumulative LDT of ships % Ships % LDT of ships

1 General cargo 149 1,086,008 53 387,625 24.97 18.92

2 Bulk carrier 119 1,230,655 158 1,594,772 34.24 36.27
3 Container 50 405,474 111 1,234,110 19.90 21.05
4 Oil Tanker 62 650,143 31 347,841 11.50 12.81
5 Reefer 24 228,127 17 103,325 5.07 4.26
6 LPG/Gas Bulk carrier/Miscellaneous 6 65,014 22 174,702 3.46 3.08
7 Passenger/RoeRo 5 181,194 2 100,018 0.87 3.61
Total 415 3,847,000 394 39,42,393 100 100

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of a typical yard with notional yard boundaries, gate and the beached ship between the high-tide and low-tide lines. There are nearly 160 active
yards in Alang, having mostly 60 m width (some yards are of 100e150 m width) and 100e125 m length between high-tide line and exit gate.

process of ship recycling are incorporated in the assessment. In the
present research, two hypotheses have been put forth at the outset.
Hypothesis 1. The lateral knowledge of experts involved in risk
assessment exercise needs to be complemented with the cause-effect
relationships particularly relevant to the technology model and
management practices implemented in Alang.
Hypothesis 2. The dependable Ship-Specific Recycling Plan can only
be developed in the light of clarity on the two aspects, namely: (1) the
time-tested know-how of recycling a given type of ship and (2) the
HSE-related issues for recycling the given type of ship.
The explicit focus of this study involves 1) development of ship-
specific ship recycling plan for three types of ships, 2) preparation of
hazardous wastes inventory generated from ship recycling process as
per the IMO guidelines and, 3) identification of HSEal risks associated
with breaking of obsolete vessels and suggestions for improvement.
The scope of this research is limited to three types of ships, namely:
bulk carrier, container and general cargo ships. Investigations were
restricted to all the hazardous job-tasks performed during the process
of complete recycling. The activities outside the yard including trans-
portation of steel plates and scrap to re-rolling mills and electric arc
furnaces, equipment, transportation of wastes to CHW-TSDF and its
disposal as well as transportation reusable materials to second-hand
material selling shops were not considered in this research.
The methodology adopted to address the above objectives included
identification of risks, inventorization of hazardous wastes and
tracking of all the functions and operations related recycling of three
types of ships through field surveys, primary data collection and
analysis.
2. Methodology
Two bulk carrier ships, two general cargo ships and two
container ships were tracked (one ship at a time) from beaching to
complete recycling in this study and the life cycle of recycling
process was investigated in-depth. There was no precise reason
behind selecting these above ships except similarity in type of ship,
LDT of ship and the year of manufacturing as well as availability
during the study period. The uniform methodology was adopted in
this study, as depicted in Fig. 2, for investigating the process of
recycling e especially, the ship-specific sequence of activities. Also,
the corresponding HSE as well as the hazardous waste
management-related issues were studied in-depth.
Literature review suggested that the activities that are poten-
tially threatening to the health and safety of workers and to the
surrounding environment can be identified using the qualitative
methods including checklist, task analysis, what-if-analysis, hazard
operability studies (HAZOP), safety audits, sequentially timed event
plotting (STEP) technique etc.(Tixier et al., 2002; Ayyub, 2003;
Marhavilas et al., 2009, 2011).
As reported by Garmer et al. (2015), the ship recycling work-
force is typically unskilled and the ship recycling sector happens
to be primitive, complex and low-tech. In such a complex work
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298 283

Fig. 2. The uniform methodology adopted for the six ships in this study for investigating the process of complete recycling e especially the in-depth analyses of ship-specific
sequence of activities and the corresponding HSE as well as the hazardous waste inventories.

environment one can, at best, investigate risks by employing the
traditional “what-if-analysis”. One desirable strength of the “what-
if-analysis” happens to be the adoption of the qualitative approach
and the results of the analyses can be meaningfully integrated with
the “three-step risk assessment method” developed and reported
previously by us (Garmer et al., 2015).
In the present study, the primary data were collected for each
step in the progressive recycling of a given ship with the help of
field observations, brainstorming sessions with safety officers,
production managers and workers in the recycling yards (see work
package 2 in Fig. 2). The hazardous/non-hazardous wastes sepa-
rated during the course of recycling from the ships were classified
284 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
as per the as per the Inventory Guidelines (2009) prescribed by IMO
(see work package 3 in Fig. 2). The five-step procedure was adopted
in performing the what-if-analysis, as described in Marhavilas et al.
(2011); see Work Package 4 in Fig. 2.
For better understanding of the HSE issues associated with ship
recycling process, the work activities were divided into four zones,
namely, inside ship, inter-tidal, primary and secondary. The ship-
specific breaking was analysed by regular interaction with safety
officers, discussions with the Mukadams (the Indian terminology
for the shift supervisor on floor) by continuous field monitoring,
interviews and group discussions. The steps adopted for recycling
of the given ship by the participating yard and the ship-specific
primary data collected in the present study were compared and
contrasted to ascertain that the steps implemented by the given
yard were not freak or isolated and the protocol followed by the
yard in fact conformed with the know-how (tacit knowledge)
developed and practiced over the decades in Alang. Thus, the
confirmation exercise was conducted in nearly 45 ship recycling
yards through door-to-door meetings with safety officers, workers,
productions managers and yard owners. The emission factors based
on the primary data corresponding to the six ships studied in this
research have been compared with the emission factors estimated
on the basis of “cluster study” reported in Hiremath et al. (2015),
see work package 5 in Fig. 2. Finally, the outputs from work package
2, 4 and 5 will provide inputs to steps 1, 2 and 3 of the three-step
risk assessment method.
3. Results and discussion
Progressive recycling was tracked for a given ship from the first
step of beaching to the final step of transporting the materials and
wastes out of the recycling yard. Each work activity was observed
carefully during the process of breaking of the given ship under the
investigation. At the outset, it was recognized that the bulk carrier,
general cargo and container ships were the most predominantly
broken ships in Alang and their hull structural members happen to
be comparable. The internal structure of bulk carrier, general cargo
and container ships comprises of slender, deep and vertical com-
partments (typically named as “vaults”). These compartments
were, more likely than not, constructed structure planar sheet
metal reinforced and structurally supported with welded angles,
struss-like structural elements. Therefore, owing to the similarity in
the hull structural members of these three types of vessels the
“typical process for recycling” of the bulk carriers, general cargo
ships and containers was articulated by tracking the six ships (one
ship at a time).
The complete recycling of a bulk carrier (ship code B1) weighing
24,295 LDT and physical dimensions of 290 m length, 47.5 m width
and 24.3 m depth (built in 1985 and dismantled in 2011) was
investigated by IIT Bombay team in Alang. In all 141 days were
required by the yard from beaching to complete recycling. During
the course of breaking of bulk carrier (ship code B1) the IIT Bombay
team made following observations.
3.1. Work activities 3 to 7
After obtaining the permission for ship recycling from GMB (the
regulator) the team of safety manager, production manager and
selected foremen customarily conducts a reconnaissance survey of
the beached vessel in order to understand the architecture, special
features and structures on-board as well as to compare and contrast
deviations from the documentation on machinery and materials in
the ship and the maps and documentation furnished at the outset.
The investigation team of IIT Bombay joined the reconnaissance
survey and started making observations and rough inventory
before detailed plans were chalked-out for undertaking primary
data collection on all the steps undertaken in the course of
beaching to complete recycling of a given type of ship selected for
the study.
Hiremath et al. (2015) have recently published a detailed study
conducted in nearly 100 yards from the “cluster of ship recycling
yards” in Alang Port and reported the so-called “typical ship recy-
cling procedure” adopted more or less uniformly by all yards.
Reportedly, this procedure is rooted “in a commonly understood
logic that ensures economic, procedural, environmental and work-
safety related advantages”. This time-tested tacit know-how prac-
ticed in Alang comprised of “a variety of work activities and the
associated job tasks” (total 12 work activities). The number of days
typically required to accomplish each work activity as well as the
inputs and outputs of each work activity were also highlighted in
their study. Inspection of ship before beaching was activity 1 and
beaching of ship in the yard during high-tide was activity 2. These
two initial activities will remain constant for any ship.
Similarly, the work activities 3, 4 and 5, as seen from the “typical
ship recycling procedure” remains nearly same for all types of ships
and generally span over a period of approximately one to three
weeks. The work activity 6 comprises of obtaining free from
contamination certificate, “gas free certification” followed by
“vessel cutting permission” - which paves way for the actual ship
recycling operation.
One of the strengths of the “Alang business model” lies in the
fact that the most efficient recovery and recycling of non-ferrous
metals and reusable objects takes place in Alang yards (work ac-
tivity 7). Thus, the work activities from 3 to 7 are typically
completed in nearly 1/3rd of the workforce required and it spans
over four to six weeks (typically 1/3rd of total time) from beaching
to complete recycling. Interestingly, these recycling activities
including recycling of non-ferrous metals engines, winches, power
generators, air-conditioners, refrigerators, gadgets, furniture, con-
struction materials and several other refurbishable objects have
been strengthening the financial bottom line of the recycling yards
in Alang. It is to be noted that the work activities from 3 to 7 were
same for the all the ships under investigation. In other words, work
activities 3 to 7 reported by Hiremath et al. (2015) were validated
through this research.
3.2. Ship-specific observations on gas (plate) cutting
The work activities 8, 9 and 10, as outlined in the ship recycling
plan articulated by Hiremath et al. (2015), claimed rather major
share of workforce and time required for complete recycling. The
work activity 8 involved removal of insulating materials from vessel
and work activity 9 involved cutting of the ship into slices. Slices
were further cut, segregated and loaded onto the trucks in work
activity 10.
It was observed that typically six steps were performed between
work activity 8, 9 and 10. These observations were further validated
through interviews with safety officers, production managers, yard
owners and workers of 45 randomly selected ship recycling yards
(other than yards selected for investigation) in Alang. Fig. 3 depicts
a typical ship-specific steps followed in work activity 8, 9 and 10
while recycling a bulk carrier ship in Alang yards.
It was observed that at first, the bow of the ship was sliced
by a team of gas cutters using the hand-held oxy-LPG torches
(step 1 in Fig. 3). After slicing the bow, workers could
comfortably enter and exit the first hold of the ship. The front
wall of the first hold was sliced first followed by the sidewalls
depending upon the availability of space to make the slice fall
outside the ship in the inter-tidal zone. Lack of space makes the
workers to slice the back wall of first tank first and then side
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298 285

