Navigational safety in the Sound between Denmark and Sweden (Øresund)

Transcription

1 The Royal Danish Administration of Navigation and Hydrography, The Danish Maritime Authority and The Swedish Maritime Administration Navigational safety in the Sound between Denmark and Sweden (Øresund) Risk and cost-benefit analysis August 2006

2 The Royal Danish Administration of Navigation and Hydrography, The Danish Maritime Authority and The Swedish Maritime Administration Navigational safety in the Sound between Denmark and Sweden (Øresund) Risk and cost-benefit analysis August 2006 Ref R (1) Version 1 Date Prepared by JESP/PTA/SAT Checked by FMR/SAT/PTA/LWA Approved by TAN Report cover: Photograph by Søren Madsen, Øresundbron. Rambøll Danmark A/S Teknikerbyen 31 DK-2830 Virum Danmark Phone

3 Table of contents 1. Introduction Objective Limitations Report overview 4 2. Executive summary Risk and accident types Risk acceptance Data analysis and accident registrations Hazards and risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) Risk analysis (FSA step 2) Cost benefit analysis (FSA step 4) Recommendations for decision making (FSA step 5) Procedure for analysis Project definition and information basis Project definition Information basis Hazard identification and risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) Risk assessment (FSA step 2) Frequency and consequence analysis Risk control options (FSA step 3) Cost benefit assessment (FSA step 4) Decision making and recommendations (FSA step 5) Basic information Geographic limitations 4.2 Ship traffic overview Navigational routes Specific limitations and requirements for navigation in Øresund Pilot regulations in Øresund Descriptions for use of Swedish or Danish pilots Requirements for use of pilot for specific ship cargos or ship sizes Requirements for use of pilots calling on different harbours in Øresund IMO recommendations for use of pilot in Øresund Data basis and analysis Drogden observation station Leisure boats and fishing ships Port registrations Pilot registrations Ferry lines 5.6 VTS-Data AIS-data Dynamic data Static data 36 Ref /R (1) I

4 5.8 Validation of data Quality of the dynamic AIS data Quality of the static AIS-data Comparisons of AIS data and data from Drogden observation station Comparison between AIS and ferry lines between Helsingør/Helsingborg Comparison between VTS data and Drogden observation station Data validation summary Detailed analysis of AIS data Navigational routes Øresund The traffic separation zone at Øresund North The routes east and west of Ven Kongedybet, Hollænderdybet and Kronløbet Drogden and Flintrännan Outside Malmö Harbour Drogden South Detailed analysis at Drogden observation station The number of ships over all registered years The number of ships registered each month The number of ships registered each hour of the day Distribution of GT and draught Meteorological an oceanographic data Current Wind and visibility Ice Accident registrations Location Frequency Causes Use of pilot Light conditions 6.6 Size of ship (GT) Consequences Identification of hazards and risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) Methods and procedures Identification method Frequency and consequence classes Risk matrix Risk Register Hazard identification workshop Meeting participants Overview of results from workshop Risk reduction workshop Meeting participants Overview of results from workshop 7.4 Preliminary risk ranking Frequency models (FSA step 2) Basic model principles 106 Ref /R (1) II

5 8.1.1 Ship characteristics Ship traffic distributions Route characteristics External conditions Failure types Ship-ship collision for passing ship Description Assessment of model parameters Ship-ship collision for crossing ships Description Assessment of model parameters Grounding and ship-obstacle collision Description Assessment of model parameters Methods for implementation of the frequency models Consequence models (FSA step 2) Consequence models Consequence cost evaluation Fatalities Property damage Environmental damage Presentation of results from risk analysis (FSA step 2) Locations and scenarios Grounding and collision risk results Expected annual accident costs Sensitivity analysis Cost-benefit models (FSA step 4) Description of cost-benefit model Assessment of basic cost-benefit parameters Cost-benefit evaluations (FSA step 4) Total risk changes from implementation of risk reducing measures Calculated values of the cost-benefit criterion Ranked list of risk reducing measures Cost-benefit sensitivity analysis Control programme for follow-up and updates of results Recommendations for decision making (FSA step 5) References 170 Appendices Appendix 1: Hazard identification sheets Appendix 2: Transverse southbound traffic distributions Appendix 3: Transverse northbound traffic distributions Appendix 4: Speed distributions Appendix 5: Draught distributions i i ii iii iv v Ref /R (1) III

6 Appendix 6: Heading distributions Appendix 7: Course over ground distributions Appendix 8: Fitted distribution parameters for ship location Appendix 9: Passage situation distributions Appendix 10: Estimation of the number of leisure boats in Øresund Appendix 11: Visit to ports in Øresund Appendix 12: General description of Bayesian network Appendix 13: Bayesian network for frequency models Appendix 14: Bayesian network for consequence models Appendix 15: Accident costs in Norwegian waters vi vii viii xvi xxi xxiv xxviii xxix xxxvi xxxix Ref /R (1) IV

