Page 20 - Layout 1

5 Cargo

Heat damage case study 2:to the rice was also reported. The double bottom tanks

The bulk carrier had loaded wheat and at time of discharge for cargo holds 2, 3, 4 and 5 were subdivided into ballast
the top layer of the cargo was found to be in good condition. and fuel oil tanks. The cargo receiver accused the vessel of

However, cargo at the aft bulkhead, adjacent to the engine excessively heating bunker fuel.

room was damaged. The damaged cargo was dry and caked. Excessive temperatures can lead to non-enzymic browning,
It could not be established what the exact temperature of which can cause discolouration in rice cargo. It is important to

the bunker fuel had been.know the temperature and moisture levels when deteriorative

changes occur in milled rice. It seems that non-enzymic
browning, such as the Maillard reaction, requires temperatures

Heat damage case study 3:above 60°C. In this case the recorded cargo temperatures were

The bulk carrier had loaded sunlower seed meal, with within normal parameters for this trade. These temperatures
burned cargo found by the aft bulkhead adjacent to the would not cause discolouration or browning.

engine room during discharge. Subsequently, heavy fuel oil The damage caused to the rice is more likely because

tanks in the engine room were in direct contact with the aft of pre-shipment temperature abuse or a problem inherent
bulkhead. The surveyor was unable to ind records showing in the rice. Caking of bags was caused principally by

what temperatures the heavy fuel oil had been heated to.condensation in the vessel, which was aggravated by an

inherently high moisture content in the rice. The moisture
content caused the rice to become microbiologically

Heat damage case study 4:unstable, and as such, unsafe for shipment, a factor that

The bulk carrier had loaded soybean meal. Loading hadundoubtedly led to localised spoilage in random areas, as
been interrupted several times due to rain. On completionwas the case of this cargo.

of loading the cargo was fumigated. During the voyage the The claim was settled and it was determined that heating

vessel had experienced some heavy weather. Upon discharge of the bunker fuel was not the cause of the cargo damage,
mouldy cargo was found in the top layer. Furthermore,but the inherent moisture content of the rice before loading.

some heat damaged cargo was found by the aft cargo hold

bulkhead, adjacent to a heavy fuel oil tank. During the
voyage this tank was heated to 60°C.Alleged heat damage case study 2

The bulk carrier had loaded yellow corn in southern USA.

During the voyage the crew measured the temperature and
Alleged heat damageventilated the cargo holds. The vessel also experienced two

Inspection of casualties where the owner has been blamed days of heavy weather, registering force 8, and seas covering

for causing heat damage to the cargo have shown that itthe cargo hatches. Damaged cargo was found on the top
is more likely that the cargo was not in proper condition layer when the cargo hatches were opened during discharge

when loaded. The shipper had not ensured that the cargo and was found to be mouldy and discoloured. This was
similar for almost all cargo holds. At the end of discharge
was properly prepared for shipment. This emphasises the
importance of crews keeping good records to prove that all some damaged cargo was found on the tank top. The cargo

procedures were followed.receiver claimed that the vessel had excessively heated the
bunker fuel. The temperature of the bunker fuel had never

been above 40°C according to the Chief Engineer. Loading

Alleged heat damage case study 1was stopped at the loading port about seven times because
of rain, and could have affected the moisture content of
The bulk carrier had loaded bagged parboiled rice in a
Southeastern Asian port. During loading the moisture the cargo. Before loading, the cargo should have been dried.

content of the rice was very close to the allowed limit. The In this case it seems that the cargo was not dried before
loading. Major differences were also recorded between
sea temperature in the port was 32°C. When loading was
complete the cargo holds were fumigated with phosphine. night and day temperatures at the loading port, which can

The cargo holds were under gas for the irst four days of cause condensation in the cargo hold. The cargo was also
loaded almost to the cargo hatch cover, so there was no
the voyage and then the hatch covers were opened and
ventilated as per best practices. The fuel in the double air circulation in the hold. The claim was settled and the

bottom bunker tanks, below cargo holds 3, 4 and 5, accusation that damage was caused by heating bunker fuel
was dismissed.
registered a temperature of 29°C during the voyage.
During discharge it was found that some cargo had

become discoloured. Some moisture damage and caking

www.swedishclub.com 18