walls and pull them by winches so that they fall inside the ship.
This sequence of breaking holds is depicted in Step 2 of Fig. 3
and can be illustrated with the help of photographs in Fig. 4.
Some of the indicative photographs from the field investigation
on recycling of holds in general cargo and container ships are
depicted in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively.
The slice taken apart from the first hold of bulk carrier under
investigation was dragged from the inter-tidal zone to the primary
zone for further separating structural elements, bolts, rivets as well
as non-planar and twisted scrap and fragmented into larger plates.
These plates were typically lifted and placed in the secondary zone
with the help of cranes; which were subsequently cut into smaller
plates as per the sizes preferred by re-rolling mills. These trans-
portable size plates were stored systematically in the loading area
near the exit gate of the yard and eventually were transported on
the same day to the designated re-rolling mill. During the course of
fragmentation, solid and hazardous wastes were also collected
carefully, bagged and stored in the designated spaces and eventu-
ally transported to CHW-TSDF. The scrap steel was also transported
to the designated electric arc furnaces. These sub-tasks have been
outlined in steps 3 and 4 in Fig. 3 (see photographs of the opera-
tions in Fig. 7).

Fig. 3. Typical steps followed in breaking of bulk carrier ships in Alang ship recycling yards.
286 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

Fig. 4. Typical steps involved in step 2 of breaking bulk carrier ship.

In case of the bulk carrier, which was being tracked during
the process of recycling, had several holds lined up adjoining
each other e separated by a “separator” (i.e. a wall of corrugated
steel sheet between adjoining holds). According to the produc-
tion manager, it was possible to slice-off the second hold in the
inter-tidal zone without losing the balance of the beached
vessel. Therefore, steps 2, 3 and 4 were repeated and the second
hold was removed from the vessel. It was not clear if the ‘slicing
team’ could continue slicing the third hold because there were
certain logistic difficulties in separating the third hold in deep
water. Thus, at the end of recycling second hold, a logical
question was asked: “Is it safe to cut another slice without
dragging the vessel?”
It was concluded that slicing the third hold was not practical and
it was decided that the ship would be dragged another 40e50 m
using the winches during high-tide close to the wet primary zone of
the yard so that it would be easier to drag the slice to the wet-
primary zone during the low-tide.
Before dragging the vessel, the bottom part of the first and
second hold (typically called as hull of the ship) was also chopped
off and sea water was filled inside the ballast tank to balance the
remaining portion of beached ship (see step 5 in Fig. 3). At this
juncture yet another logical question was asked: “Can slicing be
continued?” Accordingly, the remaining holds were also broken by
repeating steps 2 through 5. Finally, after separating and processing
all the holds of the bulk carrier, the cabin and engine rooms were
cleaned and chopped-off subsequently (see step 6 in Fig. 3). Specific
efforts were made at this point to study, survey the engine room by
a team comprising of the Production Supervisor, Safety Officer and
the specialized team entrusted with recycling of the engine, asso-
ciated equipment, fuel vault and fuel supply lines as well as the
cockpit and cabin.
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
Fig. 5. Typical steps involved in step 2 and step 6 of breaking general cargo ship.
First, the locations of hazardous wastes and equipments were
marked carefully so that there would not be any accident in the
process of gas cutting in engine room. The engine room in the bulk
carrier spanned three floors. In order to ensure adequate ventila-
tion in the engine area, openings were cutout in the walls so as to
act as windows (see photographs in Fig. 8). All the small equip-
ments were safely disconnected from flanged joints (by removing
nuts and bolts), fuel lines were carefully drained and wiped to
minimize fire hazard and the separated objects were brought to the
secondary zone of the yard with the help of bringing the mobile
cranes in the inter-tidal zone during low tide periode taking
advantage of hard surface sand.
The engine consisted of several parts and hundreds of con-
necting pipes (see photograph in Fig. 8). It was observed during the
investigation that inside each pipe some trace amount of oil was
present and chances of catching fire in the process of cutting could
not be ruled out. In order to minimize the hazard, helper was
provided to each gas cutter was provided with a helper who slowly
and continuously poured water onto the cutting zone. In addition,
three water lifting pumps were placed in the cabin to provide fire
safety all the time to avoid any sudden fire break-out.
Cabin consisted of crew room, offices, bed rooms, galley
(kitchen) and living rooms. All the navigational equipments in
287
cockpit (bridge or ship control room), were broken, collected,
packed and handed-over to the governmental authorities for
disposal. Each of these compartments, cockpit and cabin were
insulated using thermocol sheets and glass wool (see photographs
in Fig. 8). Glass wool was removed by the specialized team equip-
ped with personal protective equipments (PPEs), stored in the black
plastic bags and were sent to CHW-TSDF to conform with the legal
obligation. Propeller of the vessel at the stern part was also sliced
and dragged to the wet-primary zone and finally loaded into truck
using cranes and sent for non-ferrous recycling. Thus, the entire
bulk carrier was sliced and cut in the inter-tidal zone progressively
from the bow to stern and the fragments were further processed in
primary and secondary zones.
In all six ships investigated in this study, no hazardous materials
were observed attached to the walls of holds because care was
taken upfront to clean the ship thoroughly before commencement
of cutting. At the outset, asbestos and asbestos containing materials
were categorically identified all over the ship, carefully sorted out
and sent to asbestos removal room in the secondary zone of the
yard. The dedicated asbestos removing team was contracted to
perform the specialized operations of separation, bagging, label-
ling, storing in dedicated asbestos room and finally transporting to
CHW-TSDF for treatment and disposal as per the legal obligation.
288 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

Fig. 6. Typical steps involved in step 2 of breaking container ship.