7 1. Introduction 1.1 Objective In March 2005 the Danish and the Swedish authorities met for a general discussion of the navigational safety in Øresund. At the meeting it was agreed that an overall description of the navigational safety in Øresund should be established. In order to do so, a common data basis including registered groundings, collisions and navigational traffic patterns should be made for both Danish and Swedish territorial waters. In this connection, it was expected that the new AIS-technology could give important contributions. A common work group was established that before May 2005 should present a commisorium for this. Both countries emphasised that present activities should not be delayed from this commisorium. It was decided that all relevant measures to influence the safety level in Øresund (navigational markings, procedures, navigational limitations etc.) should be included in the analysis. This co-operation between authorities was a logic continuation of the co-operation established at the HELCOM minister conference in Copenhagen 2001 and amongst other issues was initiated through a suggestion from eight Baltic Sea counties concerning new route arrangements in e.g. Bornholmsgattet. Bearing this in mind, The Royal Danish Administration of Navigation and Hydrography, The Danish Maritime Authority and The Swedish Maritime Administration have requested Rambøll to carry out a risk analysis of the navigational safety in Øresund. Øresund is a highly trafficked waterway used by a large number of cargo ships, oil and chemical tankers, container ships etc. to transport goods from the Baltic Sea to remaining parts of Europe and overseas destinations. Furthermore, passenger ships with a high frequency of daily departures transports passengers between Denmark and Sweden. Finally, a large number of leisure boats are using Øresund as sailing area in the summer period. The high intensity of various ship traffic in combination with the relative narrow navigational routes in some parts of Øresund, will inevitably cause critical situations. These situations may lead to collisions or groundings and a subsequent potential loss of lives or environmental damage and several accidents have taken place in Øresund within the last decade. In order to ensure that the navigational risk in Øresund is not at an unacceptable level with respect to human safety, property and environment, the authorities wants to have a mapping of the risk in various parts of Øresund. This mapping may then form a basis for decisions on whether to implement risk reducing measures to lower the risk in critical areas. 1

8 The objective of the study is to establish a basis for the data analysis and to determine the risk for collisions and groundings in relation to human safety, property and environment and furthermore to give recommendations for risk reducing measures that on implementation will lower the risk related to the various risk types given above. The risk analysis method applied in this study is prepared such that full accordance with the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process, ref. [1], is achieved. 1.2 Limitations The study of the navigational safety is limited to Øresund defined by the area between a line from Gilleleje to Kullen and a line between Stevns and Falsterbo in south, see Figure 1-1. Within this area, potential navigational risks are considered when occurring outside the port areas. 2

9 Figure 1-1 Relevant area for the analysis. 3

10 1.3 Report overview The study presented in this report covers a number of activities from gathering of basic information over establishing a data basis, data analysis and risk analysis to the final presentation of results. An overview of the content of the report is sketched in Figure 1-2. Procedure for analysis Project definition Information basis Description and procedure Chapter 3 Procedure Basic information Location Navigational routes Validation and presentation Chapter 4 Other information Data basis and analysis AIS-data Accidents Other data sources AIS: validation and presentation Chapter 5 Accidents: presentation and analysis Chapter 6 Hazards and risk control options FSA step 1+3 Workshops Risk register data Identification of critical scenarios Identification of risk control options Intial risk ranking Chapter 7 Risk analysis FSA step 2 Error modelling Scenario models Bayesian networks Frequency modelling Consequence modelling Results Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Cost Benefit FSA step 4 Assessment of accident costs Assessment of costs for implementing measures Ranking Cost benefit models Human safety Property Enviroment Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Recommendations FSA step 5 Recommendations Recommendations for decisions making Chapter 13 Figure 1-2 Report overview 4

11 2. Executive summary The present report presents a data analysis of the vessel traffic as well as a risk analysis of the navigational safety in the Sound between Denmark and Sweden (Øresund). Figure 2-1 shows a map of the area. Figure 2-1 Relevant area for the analysis. The objective of the risk analysis is to establish a basis for the maritime authorities on which they can evaluate and decide which navigational arrangements and measures ought to be introduced in order to minimize or reduce risks and maintain a sufficiently high safety level for the vessel traffic in Øresund. 5

12 The methods applied in the present study is in accordance with the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process, ref. [1]. The summary follows the phases in this procedure by giving a summary of: Basis for the analysis o Risk types o Risk acceptance o Data analysis and accident registrations Hazards and Risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) Risk analysis (FSA step 2) Cost benefit analysis (FSA step 4) Recommendation (FSA step 5) 2.1 Risk and accident types The following risk types are included in the analysis: Human safety - measured in terms of the expected number of fatalities pr. year. Property - measured in terms of expected annual cost. Environment - measured in terms of annual cost for clean-up. (Long term costs from adverse effect on the environment are not included). The accidents considered and for which the risk is calculated for the three risk types above includes the accident types ship-ship collisions and groundings. 2.2 Risk acceptance The risk acceptance criteria are based on the approach described in the IMO guidelines for carrying out a Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) in which a ranking of risk reducing measures on the basis of cost-benefit calculations is proposed. Hence, it is the societal risk that is considered in the present study. This is supplemented by verifying that no single locations or areas in Øresund should contribute significantly to the total risk for the entire Øresund. 2.3 Data analysis and accident registrations The following data sources have been used in the analysis of the vessel traffic: Ship passages at Drogden lighthouse Information concerning leisure boats and fishing ships VTS data in Drogden Port registrations Pilot registrations Ferry line departure tables AIS data from October and November

