Obviously, cigarette smoking has long been banned by airlines around the world. A no-smoking sign is clearly visible from where you sit to the bathroom. But what about e-cigarettes?

It turns out that there’s no unified stand when it comes about bringing and using electronic cigarettes. Is one allowed to bring but not smoke them? Or is it possible to do both?

If one has to ask Frank Pallone Jr., a U.S. House representative, he’d say no to both. In fact, he has already called the attention of Transport Secretary Anthony Foxx based on the letter he has given to the agency.

According to his correspondence, his request has been sitting in the department for the past 4 years with little or no progress. It’s high time therefore that they act upon it—that is, banning the use of e-cigarettes on aircraft. Incidentally, the politician responsible for banning smoking in airplanes, Senator Frank Lautenberg, also came from the same state as Pallone, where he represents the sixth district. Thus, he believed that it’s time they take on a similar responsibility.

In an op-ed published in CNNa few months ago, Marc Scribner, who is an expert in policy issues affecting transportation and telecommunications, wrote that airlines should not ban e-cigarettes, a device that mimics the function of a traditional cigarette without smoke or burning. Smokers get the sensation of the habit by inhaling nicotine vapor.

According to Scribner, although there are risks to e-smoking, they are far less worse than traditional smoking. Further, if the issue is public health, he contends that the harm is borne by the user, not by those around them, especially non-users.

Meanwhile, based on the regulations issued by International Air Transport Association (IATA), which is composed of more than 250 airlines around the world, e-cigarettes are treated as portable electronic devices. Moreover, they function with the use of lithium-ion batteries. They are allowed to be hand-carried, but they cannot be in checked-in luggage. Proper safety measures should be carried out in using lithium-ion batteries.

Two companies in Australia were forced to cough up a total of $32,000 after the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) discovered several violations in transportation of dangerous goods. A driver was also fined $4,000.

Trojan Fiberglass and G&N Costello Freight Lines were both penalized by the EPA Department of New South Wales after a routine inspection in Newcastle, specifically in Kooragang, on February 25, 2015.

According to a report on the EPA website, G&N Costello acted as a prime contractor while Trojan Fiberglass was the consignor. At the time of the inspection, the EPA had found a number of serious violations based on the rules of transportation of dangerous goods.

One of these is that the vehicle didn’t have a proper placard based on the contents of the vehicle, which were a flammable liquid (class 3) and organic peroxide (class 5.2). Further, these items didn’t have the proper labels and weren’t organized properly.

There was issue with the truck as well since it didn’t possess a license to transport bulk dangerous goods. It also didn’t have the proper safety measures, including a lack of PPE (personal protective equipment). The driver, on the other hand, didn’t have the exact license for dangerous goods transport.

In the end, both the contractor and the consignor received penalty offices amounting to $14,000 each. The EPA particularly fined Trojan for failing to train and supervise the driver while transporting the goods. The driver, meanwhile, had to pay $4,000. For the other offenses, EPA issues official cautions.

The EPA reiterated its call to those involved in the industry to follow the dangerous goods laws to significantly reduce the risks of harm to the environment, public, and the industry as well.

See the EPA Compliance Policy here: http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/legislation/prosguid.htm.

Lithium-ion batteries are becoming some of the preferred batteries for electronics especially laptops since they can make the equipment’s power last for a long time. However, they are also extremely dangerous as they can overheat and cause fire.Hence, when transporting lithium batteries, the organisation must meet the transport requirements and declare the package content.

It doesn’t come as a surprise therefore when the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) of the United Kingdom has persecuted Amazon, one of the largest online retail stores, for bending the rules and sending loose lithium-ion batteries by plane. It is believed that these batteries were meant to be replacements in laptops and mobile phones. Further, these very small batteries will be delivered across UK and in other countries.

Overall, Amazon UK received 11 charges from UK’s CAA through its prosecuting attorney, Alison Slater. On the other hand, speaking on behalf of Amazon, Stephen Spence told the magistrates court of Westminster that although they didn’t oppose the facts presented by the CAA, they also stressed the company practiced reasonable care. The company had yet to enter their pleas for each of the charges while the court remains adjourned until July 27. The prosecution is planning to add one more charge.

Aside from lithium-ion batteries, Amazon was also accused of violating the transport code for washes for car screens and flammable aerosols.

Many aviation accidents have been believed to be caused by the transport of lithium-ion batteries, particularly the loose ones. These include Air France, which crashed in 2010 during its trans-Atlantic flight, and a cargo plane crash that killed all UPS passengers. Flight MH370 of Malaysian Airlines has been subjected to many theories as the plane and its passengers remain missing, but one of the stories is it’s carrying lithium-ion batteries in bulk.