It was also observed by the IIT Bombay investigation team
during the field investigation that the preventive measures were
undertaken before breaking the six ships under study, using the
hand-held oxy-LPG torches. The typical measures were: 1)
adequate ventilation was provided by creating sufficient windows
in the confined spaces of holds and cabins before commencing.the
gas cutting operations in the vessel, 2) the part of vessel to be sliced
was carefully marked depending on the safe and comfortable place
for the gas cutters and supporting helpers to sit and work, 3) the gas
cutters and supporting helpers were provided with PPEs including
body harnesses while working on slippery surfaces and at height to
minimize hazard of falling from height and suffocation and 4) the
slice was cut and separated in such a way that the fragmented ship
would not lose its balance in the inter-tidal zone.
In summary, based on the field work and observations made
during the course of tracking the six ships (the ship-specific
studies); it was concluded that the bulk carriers as well as gen-
eral cargo and container ships had comparable hull structural
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
Fig. 7. Typical steps involved in step 3 and 4 of breaking bulk carrier ship.
members including holds, engine rooms, architecture of deck and
cabins, utilities and material handling arrangements. Also, the
environmental and work safety-related considerations were com-
parable and therefore were broken in similar manner.
In addition, this study presents the detailed account of tasks and
sub-tasks performed under the work activities 8, 9 and 10. It is
interesting to note that this study confirms that all the work ac-
tivities required for complete recycling of a given ship, as outlined
in the ship recycling plan articulated by Hiremath et al. (2015), were
also performed during the course of recycling of the six ships
tracked in this field investigation. The ship-specific recycling plan
articulated in this study can be used as an input to “Step-1” of the
three-step risk assessment method.
3.3. Data on time-frame and man-days from beaching to complete
ship recycling
The number of days and corresponding man-days required for
beaching to complete recycling of six ships were tracked by
employing the uniform methodology in this study. As depicted in
Table 2, the two bulk carrier ships, two general cargo ships and two
container ships were tracked (one ship at a time) by recruiting
different yards in our study with the help of regulating agency in
the cluster of yards in Alang. Among the several important data
reported in Table 2, the total number of man-days required during
289
the course of beaching to complete recycling of each ship were
categorically recorded during this ship-specific study. Each man-
day is equivalent to the 8-h work period in Alang yards and it is
mandatory that the recycling activity be conducted during the day-
light period (in one shift).
As discussed earlier, the ship recycling industry is typically a
low-tech, labour intensive and unskilled worker-driven indus-
trial sector. On a given day, nearly all the workforce on the yard
would be the contract labour made available to the yard through
several short-term labour-contracts. While many details were
made accessible to IIT Bombay investigation team, the data on
number of workers working in the yard and the corresponding
man-days for the day were not accurately available. Managing
and counting the exact man-days engaged on a given day in a
yard under investigation was rather complex on account of two
reasons.
First, a variety of tasks were simultaneously conducted in the
yard with the help of workforce divided in two classes. One class
was engaged in repetitive and specialized operations (e.g. plate
cutting, engine cutting, plates grading etc.,) followed by other in
multi-tasking (e.g. helpers providing oxygen and LPG cylinders to
plate cutters, helpers for winch and crane operators, cleaners, etc.).
Second, the multi-tasking teams engaged on the yard on a given
day may work only for a fraction of the day and therefore, may not
appear on the pay-role of the yard for that work day.
290 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

Fig. 8. Typical steps involved in step 7 of breaking bulk carrier ship.

Table 2
The details of six obsolete ships investigated in this research along with the man-days from beaching of vessel to the complete recycling.

Type of ship Identification code LDT at the Dimensions Year of Year of Total man days from Total number of Range of the number
time of L  B  D in metre building recycling beaching to complete days for complete of workers on Pay-role
building recycling @ 8 h. recycling @ 8 h. in the yard during the
Work per day Work per day course of recycling

Bulk carrier 1st ship: Code: B1 24,295 290  47.5  24.3 1985 2011 37,000e47,000 141 110e400
Bulk carrier 2nd ship: Code: B2 22,103 260  43  24.7 1982 2011 34,000e43,000 128 110e400
Ship
General cargo 1st ship: Code: G1 5140 147.43  22  12.14 1978 2012 8000e10,000 59 50e190
Ship 2nd ship: Code: G2 9091 169.5  27  14.2 1985 2012 14,000e18,000 105 60e225
Container Ship 1st ship: Code: C1 5586 157.6  22.80  11.80 1990 2013 9000e11,000 65 50e190
2nd ship: Code: C2 6937 145.3  24.8  13.3 1987 2013 11,000e14,000 80 55e200