13 Through the data analysis the overall navigational routes in Øresund are described. Based on the traffic intensities on these routes Øresund is divided into six focus areas and the results are presented for each of these areas in terms of: The number of passages. An example for Flintrännan and Drogden is shown in Figure 2-2. The distribution of the ship locations transverse to the navigational routes in each focus area. Direction route distributions where information is given not only of ship location, but also of the ship direction, when passing a chosen line across a navigational route. Illustrating the passage distances during passages and overtakings (for the most trafficked areas only). Distributions of GT and draught Figure 2-2 Ship movements in Flintrännan and Drogden. It is noted that the number of movements are registered at different locations. In between two registrations there may be changes to the ship traffic due to the pres- 7

14 ence of a port in the area (e.g there are approximately 2000 ships calling the port of Dragør each year including the pilot boats at the pilot station in Dragør). A detailed analysis of the accident registrations in the Øresund area is carried out. The analysis covers the following aspects: Location of accident Frequency Causes Use of pilot Light conditions Size of ship (GT) Consequences The results of the analysis of the accident registrations are used to calibrate the established collision and grounding frequency models and to estimate input parameters for both frequency and consequence models. 2.4 Hazards and risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) A hazard identification workshop was held with the objective of identifying hazards relevant for the navigational safety in Øresund. The hazard identification workshop resulted in a list of 66 identified hazards. A preliminary evaluation of frequency and consequence for each risk type for each hazard was carried out based on input from the workshop participants resulting in a preliminary risk ranking. This preliminary risk ranking is used as part of the basis for determining the critical locations in Øresund to be further studied in the risk analysis (focus areas) and the critical scenarios for the detailed risk analysis. A second workshop was subsequently held with the objective of identifying risk reducing measures (risk control options) for each of the hazards identified in the first workshop. The risk reduction workshop resulted in a list of 44 risk reducing measures. The identified risk reducing measures are included in and accounted for in the cost-benefit analysis. 2.5 Risk analysis (FSA step 2) Calculation models for estimating risks associated with collision and grounding have been established for the following accident types: Ship-ship collisions for passing ship Ship-ship collisions for crossing ships Grounding and ship obstacle collision The basic concept in these models is that the ships may based on the location on the considered route be at collision or grounding course, but will in normal conditions make proper corrections such that an accident does not occur. Only in cases, where failures occur and no corrections are made, an accident occurs. The models give estimates of the accident frequencies and the accident consequences. The acci- 8

15 dent frequencies are given in terms of the number of expected annual accidents. The consequences are given in terms of the costs of fatalities, property damage and clearing and clean-up damage. The economical cost of a fatality related to a ship accident as well as cost related to clearing and clean-up (environmental damage) is estimated based on information given in Safedor, ref. [6]. The property damage is estimated based on anonymised data information from a ship insurance company regarding the insurance sums in case of ships being involved in accidents. The areas with dominating risk contributions are the area at Helsingør/Helsingborg and the Drogden channel. In total it is expected that the average number of annual collisions is more than one and that the annual number of groundings in Øresund is approximately Cost benefit analysis (FSA step 4) The cost benefit analysis is performed according to the Danish Ministry of Transports Guidelines for Social-economical evaluation, ref. [11]. The method implies that cost of a given risk reducing measure is evaluated against the safety benefits that will be achieved by implementing the risk reducing measure. The benefit of a given risk reducing measure is estimated based on the results of the risk model. The cost and benefit of a given risk reducing measure is combined in the cost-benefit criterion, which is positive when the measure is cost beneficial. Cost and benefits are calculated on basis of the Net Present Value using a lifetime of 25 years for the implemented risk reducing measures and an interest rate of 6%. The cost benefit criterion is calculated for different risk reducing measures resulting in the ranked list of measures shown in Figure 2-3 below. 9

