Costly Fumigation Mistakes
Costly Fumigation Mistakes
The war on pests demands a significant portion of an annual budget. The global integrated pest management market is expected to reach $185 bn by 2028. Professional pest control may be pricey – but not nearly as costly as fumigation mistakes can be.
Explosive Shipping Mistake
In separate incidents, a bulk carrier loaded with yellow corn from Mexico and another loaded with grain in the US Gulf experienced explosions at sea.
Fumigation technicians boarded when loading was complete. The cargo was fumigated with fumitoxin pellets. Aluminium phosphide pellets are widely used in bulk cargo applications. Aluminium phosphide reacts with water to produce phosphine, an extremely toxic and effective fumigant.
As per the cargo documentation, fumigation pellets should be applied subsurface. In this instance, the technicians poured the pellets from flasks while walking on the hatch coamings or hatch covers. This work took a little more than an hour. All cargo hatches were then closed and the vessels sailed.
A series of explosions
While underway, an explosion occured in one hold which moved the hatch covers slightly and blue grey smoke was seen coming from under the edges. There were explosions in the remaining holds shortly afterwards.
Woman Sues Over Deaths of her 2 Cats
Newborn baby dies
What caused the explosions?
Phosphine gas will form an explosive mixture when mixed with air at a concentration exceeding around 1.8% to 2% by volume (the lower flammable limit). The concentration of phosphine in the air in each of the holds
exceeded this lower flammable limit. The fumigant pellets in each hold had not been distributed across the entire cargo surface, nor applied to the subsurface; the pellets were simply poured on top of the cargo.
The accumulation of the pellets in limited areas promoted a relatively rapid reaction of the pellets with moisture, generating concentrations of phosphine gas above the lower flammable limit. This lead to the explosions.
The cost of the mistake
In addition to the structural damage to the vessels, the damage to the hatch covers meant that poor weather conditions caused cargo damage too.
What can we learn?
The fumigation application method is critical. In these instances, uneven distribution of the fumigation pellets was sufficicient to create volatile conditions as the chemical process of the fumigant type progressed.
For more about shipping incidents, follow The Swedish Club
The Costly Woes of Wet Weather
A supramax bulk carrier loaded wheat for human consumption in a European port for discharge at a Middle Eastern port. The cargo was loaded from a barge alongside and also directly from the quay. Lorries transported the cargo and dumped the wheat in a pile on a large steel plate positioned on the quay. From this open pile the cargo was picked up by a ship crane and loaded into the holds. The vessel had five cargo holds.
Weather Interruptions
The loading took about two weeks with 12 breaks because of rain. At each rain break, the cargo remaining on the steel plate was loaded back on the lorries by crane and removed from the quay. The steel plate was supposed to be dried prior to resumed loading.
Loading of hold 3 was done in the early evening and resumed again in the early hours of the next day due to rain. At that time of year, the sun sets at about 16:00 so visibility was limited.
Fumigation prior to sail
Before departure, the cargo was fumigated professionally with aluminium phosphide tablets and seals were applied to all cargo holds. The crew applied tape and foam on the cargo hatch covers to prevent any fumigant gas from leaking out.
Inspection at discharge port
The vessel arrived at the discharge port and anchored. Officials boarded the vessel and unsealed the holds to inspect the cargo. The vessel then remained at anchor for another three weeks.
Wet and infested cargo in hold 3
Almost all the cargo in hold 3 had been unloaded when infested cargo was found at the bottom. In addition, some of the cargo was lumpy indicating wet
damage. The cargo that had already been unloaded was found to be sound and in good condition.
A salinity test was carried out on the damaged cargo but the result was negative. No saltwater damage was found. The cargo receiver rejected the remaining cargo in the hold because of the insects and lumpy cargo.
When the damaged cargo was found, no more cargo was allowed to be discharged and the vessel had to depart.
What we can learn
It is likely the cargo damage was caused by wet cargo being loaded with inefficient fumigation in cargo hold 3 – there were no insects found in the other holds.
Fumigation was carried out during the voyage and was undertaken with a gas recirculation system.