In the light of these facts, the cumulative man-days logged in
during the course of complete recycling of a given ship were inferred
and estimated using the data provided by multiple sources. Thus, at
best, a range of man-days required during the course of beaching to
complete recycling could be estimated for each ship. In any case, the
data for six ships tracked in this study suggest that the number of
workers employed for recycling a given ship varied from ship-to-ship
primarily on account of the different tonnages (LDT of the ships).
The larger slice of ship was converted into transportable size
plates typically having 2000 mm length and 150 mm width varying
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
from 4 mm to 32 mm thickness. It was observed during field survey
that the nearly 70% of the total man days were consumed in plate
cutting activity. Based on the time-motion study on steel plate
cutting using oxy-LPG torch, as reported by Deshpande et al. (2013),
a team comprising of gas cutter and helpers typically delivers a cut
of 1 km length having 1 mm depth in one work-day (8 h period) in
Alang yards.
The time required to dismantle a ship could be attributed to
many of the following reasons: 1) the size of the yard engaged in
recycling, 2) LDT of the ship and 3) volatility of steel prices in the
international market. On an average, a yard is approximately 60 m
wide with typically 100-m long working zone. However, some of
the yards are 100e150 m wide and have made arrangements for
augmentation of secondary zone in the vicinity of their yards on the
landward side. Thus, the infrastructure required for accommoda-
ting larger number of plate cutters and the associated grading,
storing and loading facility varies significantly on the basis of
physical size of the yard. Consequently, the number of workers
engaged on a given day by a given yard or total days required for
complete recycling of a given ship varies from time-to-time and
also from yard-to-yard.
Thus, the data furnished in Table 2 on the range of workers
employed for breaking the six different ships, the days required for
complete recycling of each of those ships and the total number of
man days logged by the yard for complete recycling highlight the
following three important lessons:
a) the number of man days required for complete recycling of a
given type of ship can indeed be used as the most important
parameter while developing and planning for recycling of a
given ship,
b) the yard management can deploy adequate workforce so as to
be able to complete the task of recycling within a desirable time
frame and
c) there are certain limitations with respect to the number of
workers that could be engaged and size of the ship that could be
beached in a given yard for recycling resulting from the physical
size of the yard and fluctuations in the price of steel in inter-
national market.
In summary, the observations made in this study corroborates
with the work done by plate cutter team reported in Deshpande
et al. (2013). This study also corroborates the time-frame and
requirement of work force (2/3rd of the workforce and 2/3rd of
time) reported for conducting all the work activities e especially
activities 8, 9 and 10, as outlined in the ship recycling plan articu-
lated by Hiremath et al. (2015). As reported in Table 2, the six ships
investigated in this research having LDT of 24,295, 22,103, 5,140,
9,091, 5586 and 6,937, respectively and average man-days recorded
for compete recycling were 42,000, 38,500, 9,000, 16,000, 10,000
and 12,500, respectively. Clearly, on an average, 1.762 ± 0.026 man-
days would be required to dismantle one LDT of a given ship. Thus,
if one knows the total LDT of a ship then one can estimate the range
of man-days required and allocate plate cutters teams in the yard.
The inventory of hazardous wastes was also prepared for the six
ships under investigation as per the Guidelines for the Development
of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials e which included the type of
wastes, location and quantity of waste in the vessel.
3.4. Inventorization of hazardous materials on board (work activity 8)
The regulations 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 of the Annex to the Hong
Kong Convention requires an Inventory of Hazardous Materials
which shall be prepared and verified taking into account
Guidelines, including any threshold values and exemptions
291
contained in those Guidelines, developed by the Organization.
Thus, the Resolution of Marine Environmental Protection Com-
mittee (MEPC) 179(59) which was adopted on 17 July, 2009 has
provided “Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of
Hazardous Materials”.
The Inventory consists of, Part I: Materials contained in ship
structure or equipment, Part II: Operationally generated wastes,
and Part III: Stores. Guidelines are classified under “Table A”,
“Table B”, “Table C” or “Table D” according to its properties. Table A
comprises the materials listed in appendix 1 of the Convention,
Table B comprises the materials listed in appendix 2 of the
Convention, Table C (potentially hazardous items) comprises items
which are potentially hazardous to the environment and human
health at ship recycling facilities and Table D (regular consumable
goods potentially containing hazardous materials) comprises goods
which are not integral to a ship and are unlikely to be dismantled or
treated at a SBR Facility. Table A and Table B correspond to Part I of
the Inventory. Table C corresponds to Parts II and III and Table D
correspond to Part III.
The field survey has resulted in the physical characterisation of
materials generated during obsolete vessel breaking. Table 3 pro-
vides a brief description of the bulk carrier, general cargo and
containers ships hazardous wastes inventory. This inventory pro-
vides more systematic approach for handling wastes, precisely for
work activity 8 (i.e. removal, packing, storage and transportation
wastes) as reported in Hiremath et al. (2015). This Table can be used
to prepare inventory of wastes generated from ships along with its
location and regulate the movement of hazardous wastes. This is a
nascent step towards inventorization of wastes and reusable ma-
terials from obsolete vessel breaking. The inventory developed in
this study can be used as an input to “Step-3” of the three-step risk
assessment method.
The wastes reported in Table 3 (see Appendix) were categorized
into three types namely, waste disposable in landfill, incinerable
waste and bilge water (liquid waste) for in-depth analysis. The
wastes disposable in landfill includes asbestos and asbestos con-
taining materials, glass wool as major wastes and rusted iron scales,
ceramic, incinerator ash, fire ash, broken glass and cementing
materials as the other minor disposable materials. The incinerable
wastes includes paints and coatings, oil rags, oily sludge, thermocol,
polyurethane foam (PUF), rubber gasket, Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
and plastic wastes.
The categorized wastes data reported in Table 3 was further
analysed to know the emission of wastes in terms of Kg/LDT of ship
dismantled and it was compared with the emission models
developed in Hiremath et al. (2015).
Comparison of the emission factors (expressed in kg/LDT) for
the three hazardous waste streams (namely: wastes disposable in
landfill, incinerable wastes and bilge water) predominantly emitted
in the course of recycling of end-of-life vessels in Alang, India has
been presented in Fig. 9. The emission factors based on the primary
data corresponding to the six ships studied in this research have
been compared with the emission factors estimated on the basis of
“cluster study” reported in Hiremath et al. (2015). The results re-
ported by Hiremath et al. (2015) were based on the cumulative
emissions from 159 ships (three types: bulk carrier, general cargo
and container ships) dismantled in the yards in Alang during the
period of two years (cluster study for 2011e2013). It is interesting
to note that these results are comparable with the results from six
ship-specific studies presented in this research.
This conclusion is borne by the linear regression of the emission
factors based on the six ship-specific primary data reported in this
research with the emission factors reported in Hiremath et al.
(2015) based on the “cluster study”. The regression analysis yiel-
ded R2 of 0.99 and slope of 0.8 for the linear function:
292 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
Fig. 9. Hazardous waste streams (namely: wastes disposable in landfill, incinerable wastes and bilge water) predominantly emitted in the course of recycling of end-of-life vessels in
Alang, India: (a) Emission factors reported in Hiremath et al. (2015) based on the cumulative emissions of all the ship recycling yards in Alang during two years (cluster study for
2011e2013) and (b) Emission factors estimated on the basis of the six ship-specific studies reported in this research.
emission factor ðship  specific studyÞ
¼ 0:8  emission factor ðcluster studyÞ:
The error bars shown in Fig. 9 are the standard deviations of the
statistical values corresponding to ship-specific study presented in
this research as well as the cluster study (reported by Hiremath
et al., 2015). Clearly, the larger standard deviations seen in the
cluster study (when compared with the ship-specific study) are due
to a wide range of ship tonnages contributing to the data set of 159
ships as opposed to 6 ships studied here. For example, the bulk
carriers ships studied in Hiremath et al. (2015) were in the LDT range
of 7000 and 27,000 as opposed to two bulk carrier ships studied in
this research having LDT of 22,000 and 24,000 LDT respectively.
Similarly, general cargo studied in Hiremath et al. (2015) were in the
LDT range of 3000 and 12,000 as opposed to two general cargo ships
studied in this research having LDT of 5000 and 9000 LDT. Also, the