16 Cost/benefit criterion Move the turn at W4 (Helsingør- Helsingborg) Convoy sailing in Drogden Overtaking forbidden in Drogden Ships with smaller draught sailing outside markers in Drogden Traffic separation scheme between Drogden and Flintrännan Traffic separation scheme around Ven Improved marking of Väster Flacket by buoy Removal of Drogden lighthouse (excl. installation of new lighthouse) Introduction of VTS (navigational assistance service) mprove marking of Trekroner lighthouse Removal of Drogden lighthouse (incl. installation of new lighthouse) Precautionary area around Middelgrund IMO pilot recommendations made compulsory Excavation of Drogden to make it twice as wide ntroduction of VTS (information service) Funnel shapped entrance to Drogden Free pilot service Figure 2-3 Graphical presentation of ranked risk reducing measures. The risk reducing measures in left side of Figure 2-3 from Move turn at W4 to Introduction of VTS (navigational assistance service) have a positive cost benefit criterion. It should be noted that due to the uncertainty on the model results the present analysis does not give a clear conclusion on a positive cost benefit criterion for VTS (navigational assistance service) and Removal of Drogden lighthouse (excluding installation of a new lighthouse). 2.7 Recommendations for decision making (FSA step 5) Some risk reducing measures may be implemented very easily without imposing disturbances to the traffic, whereas implementation of other measures may lead to various degrees of traffic disturbance or have other effects to be taken into account (e.g. political) before deciding whether or not to implement the risk reducing measure. Bearing this in mind, the list of recommendations is given in Table 2-1 below. Further development of the details in these risk reducing measures should be carried out, and the estimated costs confirmed. 10

17 No. Description of recommendation Comments 35 Move buoy W4 at Helsingør- Helsingborg further north to give the north- and southbound traffic more time to manoeuvre before meeting the east/west bound traffic. This gives a large reduction in collision frequencies. It is however noted that no collisions are actually registered at this location 7 Mark additional lanes in Drogden outside the existing Drogden channel to be used for smaller ships with draughts less than 5 m. This will give more space to the large ships in Drogden and will lead to a reduction in collision frequencies 43 Improvement of the marking at the north western area of Väster Flacket A number of groundings have been registered at this location, and a better marking will lead to improved navigational conditions Table 2-1 List of recommended risk reducing measures. Besides the measures above, a number of measures may be recommendable depending on additional clarification before implementation. These recommendations are: Convoy sailing in Drogden Overtaking forbidden in Drogden Traffic Separation Scheme in Drogden/Flintrännan Traffic Separation Scheme at Ven VTS (navigational assistance service) and Removal of Drogden lighthouse (excluding installation of a new lighthouse) were found to be cost beneficial in the cost benefit analysis. However, due to the uncertainty on the model results, the present analysis does not give a clear recommendation of these measures. Further analysis of both cost and benefit of these measures might reduce the uncertainty and prove them beneficial. 11

18 3. Procedure for analysis The objective of the this risk analysis is to establish a basis for the maritime authorities on which they can evaluate and decide which navigational arrangements and measures ought to be introduced in order to minimize or reduce risks and maintain a sufficiently high safety level for the vessel traffic in Øresund. As a fundament for the risk analysis and hence also an objective of the present work, is the collection and analysis of ship traffic data such that it is ensured that a common basis for the present risk analysis and potential updates is established. The methods applied in the present study to carry out a navigational risk analysis in Øresund is in accordance with the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process, ref. [1]. The procedure used in the present study (and as defined by the IMO guideline) is in line with general applied risk assessment procedures in areas like railway safety, oil&gas, etc. The assessment is divided into a number of phases: 1. Project definition / Basis Information 2. Hazard Identification 3. Risk Assessment 4. Risk Control Options 5. Cost-benefit Assessment 6. Decision making recommendation The interaction between the phases, which are described in detail in the following, is shown in figure 5-1. (1) Project definition / Basic Information (2) Hazard Identification FSA step 1 (3) Risk Assessment FSA step 2 (6) Decision Making Rec ommendations FSA step 5 (4) Risk Control Options FSA step 3 (5) Cost-benefit Assessment FSA step 4 Figure 3-1 Phases in the applied risk analysis 12

19 The present section outlines the basic concepts for the analysis with regard to the phases illustrated in Figure Project definition and information basis This phase relates to a description of the definitions and limitations of the study and furthermore to the description of the set of background information that is necessary in order to carry out the safety assessment Project definition In order to have a common understanding of the basis for the risk analysis, a description of definitions and limitations to the present study are carried out. This concerns: Definitions and limitations of the types of risk to consider Formulation of risk acceptance criteria Risk types As a basis for the risk analysis, a set of risk types are defined to be included in the analysis: Human safety Property Environment The measures for the different risk types are as follows: Human safety is measured in terms of the expected number of fatalities pr. year. Property is measured in terms of expected annual cost. Environment is measured in terms of annual cost for clean-up. It is noted, that these costs do not include long term costs from adverse effect on the environment. Hence, a calculation of the risk will address the items above. It is noted that human safety relates to the safety for the persons onboard ships in Øresund and not to 3 rd party, e.g. the risks for persons being at the Øresund Bridge in case of an accident is not included. Risk acceptance The procedure for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) as described in the IMO guideline does not account for any absolute acceptance criteria, i.e. no formulation on upper bounds for the number of fatalities, for property damage costs of for environmental costs are defined. The FSA acceptance criteria relates solely to the ranking of risk reducing measures made on basis of cost-benefit calculations. Hence, this procedure is used in the present study. 13