If the fumigation failed for cargo hold 3, what was specific to this hold? It is probable that this hold, unlike the others, was not sufficiently tight. The Master checks that cargo holds are weather-proof but hatch covers are not ‘gas-tight.’ Effective fumigation needs enough of the gas to be retained in the hold long enough to ensure the death of all insect life.
Deadly Fumigation Mistakes
Effective and efficient fumigation requires airtight conditions. Fumigant gasses are able to infiltrate hard to reach spaces and asphyxiate pests within their secret hiding places. Unfortunately that which makes fumigant gas SO effective, is also that which makes it so dangerous.
British couple die in luxury Egyptian resort
The retired couple were staying at Steigenberger Aqua Magic Hotel in the Red Sea resort of Hurghada in August 2018. The room next to theirs was fumigated with a pesticide, ‘Lambda’, for a bug infestation. In some countries, Lambda is diluted with the substance dichloromethane. This causes the body to metabolize or ingest carbon monoxide.
The fumigated room, which was sealed with masking tape around the door, was connected to theirs by an adjoining door.
The husband was declared dead on scene and the wife died a few hours later in hospital. The deaths were caused by carbon monoxide poisoning as a result of inhaling the vapor from the pesticide which contained dichloromethane.
What we can learn
Masking / Duct tapes are not always gas-tight. Duct tape can be used for methyl bromide but the molecular structure of sulfuryl fluoride makes duct tape ineffective as a gas-seal.
Young Durban couple die in their beds
In September 2022, a young Durban couple were found dead in their Musgrave apartment. Investigations into the cause of death discovered a neighbour had ordered the fumigation of his empty apartment. Excessive amounts of white powder and pellets across the bare floors of the apartment were analysed.
“Organophosphates” (chlorpyrifos) was used for the fumigation. This chemical is used extensively in the agricultural sector, but was banned for residential use in 2010. When used in isolated farm settings, evacuation is required up to 7 days.
The pest controller had not sealed any doors or windows in the fumigated apartment and no warning labels or notification signs had been placed at the building site.
What we can learn from this case
It is the property owner’s responsibility to engage the services of a certified, registered professional pest management company. The service provider used an illegal chemical and did not comply with standard fumigation protocols. The death of this couple can be directly linked to the unprofessional conduct of the pest control provider.
Fumico offers complimentary ProFume Stewardship Training which incorporates the correct risk management protocols required when conducting any form of fumigation pest control and comprehensive training on chemical interactions when using sulfuryl fluoride fumigant gas.
Two pest controllers die in Florida from ‘acute toxic effects’.
After the fumigation of a wharehouse building in Pompano Beach, Florida, two workers died and a third was hospitalized. Sulfuryl Fluoride fumigant gas was used in the fumigation of the furniture wharehouse. The business owner and his assistants started feeling nauseous and vomited while standing outside the building undergoing fumigation. The business owner was later found dead outside his home, his co-worker was found dead in his vehicle and the third was hospitalized.
The medical examiner found sulfuryl fluoride in their systems and on their clothing. Their deaths were ruled accidental by acute pesticide exposure.
What we can learn from this case
Despite being outside the warehouse building during fumigation, the workers still encountered chemical exposure. The autopsy report attributes the mishandling of pesticides to the poisoning incident. Mishandling can incorporate a lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) for pesticide applicators, improper tenting of the structure, or residues on clothing, skin, and hair. These chemicals do not remain in one place as fumigants and as a class of pesticides are most prone to drift, are highly volatile, highly toxic, and have very high application rates.
Pest control is fundamentally about the death and total destruction of pests. Risk management is integral to the process: highly toxic chemicals used within highly volatile settings MUST require suitably trained professionals to mitigate the very real dangers of the process. Mistakes carry a very high cost.
Manage the Risks
- Engage only qualified, certified pest control experts.
- Follow all chemical manufacturer’s instructions meticulously: application methods, prescribed use and warning labels should be followed accordingly.
- Site clearance, site preparation and site management cannot be lackadaisical.
- Monitoring equipment requires regular calibration services.
- Cost cutting with regards chemicals used, staff employed, equipment bought or maintained and protocols administered is guaranteed to be more costly for you, your client and innocent bystanders.