container ships studied in Hiremath et al. (2015) were in the LDT
range between 4000 and 17,000 as opposed to two container ships
studied in this research having LDT of 5000 and 7000 LDT each.
In a planning exercise, it is a common practice to consider higher
level of waste generation in order to design, transport, store and
dispose wastes to have more safety and less risk in managing the
wastes. Thus, it is evident from Fig. 6 that the emission models
developed and reported in Hiremath et al. (2015), are providing
adequate information to the authorities to estimate and plan
transportation, storage and disposal of wastes (disposable, incin-
erable and bilge water).
Along with inventorization of wastes, what-if-analysis was
conducted in the yards under investigation in parallel and the
outcome of the exercise was illustrated below.
3.5. Analysis of occupational and environmental risks using
what-if-analyses
As stated earlier, the so-called “three-step risk assessment
method”, published by Garmer et al. (2015), relied on lateral
experience of the experts engaged in the risk assessment exercise.
In the present study, a what-if-analysis was undertaken to identify
the causeeeffect relationships in different potentially hazardous
work activities, tasks and sub-tasks. It is believed that the inclusion
of this ship-specific field reality-based approach will bring out
additional and critical hazards and strengthen the outcome of the
three-step risk assessment method. The overall methodology of the
what-if-analysis, as outlined by Marhavilas et al. (2011), was
detailed in the Work Package 4 of Fig. 2.
Accordingly, the system boundary of the study was defined from
the beached ship in the inter-tidal zone to the exit gate of the yard,
as depicted in Fig. 1. One ship was tracked at a time through the
entire ship recycling process and the issues pertaining to occupa-
tional health and safety as well as environmental pollution were
included in this study. The critical job-tasks were carefully grouped
zone-wise and “what-if” questions were generated in each case and
thus, developed recommendations for improvements wherever the
risk of potential problems seemed uncomfortable or unnecessary.
The potential risks in each zone, thus identified and reasoned
based on causeeeffect relationships, were further conformed by
conducting meetings in several other ship recycling yards (nearly
45 yards) to ascertain that the risk or the jobetasks encountered in
the investigation were not irregular occurrences resulting from
uncommon and clumsy operations conducted in the particular yard
recruited for tracking the ship. The risks involved with personnel
working in each zone of the ship recycling yard are illustrated
below.
a) Inside the Ship: The health and safety related issues articulated
from the field investigation for the personnel working inside the
ship were divided into two types. First, risks to the personnel
working on the deck of the ship. Second, risks to personnel
working in closed or confined space of the ship including holds,
cabin, engine room and cockpit. The following potential critical
factors for “falling from height” were observed to the personnel
working on deck of the vessel during the analyses:
a) because of the vibrations and tremors due to cutting process
b) while transporting the cylinders out of vessel, c) while removing
the tied rope used for pulling the vessel, and d) slippery surface in
the deck.
The risks articulated from the field study for the personnel
working in the closed space or confined space of the ship include:
a) suffocation due to toxic gas accumulation in the tank because of
cutting using oxy-LPG torch or due to leakage of gas pipes in engine
room b) toxic gas leakage from cylinders c) explosion of the gas
cylinders in the cabin d) fire catching and explosion by oil stored in
barrels e) falling inside the hold due to slippery surface or failure of
scaffolding or welded rusted ladders f) falling due to hindrances in
the pathway inside the cockpits, holds and cabins and g) slipping
into open tanks or access way because of unsafe structured ladders
and lack of light in pathways.
The risks of environmental pollution in breaking bulk carrier,
general cargo and container ships in Alang articulated from the
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
field study were: a) emission of toxic gases in cases of plate cutting
operation or emergencies like fire break-out b) release of stored
toxic gases to ambient atmosphere due to leakage and c) discharge
of carcinogenic substances such as asbestos while removal of
asbestos and asbestos containing materials.
b) Inter-tidal Zone: The health and safety related issues articulated
from the field study for the personnel working in the inter-tidal
zone were attributed to risks of the following: a) slice falling on
personnel working in this zone b) sharp object penetration c)
struck and hit by slices while moving in between zones and d)
failure of winch and ropes while pulling ship which may ulti-
mately lead to severe injury and in most of the cases fatality.
The environmental risks in breaking bulk carrier, general cargo
and container ships in Alang articulated from the field were a)
ballast water release to the ocean b) tilting and sinking of imbal-
anced ship in water due to high-tide resulting in contamination of
sea water, and c) sediment contamination due to oil spill.
c) Primary and Secondary Zones: The health and safety related
issues in primary and secondary zone of the yard were observed
to be similar in both the zones. Therefore, risks to personnel
working in both the zones were reported together. The risks
articulated from the field study for the personnel working in the
primary and secondary zone were: a) crane and winch rope
breaking while lifting slices between zones b) exposure to toxic
gases due to plate cutting operation can result in both acute
(irritation, headache and dizziness) and chronic effects (cancer
and respiratory diseases) c) accident due to movement of trucks
and tractor tailors inside the yard d) falling of steel plates while
loading onto trucks e) burning during plate cutting using oxy-
LPG torch f) finger trapping and injuries to one's palm while
operating lifting devices g) electric shock due to open connec-
tions h) penetration and injury caused by sharp edges of
transportable size plates while loading into trucks i) back firing
and explosion of cylinders j) exposure to carcinogenic sub-
stances such as asbestos, glass wool which may result in chronic
diseases such as cancer, asthma and skin diseases and m) par-
ticulate matter, such as CO, NOx, SOx that is generated due to
movement of trucks and tractors causing suffocation and
dizziness in workers.
The environmental risks in breaking bulk carrier, general cargo
and container ships in Alang articulated from the field were: a)
release of CO2 from cylinders and Freon gas from refrigerator stored
in the different zones b) stored material can catch fire in the yard c)
paint chips and molten steel generated by plate cutting contami-
nating surface soil d) spillage of acids from battery and leakage of
oil and grease from various equipment and e) emission of toxic
gases to atmosphere due to plate cutting operation.
The checklist named as Document E: Job task hazards and asso-
ciated causal risk factors used in step-2 of the three-step risk
assessment method can be strengthened by incorporating these
below risks specially identified in this research based on the cau-
seeeffect relationships:
The risk of falling from height because of the vibrations and
tremors created in the process of gas cutting and separating the slice
from the vessel in the inter-tidal zone, risk of falling from height
while transporting the cylinders out of vessel, risk of falling from
height while removing the tied rope used for pulling the vessel, risk
of falling into open tanks or access way because of unsafe ladder
typically welded vertically to the walls in the holds and tanks, risk of
slipping as well as falling inside the tanks and holds due to darkness
and risk of back firing in oxygen and LPG cylinders.
293
3.6. Recommendations for improvement of health, safety and
environment
Training workers use safety belts (other equipments for height)
while operations can achieve the minimization of risks in deck
space of the ship.
The minimization of risks in confined space inside the ships can
be achieved by providing adequate ventilation (by creating win-
dows or by using exhaust fans) before commencing the cutting.
Removal of all cylinders from vessel before commencing the cutting
and checking all pipes for the presence of trace gas and oil before
cutting is essential. Fire extinguishers must be placed on board at
all times. Recovered oil from ship must be stored in the yard in a
safe place and sent to the authorized agency as soon as it has been
extracted from the ship. Compulsory use of gum boots and frequent
cleaning of slippery surfaces may reduce the risk of falling. The
safety officer must check scaffolding every day and proper fitting
must be done. Obstacles at the human height inside the ship should
be removed. Open bottom holes of the hold must be marked and
properly closed. The helmets having torch must be provided to all
the personnel working in confined space of the ship.
Trained workers may be used to remove asbestos and glass wool
without it being dispersed into the environment. Paint applied on the
steel plates should be scraped, collected before cutting and should be
disposed in the CHW-TSDF after solidification/stabilization. It is to be
noted that glass wool is not categorized as hazardous waste as per the
Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary
Movement) Rules, 2008, enforced by the Ministry of Environment,
Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. In addition, it is
reported in the study carried out by Wilson et al. (1999), that glass
wool is five to ten times less risky (risk might be zero) and no cancer