20 It is however noted, that no single locations or areas in Øresund should contribute significantly to the entire risk. Thus, the results of the risk analysis are given in total for the entire Øresund and divided into different areas in order to present the distribution of risk on the different areas Information basis The risk analysis is based on the available information about Øresund with respect to: Area description (limitation) Description of ship traffic Accident registrations Meteorological information Existing rules and procedures A large number of data sources have been investigated. The data analysis is described in details in chapter 5 - both regarding the data analysis of existing traffic and the analysis of registered accidents in Øresund. Besides the collected data material, information about the navigational conditions in Øresund have been detailed described on basis of arranged workshops with invited attendees having large knowledge of the navigational conditions in Øresund as described in the following section. 3.2 Hazard identification and risk control options (FSA step 1 and 3) Prior to the risk analysis, an identification process is carried out. The purpose of the identification process is to identify Critical areas and events relevant for the considered risk types (hazard identification) Risk reducing measures (Risk control options) that will lower the risk related to the considered risk types The identification process is carried out on two workshops one where hazards have been identified and one where risk reducing measures have been identified. People having large knowledge of the navigational conditions in Øresund (pilots, ship masters, rule makers etc.) have been invited to attend the workshops. Detailed descriptions of the identification of hazards and risk control options including procedures, results and lists of attendees are given in chapter 7 and form the basis for the risk assessment modelling together with the information given from the collected data and background material. 3.3 Risk assessment (FSA step 2) On basis of the identified critical areas and critical events as determined from the hazard identification and analysis of accident registrations, a number of Bayesian networks have been established to calculate the frequency of occurrence of the events and the consequence given an event occurrence. 14

21 3.3.1 Frequency and consequence analysis In order to determine the yearly frequency of collisions or groundings, models have been established taking into account a number of parameters. Different main event categories and subcategories have been defined taking into account one or more of the events identified at the hazard identification workshops. It is noted that these are not all relevant for all considered scenarios. Basically, the following general types of events are analysed: Ship-Ship collisions Crossing routes Passage situations (passages and overtakings) Ship-obstacle collisions Groundings Frequency and consequence models are made for these categories and are separately adjusted to fit local conditions. Thus, a large number of models are made all based on the categories above but representing each a specific area of Øresund with input parameters reflecting the conditions (traffic and navigational) that are relevant for the selected area. Detailed frequency and consequence modelling are shown in chapter 8 and chapter 9, respectively. The total risk for each of the risk types is thus determined as a sum of individual contributions to the risk of the considered type (human safety, property and environment). The risk contributions are divided into different areas of Øresund and ranked to ensure that the risk of a single area do not contribute significantly to the total risk. 3.4 Risk control options (FSA step 3) On basis of the second identification workshop with focus on the risk reducing measures, a list of possible risk reducing measures (risk control options) is established. The effect of implementing the risk reducing measures are included in the frequency and consequence models such that it is possible to determine the decrease in risk by implementing the risk reducing measures. 3.5 Cost benefit assessment (FSA step 4) The influence on the risk from introducing some of the proposed risk reducing measures are analysed, and on basis of estimates of The costs related to implement a measure The benefit from reducing the risk when the measure is implemented a ranked list of risk reducing measures is presented. The ranking is made such that the risk reducing measure which gives the highest cost benefit will be on top of the list. The methods applied for calculating the cost-benefit for implementing a single measure involves calculations of the Net Present Value (NPV), i.e. the present value of an investment (and daily expenses to maintain the investment) and the savings from avoiding accidents when the measure is implemented. 15

22 In connection with calculation of NPV-values, values for discount rate and for lifetime of the considered risk reducing measure are applied. There may be differences in lifetime for different risk reducing measures. However, for simplicity it is proposed to use the same lifetime for all considered measures. 3.6 Decision making and recommendations (FSA step 5) The ranked list of the risk reducing measures is the basis for the decision makers to choose the most efficient measure for reducing the risk. It is noted that since the ranked list is based solely on economical considerations there may be other reasons (political, environmental) that shall be accounted for before it is decided which of the risk reducing measures that shall be implemented. In Figure 3-2 the overall process flow in the analysis model is shown. 16

23 Workshops Iidentification of hazards Identification of risk reducing measures Human errors -Skill based -Rule based Technical errors Engine failure Steering failure Meteoroloical data Wind Current Visibility Waves Critical events Critical locations Critical error types Accident reports -types -locations -causes Ship traffic characteristics -ship types -Annual number of movements -draught... Rules & Procedures -Markings -Maps -Pilots -VTS... Location A, Event #1 Location A, Event #2... Location X, Event #YY Definition of risk targets -Human safety -Property -Environment Risk evaluation and ranking Risk reduction and cost benefit Construction and O&M costs Recommendations Figure 3-2 Overall procedure for risk analysis and cost benefit assessment 17