attributable to the manufacture or installation of glass wool fibres.
However, as a precaution, the Gujarat Maritime Board, Government
of Gujarat has directed ship recycling yards in Alang to send glass
wool generated during the ship recycling process to Integrated
Common Hazardous Wastes Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility
(ICHWTSDF)” located near the ship recycling yards in Alang owing to
the contaminants associated with glass wool including PCB's and
other solid hazardous wastes (which may combine with glass wool
during recycling process) (Hiremath et al., 2015).
Pre-alerting everyone on the field before winching up the slice
and periodic check of the winches will aid in minimizing risk in the
inter-tidal zone. The lifting device operator shall be well trained
and workers shall be made alert before moving the slices.
The minimization of environmental risks within the inter-tidal
zone can be achieved by collecting ballast water and treating the
same before discharging into the ocean. An oil spill can be pre-
vented by careful removal of oil from tanks during a low tide.
The periodic servicing along with regular check-up before
starting the machines, scraping of paint from the metal surface
before cutting, sending the removed paint chips to CHW-TSDF and
wearing proper masks before cutting the plate minimize the risks
in the primary and secondary zones. Special care must be taken
while loading plates. Typically, a group of 5e7 workers (preferably
same linguistic and work experience) load plates. Oxy-LPG torches
must be kept designated place after work gets over (specially,
during lunch and tea breaks). Trained and experienced workers
shall be assigned for this job task. Open electric wiring in the plot
area must be removed. Proper gloves and gum boots must be
provided to workers. Gas pressure valves and control valves shall be
checked before starting the work. Workers trained in asbestos and
glass wool removal must be appointed. Water shall be sprayed on
the ground in order to reduce the particulate matter (dust) gener-
ation before starting the work and during lunch-break. Only the
workers wearing all the necessary PPEs shall be allowed to enter
294 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
into the yard. Smoking shall be completely prohibited in the yard.
Workers shall be made aware by conducting frequent training
programmes on HSE issues in the yard.
The minimization of environmental risks in the primary and
secondary zones of the ship recycling yard can be achieved by
avoiding storage of cylinders in yard. Paint should be scraped from
steel plates before cutting in the secondary zone and paint flakes
must be collected every day after the working hours and sent to
CHWTSDF for disposal.
Zero accidents and near zero pollution to the surrounding
environment should be the ultimate goal of beaching method of
ship recycling in India. The zone wise risks to workers and sur-
rounding environment articulated in this study through what-if-
analyses in Alang yards helps in developing risk minimization in-
terventions based on the causeeeffect relationship.
In summary, the specific gap was addressed in the present study
by investigating beaching to complete recycling of three predomi-
nantly handled ships in Alang. The combination of expert knowl-
edge and the risks articulated through causeeeffect relationships
can further strengthen the three-step risk assessment method. The
health safety and environmental issues associated with ship recy-
cling in Alang identified using what-if-analysis can be used as an
input to “Step-2” of the three-step risk assessment method (i.e.
identification of risks). Also, the interventions suggested for mini-
mization of risks based on the causeeeffect relationships can be
used as an input to “Step-3” of the three-step risk assessment
method (i.e. in-depth risk assessment).
The ship-specific breaking articulated in this study along with
the HSE issues addressed through what-if-analysis as well as the
inventory of hazardous/non-hazardous materials reporting as per
the inventory guidelines suggested by IMO would hopefully fulfil
the expectations of the prevailing national, international laws, and
regulations on ship recycling sector. The outcome of ship specific
investigation will further provide inputs for conducting the three-
step risk assessment in ship recycling yards more thoroughly.
It is clear from the findings of this research that both the hy-
pothesis stated in this research stands true when it comes to
strengthening three-step method by complementing with cause-
eeffect relationships identified through what-if-analysis as well as
clear understanding of both HSE related issues and know-how of
recycling is imperative in developing ship-specific recycling. The
methodology followed in this research can be adopted in preparing
the ship recycling plan for any type of ship.
4. Conclusions
Typically, the ship-specific recycling plans have been developed
worldwide on the basis of rudimentary understanding of the pro-
cesses involved in ship recycling and some insights derived from
prior experience (if any). In this research, the ship-specific recycling
plan for the three types of ships predominantly broken in Alang were
investigated with the help of in-depth study of recycling of six ships.
Two bulk carriers, two general cargos and two container ships were
tracked (one ship at a time) from beaching to complete recycling.
Based on the field work and observations made during the
course of recycling of the six ships; it was concluded that the bulk
carrier, general cargo and container ship had comparable hull
structural members as well as the environmental and work safety-
related considerations and therefore they have been broken in the
yards of Alang in a similar manner.
Recently, Hiremath et al. (2015) reported that more than 70% of
the total work force in Alang was typically involved in removal of
insulating materials from vessel and cutting of the ship into slices
and further into coupons of suitable sizes for re-rolling and finally
segregating and loading them onto trucks. The present ship-
specific study has provided insights into these broad work activ-
ities by further developing detailed account on tasks and sub-tasks
needed for articulation of a realistic ship-specific recycling plan.
In addition, this research provides valuable insights to the fi-
nanciers and managers of the recycling yards based on the size of
the given yard engaged in ship recycling, LDT of the ship and
volatility of steel prices in the international market for justifying
the number of workers employed and number of days required for
complete recycling of a given ship. The statistics on the six ships
investigated in this research suggests that, on an average,
1.762 ± 0.026 man days will be required to dismantle one LDT of a
given ship. Thus, on the basis of total LDT of a given ship, one can
estimate man days required and accordingly hire plate cutter teams
in the yard and finish recycling activity within a given time-frame.
The comprehensive emission factors (expressed in kg/LDT) for
the three hazardous waste streams namely: wastes disposable in
ladfills, incinerable wastes and bilge water for bulk carriers, general
cargo and container ships were developed based on the primary
data collected in this research and were compared with the emis-
sion factors estimated on the basis of “cluster study” reported in
Hiremath et al. (2015). It was concluded that the emission factors
(averages and standard deviation) from six ship-specific studies
presented in this research were comparable with the emission
factors based on the cluster study reported by Hiremath et al.
(2015).
One of the missing links in ‘step-2’ and ‘step-3’ of the three-step
risk assessment were the lack of complete understanding of the
“potential risks” posed in various steps during the course of ship
recycling. The lateral knowledge of experts involved in risk
assessment exercise was complemented in this research with the
causeeeffect relationships particularly relevant to the technology
model and management practices implemented in Alang. Based on
the articulated risks using what-if-analysis method, recommen-
dations for improving HSE quality in the ship recycling yards were
suggested in this study.
One of the benefits of this research will be realized when one
incorporates the ship-specific recycling plan developed in this
research as an input to “Step-1” of the three-step risk assessment
method. Also, the combination of the lateral knowledge and the risks
articulated in this research through causeeeffect relationships can
further strengthen “Step 2 and Step 3” of the three-step risk
assessment method. One additional benefit of this research will be
accrued when one actually applies the three-step assessment
method to navigate the process of improving the ship recycling
based on the guidance obtained through risk assessment for
improvement of technologies and further by implementing them.
This research fulfils the critical gaps, which were missing in
completing the obligations of prevailing laws and regulations on
ship recycling sector. The insight provided in this research will also
encourage ship recycling yard owners to incorporate the alternative
procedures that could potentially lead to minimization of adverse
impacts on workers as well as to the immediately surrounding
environment and ecosystem. The suggested recommendations in
this research acts as a set of strategies that can ensure improvement
in HSE, if implemented with the spirit of innovation and commit-
ment, and eventually achieve the safe and environmentally sound
ship recycling as desired by HKC and EU legislation.
Acknowledgements
The authors of this paper acknowledge Gujarat Maritime Board
funded project “Green Alang Initiative” and Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay for partial funding for this work. Authors
also acknowledge ship recycling yards at Alang for their help and
support.
Appendix