24 4. Basic information The considered region of the risk analysis is Øresund, i.e., the water between Sweden and Denmark with the border between Sweden and Denmark located right in the middle of Øresund. The present section describes characteristics of Øresund with focus on: Geographic limitations Ship traffic overview Navigational routes and potential route limitations Specific limitations and requirements for navigation in Øresund It shall be noted that the risk analysis is limited to Øresund excluding port areas. Thus, there is no specific description of the large ports in the area. Prior to the present study, a number of analyses of the navigational safety including the Øresund region have been carried out. These have had different focus depending on the purpose of the analysis. The most significant studies are listed below: Operational Risk Analysis for the Øresund Bridge and the Drogden Tunnel, ref. [35], [20] and [19]. A large number of analyses concerning navigational safety and the 3 rd party risk and environmental risk from establishing the Øresund Link was carried out. Drogden Feasibility Study, ref. [5]. A study of the advantages and disadvantages obtained from deepening the Drogden channel. Sund Risk, ref. [2], [3], [23], [24] and [25]. A number of studies carried out by the University of Lund with the purpose of highlighting different issues of the navigational risk in Øresund Navigational safety in Danish Waters, ref. [14] A study of critical regions in Denmark and proposals for measures to reduce the risk. Accident registrations in Øresund , ref. [4] A statistical description of registered accidents in the Danish part of Øresund. 18

25 4.1 Geographic limitations Øresund is limited of a line from Gilleleje to Kullen in north and a line from Stevns to Falsterbo in south. The area is illustrated in Figure Ship traffic overview Øresund is highly trafficked and leads the ship traffic from Kattegat and the North sea to the Baltic Sea. The yearly number of ships passing through Øresund is approximately There are several large ports located along the coast in Øresund, amongst these are the ports of: København Malmö Helsingør Helsingborg The most frequent visiting ships are ships on various passenger and cargo routes sailing in Øresund e.g.: The ferries between Helsingør and Helsingborg The ferries from Copenhagen to Oslo and Swinousce The ferries from Malmö to Swinousce and Germany The Nordø Link from Malmö to Travemünde A large number of cruise ships visiting the ports of København and Malmö. Below is shown some of the ships most frequently passing Øresund. MS Aurora - a ferry on the route from Helsingør to Helsingborg 19

26 Wilanov a ferry on the route between Malmö and Swinoucie Cruise ships at Langelinie in København Finnsailor a cargo ship on the route between Malmö and Travemünde Besides the ships on regular routes, a large number of various ship types (oil tankers, chemical tankers etc.) are passing through Øresund on their way to or from ports in the Baltic Sea. Due to limitations in allowable draught in Øresund, a number of ships are using Storebælt (with larger draught limitation) when sailing loaded and are using Øresund when sailing in ballast. 20

27 Finally, a large number of leisure boats and fishing vessels are using Øresund. The occurrences of these ships are not limited to any specific regions of Øresund, but are seen all over the region. Thus, it is seen that the traffic in Øresund consists of a mixture of different ship types and does thus require good skills and awareness from the navigator on the ships when passing Øresund. 4.3 Navigational routes The ships entering Øresund may use different routes on their way through Øresund depending on the actual draught of the ship or depending on weather conditions etc. The navigational routes in Øresund are: The traffic separation zone at Øresund North The routes east and west of Ven Kongedybet, Hollænderdybet Kronløbet - the port entrance to København Flintrännan Drogden Drogden South 4.4 Specific limitations and requirements for navigation in Øresund There are large differences in e.g. width of the navigation channels at various places, in water depth etc. Ships coming into Øresund from north may have a draught of up to 11.5 m when visiting the port of København and 13,5 m when visiting the port of Malmö. However, further south - through Drogden and Flintrännan the water depth is 8 m and 8.4 m, respectively. In Flinterännan the elevated bridge of 1090 meters has a span of 490 meters. The navigable overhead clearance ( air draught ) are 55 meters at MHW. The width of the navigation channel is 370 m. The water depth in Flinterännan is 8.4 m, and pilotage is offered for ships not exceeding a draught of 7.0 meter. There is a maximum air-draught of 55.0 meter at mean water level for crossing the bridge. In Drogden, the water depth is 8 m at MSL and pilotage is offered for ships up to a draught of 7.7 m. Ships with air draught above 35 m shall report to Copenhagen airport 4.5 Pilot regulations in Øresund Due to the dense traffic and the special navigational conditions in Øresund, a number of requirements and recommendations for sailing in Øresund with respect to pilot assistance are established by the Danish and Swedish authorities. The following is a short description of these requirements and recommendations and includes: 21

28 Descriptions for use of Swedish or Danish pilots Requirements for use of pilot for specific ship cargos or ship sizes Requirements for use of pilots for the different harbours in Øresund IMO recommendations for use of pilot in Øresund Descriptions for use of Swedish or Danish pilots The border between Denmark and Sweden is located in the middle of Øresund. For this reason, guidelines for which national pilotage service must be used have been established. It is in short described in the following: Both countries can offer pilotage if there is a Danish and a Swedish coast surrounding the water, where pilotage shall take place, i.e. Both Danish and Swedish pilots can be used for ship traffic in Flinterännan, west of Ven and through the traffic separation zone at Helsingør/Helsingborg Only Danish pilots must be used through Drogden Only Swedish pilots must be used east of Ven. Each of the countries pilots offer pilotages to and from own countries ports in Øresund Both countries pilots must offer pilotage to/from anchoring position in neighbouring country. The navigator/ship owner decides which of the national pilot services shall be used Requirements for use of pilot for specific ship cargos or ship sizes Compulsory pilotage shall apply to the following merchant ships when navigating interior and exterior Danish territorial waters, ref. [36] and includes the following: Oil tankers with cargo. Chemical tankers carrying cargoes of dangerous liquid chemicals included in IMO s chemicals code (International Maritime Organization s Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk ). Gas tankers. Ships carrying radioactive cargoes. Compulsary pilotage for Swedish territorial waters is described in ref. [37] and is in general similar to the descriptions applying for Danish waters above. Pilotage is, in general, compulsory for masters on vessels with a length of 70 meters or beam of 14 meters or more. 22

29 4.5.3 Requirements for use of pilots calling on different harbours in Øresund The following section gives specific descriptions for pilotage for a number of harbours in Øresund. Amagervaerket Harbour Ships shall use a pilot when arriving at or departing from Amagervaerket Harbour. This provision shall not apply to: Ships with a length of up to 90 metres fitted with a bow propeller and sufficient engine power Ships commanded by a master who has called at the harbour with the ship in question at least five times within the past six months. Helsingør State Port Tank ships shall use a pilot when arriving at or departing from Helsingør State Port. This provision shall not apply to tank ships commanded by a master who has called at Helsingør State Port with the ship in question at least five times within the past six months provided that a listening watch is maintained on VHF, channels 12 and 16. Prøvesten Harbour Ships shall use a pilot when arriving at or departing from Prøvesten Harbour. This provision shall not apply to: Ships with a length of up to 90 metres fitted with a bow propeller and sufficient engine power Ships commanded by a master who has called at the harbour with the ship in question at least five times within the past six months. Malmö Harbour Requirements for two pilots apply for ships heading for Malmö if the ship has a length of above 200 m IMO recommendations for use of pilot in Øresund In IMO resolution MSC 138(76) on recommendation on navigation through the entrance of the Baltic Sea it is recommended that: Loaded oil tankers with a draught of 7 m or more Loaded chemical tankers and gas carriers, irrespective of size, and Ships carrying a shipment of irradiated nuclear fuel, plutonium and high-level radioactive wastes (INF-cargoes), 23

30 when navigating the Sound between a line connecting Svinbaadan Lighthouse and Hornbaek Harbour and a line connecting Skanör Harbour and Aflandshage (the southernmost point of Amager Island): 1) to use the pilotage services established by the Governments of Denmark and Sweden 2) to be aware that anchoring may be necessary owing to the weather and sea conditions in relation to the size and draught of the ship and the sea level and, in this respect, take special account of the information available from the pilot and from radio navigation information services in the area. 24

31 5. Data basis and analysis As an important part of input to the risk analysis is detailed descriptions of the existing ship traffic based on a data analysis of available data sources. The objective of the present chapter is to establish the data basis for existing ship traffic and present the corresponding data analysis. The purpose of data analysis is primarily to give qualitative and quantitative input to the risk analysis, and secondly to give background information concerning navigation in Øresund. For the present risk analysis the following data sources have been used: Ship passages at Drogden lighthouse Information concerning leisure boats and fishing ships VTS data in Drogden Port registrations Pilot registrations Ferry line departure tables AIS data from October and November 2005 Besides these data, meteorological data (wind, waves, current, and visibility) are used as input to the risk analysis. Basic parameters based on these data are mainly taken from other available studies, ref. Drogden Feasibility study, ref. [5], the Sund Risk studies, ref. [1] and [3]. In the following sections each of the data sources listed above is described and basic analysis results are presented. Furthermore, a data validation aiming at ensuring a sufficient quality of the AIS data is carried out. Finally, detailed analyses of both AIS data and ships passages at Drogden lighthouse are made. Data sources not related to ship traffic (meteorological data) are described at the end of the present section. An overview of the data handling is seen in Figure

32 Data colletion Drogden registrations Data validation Compare data from different sources Leisure boats and fishing ships Data analysis Yearly number of passages VTS data Transverse route distribution Passage analysis Port registrations Ship characteristic distributions (L,B,D,BT,...) Ship type distributions Pilot registrations Data presentation Ferry lines AIS Figure 5-1 Overview of data analysis procedure 5.1 Drogden observation station Information concerning the ship traffic in Øresund is registered at the permanently manned Drogden observation station at Drogden lighthouse. Data in the period from to is made available for this study. 26