Table 3
Inventory of hazardous materials generated during the course of breaking of bulk carrier, general cargo and container ships.
Sr# Material from Physical property Type of wastes/Materials Equipment/System Location Quantity of Quantity of Quantity of materials Table/Part
obsolete ship materials materials generated from container of
Solid Liquid Gaseous Hazardous Non Reuse/
generated from generated ships breaking inventory
hazardous Recycle
bulk carrier from general
ships breaking cargo ships
breaking

1 Asbestos and Asbestos Steam supply and piping, valves, Engine room and B1 ¼ 19.3 MT G1 ¼ 12.9 MT C1 ¼ 12.7 MTC2 ¼ 14.2 MT Table A/I
Containing Materials miscellaneous insulations on water pipes machinery spaces, B2 ¼ 18.6 MT. G2 ¼ 11.2 MT.

A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

(ACM) and other machinery equipment, boiler pump and boiler
drums casings, furnace insulations, rooms,
sanitary spaces, AC ducts, refrigeration accommodation,
pipes, steam supply piping, exhaust cabin, machinery
piping, brake linings etc. spaces
2 Paints chips Ship surface structure External topside B1 ¼ 0.150 MT Paint chips C1 ¼ 0.045 MT IMO
shell plate area, B2 ¼ 0.070 MT. were not C2 ¼ Paint chips were not guidelines
external shell collected in collected does not
bottom to bilge both the yards include
kneels, rudder truck paint chips
area, paints on ship in its
structure Inventory
Paints/rust stabiliser e Store Room B1 ¼ Not found Not found in Not found in both ships Table C/III
B2 ¼ 0.028 MT. both ships
Solvents/thinners B1 ¼ Not found Not found in Not found in both ships Table C/III
B2 ¼ 0.055 MT. both ships
3 Plastic Materials (PVC) Ceiling panels, linings and partition Accommodation B1 ¼ 26.4 MT G1 ¼ 23.6 MT C1 ¼ 24.2 MT Table B/I
and Thermocol panels, internal bulk carrierheads, spaces, sanitary B2 ¼ 28.9 MT. G2 ¼ 22.5 MT. C2 ¼ 27.5 MT
sewage and grey water drainage pipes spaces, machinery
spaces
4 Consisting of or Capacitors in light fittings, PCBs in oil Engine room, B1 ¼ 3.27 MT G1 ¼ 2.76 MT C1 ¼ 2.8 MT Table B/I
contaminated with residuals, gaskets, couplings, wiring and machinery spaces, B2 ¼ 5.25 MT. G2 ¼ 3.85 MT C2 ¼ 3.45 MT
polychlorinated cable insulation, transformers etc. cabin area,
biphenyl (PCBs), emergency
polychlorinated generator rooms
terphenyls (PCTs),
polychlorinated
naphthalene
Gases sealed in ship's equipment or machinery
5 Refrigerants (Freon) AC plant compressor, refrigeration Engine room and B1 ¼ 8 G1 ¼ 5 C1 ¼ 6 cylinders Table D/III
systems, other small capacity upper cabin area, cylinders cylinders
refrigerators refrigerators in B2 ¼ 19 G2 ¼ 8
accommodation area cylinders cylinders
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Total flooding fire extinguishing system, Engine room, upper B1 ¼ 2 G1 ¼ 83 Not found in both ships Table C/III
for engine room and pump rooms, cabin areas, CO2 cylinders cylinders
emergency generator rooms etc. rooms B2 ¼ 416 G2 ¼ 22
cylinders cylinders
(continued on next page)

295
Table 3 (continued )

296
Sr# Material from Physical property Type of wastes/Materials Equipment/System Location Quantity of Quantity of Quantity of materials Table/Part
obsolete ship materials materials generated from container of
Solid Liquid Gaseous Hazardous Non Reuse/
generated from generated ships breaking inventory
hazardous Recycle
bulk carrier from general
ships breaking cargo ships
breaking

Acetylene (C2H2) Acetylene cylinders Acetylene room in B1 ¼ 2 G1 ¼ 14 C1 ¼ 5 cylindersC2 ¼ Not Table C/III
upper cabin cylinders cylinders found
B2 ¼ 2 G2 ¼ 16
cylinders cylinders
Oxygen Oxygen cylinders Store room B1 ¼ 3 G1 ¼ 20 Not found in both ships Table C/III
cylinders cylinders
G2 ¼ 22
cylinders
HALON e 1211, HALON Total flooding fire extinguishing system, Engine room, upper Halon Halon Halon containing materials Table A/III
for engine room and pump rooms, cabin areas, single containing containing are safely recovered and
e 1301, HALON e 2402
portable fire extinguishers cylinders in materials are materials are reused
accommodation safely removed safely

A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298

areas and reused recovered and
reused
Propane (C3H8), Butane Single pressure vessels for water heaters, accommodation Propane Propane Propane containing Table A/III
(C4H10) cutting torches equipment, ovens, space areas, workshop containing containing materials are safely
heaters etc. rooms in engine materials are materials are recovered and reused
room safely removed safely
and reused recovered and
reused
Oils, fuels and grease:
6 Lubricating oils Main engine, generator engine, stern Engine room and B1 ¼ 0.25 MT G1 ¼ 0.82 MT No lube oil in both ships Table C/III
tube and sealing arrangement, propeller other machinery B2 ¼ 0.42 MT G2 ¼ 0.66 MT
and shaft, cranes etc. spaces
Hydraulic oils Hydraulic controlled systems, valves etc. Engine room and e e e Table C/II
other machinery
spaces
Oil residues Oil tank Furnace oil sludge B1 ¼ 2.75 MT G1 ¼ 1.56 MT C1 ¼ 1.85 MT Table C/II
tank, Lubricating oil B2 ¼ 2.21 MT G2 ¼ 1.25 MT C2 ¼ 1.78 MT
sludge tank
Waste oils Waste oil tank waste oil tank, fuel B1 ¼ 1.45 MT G1 ¼ 0.75 MT C1 ¼ 1.12 MT Table C/II
oil overflow B2 ¼ 1.86 MT G2 ¼ 0.95 MT C2 ¼ 0.88 MT
drainage tank
Fuel oil Fuel oil tank furnace oil tanks, FO B1 ¼ 2.5 MT G1 ¼ 3.5 MT C1 ¼ 4.2 MT Table C/II
settling and daily B2 ¼ 4.6 MT G2 ¼ 5.6 MT C2 ¼ 3.3 MT
services tanks
Diesel oil Diesel oil tank DO storage and B1 ¼ 0.15 MT G1 ¼ 0.89 MT C1 ¼ 0.28 MT Table C/III
service tanks B2 ¼ 0.21 MT G2 ¼ 1.11 MT C2 ¼ 0.94 MT
Marine Gas Oil(MGO) MGO tank GO service tanks B1 ¼ 0.35 MT G1 ¼ 0.95 MT C1 ¼ 0.75 MT Table C/III
B2 ¼ 0.88 MT G2 ¼ 0.85 MT C2 ¼ 0.82 MT
Grease Ship engine Engine room, Cabin B1 ¼ 0.020 MT G1 ¼ 0.030 MT No stored grease from both Table C/II
and other machinery B2 ¼ No stored G2 ¼ 0.054 MT the ships
spaces grease
Heavy Metals
7 Mercury and its Thermometers, bearing pressure sensors, Engine room, Material Material Material containing Table B/III
compounds led switches, fluorescent lamps hospital, containing containing mercury and its
Navigational bridge, mercury and itsmercury and compounds are safely
accommodation area compounds are its compounds recovered and reused
safely removed are safely
and reused recovered and
reused
Lead and its compounds Cable insulations, batteries, paints Store room B1 ¼ No stored No stored paint No stored paint found in Table B/I
paint found found in both both ships
B2 ¼ 0.028 MT. ships
 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298 297

References

Table C/II

Table C/II

Table A/I
Table B/I

Table B/I

Table B/I
Asolekar, S.R., 2006. Status of management of solid hazardous wastes generated
during recycling of obsolete ships in India. In: Presented at the First Interna-
tional Conference on Recycling of Obsolete Vessels, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Asolekar, S.R., 2012. Greening of ship recycling in India: upgrading facilities in
Stored paints were safely

Navigational equipments Alang. In: Proceedings of 7th Annual Ship Recycling Conference Organized by
Informa Maritime Events and Lloyd's List Held in London, UK.
recovered and reused
Batteries were safely
removed and reused

discharged to ocean
Ayyub, B.M., 2003. Risk Analysis in Engineering and Economics. Chapman & Hall/

Ballast water was

CRC, ISBN 1-58488-395-2.
were destroyed

C1 ¼ 20.75 MT
C2 ¼ 18.25 MT
Chang, Y., Wang, N., Durak, O.S., 2010. Ship recycling and marine pollution. Mar.

C1 ¼ 147 MT
C2 ¼ 136 MT
Pollut. Bull. 60, 1390e1396.
Demaria, F., 2010. Ship recycling at Alang-Sosiya (India): an ecological distribution
conflict. Ecol. Econ. 70, 250e260.
Deshpande, P.C., Kalbar, P.P., Tilwankar, A.K., Asolekar, S.R., 2013. A novel approach
to estimating resource consumption rates and emission factors for ship recy-
B1 ¼ 26.20 MT G1 ¼ 20.57 MT
B2 ¼ 24.56 MT G2 ¼ 25.72 MT

cling yards in Alang, India. J. Clean. Prod. 58, 251e259.