33 All ship passages (except small leisure boats) crossing a line between the south of Amager, Drogden lighthouse and Klagshamn in Sweden are registered. For each passage the following information is registered: Date (year, month and date) Time (hour, minute, second) Name (name of ship) Course (north/south) Direction (Drogden or Flintrännan) Class PTNR (military call sign) Call sign Lloyd number Country Type DWT GT Velocity Pilot (is a pilot present) Draught Cargo (Yes/No) Data from Destination AIS-error The fields pilot, draught, cargo, data from, destination and AIS-error have only been registered in for the period to When AIS-information about the ship is available, this information is used and stored in the database. If AIS information is not available (most likely due to the fact, that the ship has no AIS installed), it is noted in the database, and ship characteristics are found from other sources (Lloyds etc.) if available. The data from Drogden observation station is validated in sections and 5.8.5, and the detailed analysis of the data set is presented in section Leisure boats and fishing ships Leisure boats and fishing ships are frequently seen in Øresund, and especially in the summer period a large number of leisure boats (sailing ships and fishing ships) are using Øresund. For this reason, estimates have been given for the intensity of these ship types in Øresund as an input to the risk analysis. 27

34 To describe this kind of traffic several relevant ports have been contacted. The ports have supplied information concerning: The number of permanent leisure boats in the harbour The number of "guest nights" (corresponding to leisure boats) in the harbours A "guest night" is defined as one ship staying in a foreign port for one night. I.e., if the same ship stays in the foreign harbour for two days, this will count as two guest nights. In Table 5-1 is given an overview of the permanent residents and number of guest nights for some large leisure boat ports in Øresund. Permanent residents at harbour Annual number of guest nights Svanemøllen Rungsted Helsingør Hellerup/Skovshoved Dragør Helsingborg Copenhagen* * Copenhagen County* * Table 5-1 Annual number of permanent residents and number of guest night at relevant harbours. * The summer period (June-August) only. Based on the number of guest nights and permanent residents in Copenhagen County a distribution for leisure boats and fishing ships in Øresund is estimated. The details of the calculations are shown in Appendix 10 Estimation of the number of leisure boats in Øresund. The overall distribution is as shown in Table

35 Month Ships per day January < 200 February < 200 March < 200 April 480 May 480 June 2400 July 2400 August 2400 September 480 October < 200 November < 200 December < 200 Table 5-2 Distribution of leisure boats and fishing ships in Øresund. The numbers given in Table 5-2 cover the entire Øresund region. In Table 5-3 is shown the assumed distribution at the different locations in Øresund. Note that 10% of the traffic from leisure boats and fishing vessels are not accounted for, because it is assumed that they sail outside the mentioned areas. In Table 5-3 the assumed percentage of the traffic that sail in the sailing routes for the commercial traffic is also given. Location Distribution Part of traffic in sailing routes Øresund south 15% 10% Drogden 5% 10% Flintrännan 10% 10% Ven east 15% 90% Ven west 15% 90% Helsingør-Helsingborg 30% 30% Total 90% - Table 5-3 Distribution of leisure boats and fishing ships in Øresund regions. Based on the numbers in Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 distributions of leisure boats and fishing ships for each of the areas can be established. 5.3 Port registrations Information about large ports in Øresund has been retrieved by contacting ports in the Øresund area. Basically, the annual number of visits to the port have been registered divided into different ship types, ship sizes etc. Where necessary, the information has been supplied with information from Danmarks Statistik, ref. [7]. In Appendix 11 Visit to ports in Øresund is given an overview of the annual number of visits to the larger ports in Øresund. 29

36 5.4 Pilot registrations Information of pilot assistance is important with respect to the risk analysis, because presence of a pilot onboard a ship could reduce the probability of human failure. In Øresund there is a pilot service in both Danish and Swedish waters. Pilot registrations have been received from both the Danish as well as the Swedish authorities. The Danish registrations cover the period 2004 and 2005, where the data from 2004 are more detailed. In the 2004 data set there is a registration for each pilot assistance with information of e.g. pilot route and draught of ship. In the 2005 data set the registrations are summarised for each pilot route and no information is given concerning e.g. the draught of the ships. With respect to the Swedish pilot data specific information concerning the use of pilot east of Ven was given by The Swedish Maritime Administration. In 2005 there were 500 pilot assistances east of Ven, 300 of these were in transit and the remaining 200 was for Landskrona or Malmö harbour. The Swedish pilot data set for pilot assistances in the entire Øresund was not complete. Thus, for the use of the present risk analysis pilot data are based on the Danish registrations for This means that in Swedish waters pilot data from similar Danish waters are used. The data analysis is performed for all pilot routes potentially passing through Øresund. Some of these routes (e.g. Skagen-Bornholm) could also pass through Great Belt, but it has not been possible to determine the specific choice of route for each pilot assistance. In Figure 5-3 the number of pilot assistances for each month in 2004 is given. 30