Batteries were

recovered and

discharged to

G1 ¼ 163 MT
G2 ¼ 149 MT
Stored paints

removed and

Ballast water
Navigational

Deshpande, P.C., Tilwankar, A.K., Asolekar, S.R., 2012. A novel approach to esti-
equipments
were safely

destroyed

mating potential maximum heavy metal exposure to ship recycling yard

reused

reused

workers in Alang, India. Sci. Total Environ. 438, 304e311.

ocean
safely

were

EU, 2013. Regulation No 1257/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
was discharged was

Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri¼CELEX:

were destroyed

32013R1257.
Batteries were

recovered and
removed and
Stored paints

B1 ¼ 192 MT
B2 ¼ 188 MT
Ballast water

EU SSR, 2013. “European Union Ship Recycling Regulation” Adopted by the Euro-
Navigational
equipments
were safely

pean Council and Published in the Official Journal of the EU to Become Legally
to ocean

Binding. The EU Ship Recycling Regulation entered into force on 30 December

reused

reused
safely

2013. http://maritimesun.com/news/ship-recycling-new-eu-regulation.
Garmer, K., Sjo €stro€m, H., Hiremath, A.M., Tilwankar, A.K., Kinigalakis, G.,
Asolekar, S.R., 2015. Development and validation of three-step risk assessment
Ballast tanks, double
hull spaces, fore and
Bilge holding tank,

areas, sanitary and

Outer shell, ballast

method for ship recycling sector. Saf. Sci. 76, 175e189.

designated ballast

machinery spaces
bilge wells, waste

after peak, other

Accommodation

Garud, P., 2012. Incorporation of global environmental norms into Indian legal
systems: social and economic challenges, with special reference to ship-
Store room

Ship Cabin

breaking. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Emerging Economies

e Prospects and Challenges 37, pp. 150e156.
George, W.E., 2005. Stability & Trim for the Ship's Officer. Cornell Maritime Press,
tanks

tanks
drain

Centreville, Md, ISBN 0-87033-564-2.

Hiremath, A.M., Pandey, S.K., Kumar, D., Asolekar, S.R., 2014. Ecological engineering,
sewage and grey water drainage pipes,

industrial ecology and eco-industrial networking aspects of ship recycling

Alloys with lead in lead-acid storage

sector in India. APCBEE Procedia 10, 159e163.

Ceiling panels, linings and partition
panels, internal bulk carrierheads,

Hiremath, A.M., Tilwankar, A.K., Asolekar, S.R., 2015. Significant steps in ship
containers, navigational systems

recycling vis-a-vis wastes generated in a cluster of yards in Alang: a case study.

Hardening agent in alloys, fuel

J. Clean. Prod. 87, 520e532.

ILO, 2004. Safety and Health in Ship Breaking: Guidelines for Asian Countries and
other hoods and masks

Turkey, Interregional Tripartite Meeting of Experts on Safety and Health in

Shipbreaking for Selected Asian Countries and Turkey, Bangkok, ISBN 92-2-
115289-8. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb289/
pdf/meshs-1.pdf.
Anodes, paints.

IMO, 2013. International Maritime Organization. http://www.imo.org/OurWork/

Ballast tank

Environment/ShipRecycling/Pages/Default.aspx.
Bilge tank
batteries

IMO, 2015. Recycling of Ships: the Development of the Hong Kong Convention.
Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/ShipRecycling/
Pages/Default.aspx.
IMO, 2012. Report on International Shipping Facts and Figures e Information Re-
sources on Trade Safety, Security, Environment. http://www.imo.org/
KnowledgeCentre/ShipsAndShippingFactsAndFigures/Statisticalresources/Documents/
December%202011%20update%20to%20July%202011%20version%20of%20International
%20Shipping%20Facts%20and%20Figures.pdf.
Inventory Guidelines, 2009. Guidelines for the Development of the Inventory of
Hazardous Materials. Resolution MEPC.179(59), Adopted on 17 July, 2009.
http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/ShipRecycling/Documents/
RESOLUTION%20MEPC.179(59)%20Inventory%20guidelines.pdf.
Kumar, R., 2013. Ship Recycling e a Status Report on South Asia. http://www.
shipbreakingplatform.org/shipbrea_wp2011/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/ship_
recycling_en.pdf.
Kusumaningdyah, W., Eunike, A., Yuniarti, R., 2013. Modeling trade off in ship
breaking industry considering sustainability aspects: a system dynamics
approach. Procedia Environ. Sci. 17, 785e794.
Mahindrakar, A.B., Das, S.K., Asolekar, S.R., Kura, B., 2008. Environmental issues in
the ship recycling industry in India. In: Presented at Conference Organized by
Air and Waste Management Association (AWMA), Portland, Oregon, USA.
Marhavilas, P.K., Koulouriotis, D.E., Gemini, V., 2011. Risk analysis and assessment
methodologies in the work sites: on a review, classification and comparative
study of the scientific literature of the period 2000 to 2009. J. Loss Prev. Process
polymers, waste rubbers
Zinc residues containing

(e.g. Glass wool used for

10 Other hazardous wastes

Ind. 24, 477e523.

Marhavilas, P.K., Koulouriotis, D.E., Mitrakas, C., 2009. Development of a quantita-
tive risk assessment technique and application on an industry's worksite using
different types of
insulation, cables
lead cadmium in

real accidents data. Sci. J. Hellinic Assoc. Mech. Electr. Eng. 415, 14e20.
concentrations

Ballast water

Mikelis, N., 2013. Ship recycling markets and the impact of the Hong Kong
and plastics
Bilge Water

Convention. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ship Recycling

Antimony

Beryllium

(SHIPREC 2013). World Maritime University, Malmo.

Moen, A.E., 2008. Breaking Basel: the elements of the basel convention and its
application to toxic ships. Mar. Policy 32, 1053e1062.
Neşer, G., Kontas, A., Unsalan, D., Uluturhan, E., Altay, O., Darilmaz, E.,
Kucuksezgin, F., Tekogul, N., Yercan, F., 2012. Heavy metals contamination levels
8

9
298 A.M. Hiremath et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 116 (2016) 279e298
at the coast of Aliaga (Turkey) ship recycling zone. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64,
882e887.
Neser, G., Unsalan, D., Tekogul, N., Stuer-Lauridsen, F., 2008. The ship breaking industry
in turkey: environmental, safety and health issues. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 350e358.
Ravichandran, K., Jain, P., Sankheecha, R., 2012. Ship Breaking Industry: Key Trends
and Credit Implications, ICRA Rating Feature. http://www.icra.in/Files/ticker/
Ship%20Breaking%20Industry%20Note_25Sept2012.pdf.
Reddy, M.S., Basha, S., Kumar, Sravan, Joshi, H.V., Ramachandraiah, G., 2003.
Quantification and classification of ship scrapping waste at AlangeSosiya, India.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 46, 1609e1614.
Reddy, M.S., Joshi, H.V., Basha, S., Sravan Kumar, V.G., 2004. An assessment for
energy potential of solid waste generated from a ship-scrapping yard at Alang-
Sosiya. J. Solid Waste Technol. Manag. 30, 90e99.
Sarraf, M., Stuer-Lauridsen, F., Dyoulgerov, M., Bloch, F., Wingfield, S., Watkinson, R.,
2010. Ship Breaking and Recycling Industry in Bangladesh and Pakistan. World
Bank.
SRIA, 2014. Ship Recycling Association of India. http://www.sriaindia.com/alang-
info/statistics/.
Supreme Court of India, 2007. Writ Petition (Civil) 657 of 1995, Bench: Dr. Arijit
Pasayat and S. H. Kapadia. Order of 6 September 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/
environment/waste/ships/pdf/indian_order2007.pdf. as well as. http://judis.
nic.in/supremecourt/imgs.aspx.
Tixier, J., Dusserre, G., Salvi, O., Gaston, D., 2002. Review of 62 risk analysis meth-
odologies of industrial plants. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 15, 291e303.
Wilson, R., Langer, A.M., Nolan, R.P., 1999. A risk assessment for exposure to glass
wool. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 96e109. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pubmed/10536105.
World Steel, 2013. World Crude Steel Production Summary. http://www.worldsteel.
org/dms/internetDocumentList/press-release-downloads/2013/2013-
Statistics-Tables/document/2013%20Statistics%20Tables.pdf.