These batteries, whether non-rechargeable or rechargeable, can generate a lot of power and thus may heat up quickly. The way they have been assembled or designed may also make them volatile materials. Effective January 2015, the guidelines in transporting these types of batteries have been amended by the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

Last Tuesday afternoon, June 13, an ammonia leak occurred at the Koch Foods plant building located in the 4400-block of W. Berteau at the Northwest Side of Chicago.

Employees were promptly evacuated to prevent further casualties or injuries. There were about three people hospitalised due to the resulting leak, but they were already in a stabilised condition.

At around 3 pm, the Chicago Fire Department called a hazardous material alert. By 3:45 pm, authorities said that the leak was already secured and posed no threat to the surrounding neighbourhood.

A similar incident occurred last December 2014 in one of Koch Foods’ poultry plants in Gainesville, Georgia, also sending three people to a local hospital. In June 2014, Koch Foods’ Gainesville plant was also reported to suffer from an ammonia leak where four people were sent to a hospital for treatment.

Employee evacuation. Photo c/o abc7chicago.com

Ammonia is a colourless gas which can highly irritate the lungs of the human body because of its sharp and suffocating odour. Though ammonia is not regarded as a highly flammable material, when it mixes with water, it can form an ammonium hydroxide solution that can cause irritation and burns.

When exposed to its gas or vapour form, a person may experience a burning sensation in his eyes, nose, throat and lungs. Depending on the severity of exposure, a person may lead to blindness, lung cell damage or even death.

Despite its potential harm, ammonia is an important product used in the agriculture industry for the making of fertilizers. It can also be used as a cleaning solution, refrigerant gas, water supply purifier, and is necessary in the manufacturing of pesticides, plastics, fabrics, explosives, dyes and other industrial chemicals.

Koch Foods is currently the fifth largest broiler company in the United States according to the WATT Global Media Top Companies Database. Every week, Koch Foods is able to produce 48 million pounds of ready-to-cook chicken with the help of its 8 slaughter plants, 4 processing plants and one cooking plants.

Canada’s Minister of Transport, Lisa Raitt, recently proposed new amendments for the regulation of dangerous goods. This said proposal mainly focuses on the broadening of the coverage of the original reporting requirements, and the enhancement of the current emergency response and risk analysis procedures.

Minister of Transport Lisa Raitt. Photo c/o DailyMail.co.uk

Based on a press release from Raitt’s office, this new proposal would provide “more effective regulations” in future dangerous goods events. Specifically, the following points are suggested in the amendment proposal:

· Update the current criteria and circumstances on how to report dangerous goods incidents

· Initial telephone reports directed to the Canadian Transport Emergency Centre should provide more information detailing the events of the dangerous goods accident

· The 30-day written report would have additional requirements in order to provide more data that would help facilitate the emergency response and risk analysis procedures

· The reporting of the lost, stolen, or interfered dangerous goods transport would be improved to better meet the security provision requirements of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act

· Make the reporting of the incorrectly declared or undeclared dangerous goods similar to the International Civil Aviation Organisation reporting requirements

Once the proposal is passed, these more comprehensive guidelines would not only apply to railways, but these policies would be also observed to any airplanes, air-cargo facilities, aerodromes and road vehicles that transport or carry dangerous goods.

Raitt’s office has been busy taking new dangerous goods safety measures. The proposed amendment is not the only action spearheaded by the transport minister during this year. In fact, Transport Canada had already made their step of improving rail safety since the Rail Safety Week (April 27 – May 23) wherein they announced that they were beginning to collaborate with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada with regards to the effectivity of recorded audio and video in transport vehicles. The office also announced that they were adopting United States’ tank-car standards for trains loaded with dangerous goods (TC-117).

Raitt’s office strives to make improved regulations and standards in the transport of dangerous goods so as to prevent catastrophic incidents such as the Lac-Megantic which claimed the lives of 47 people last July 2013, as well as the three CN derailments which happened in Northern Ontario just earlier this year.

“Transport Canada remains committed to having the most robust requirements in place to transport dangerous goods in order to keep Canadians safe,” said Raitt.

The increasing number of rail derailment is becoming a safety concern and pushing government bodies to implement tougher maintenance standards and stricter inspections for railroad tracks. This, to prevent derailments of freight trains, especially those carrying hazardous materials such as volatile crude oil.

Rail safety a priority. Photo c/o The Globe and Mail

Rail regulators and lawmakers in Congress have focused on mitigating the risks caused by the volatility of Bakken crude oil, as well as ensuring the strength of the oil tank cars. However, the train speed and track flaws should also be considered as they are significant factors in rail accidents.

Rick Inclima, member of the FRA or Federal Railroad Administration’s Rail Road Safety Advisory Committee, commented that the solution on avoiding rail accidents is by preventing derailment. It is alarming to think that out of 1,220 train derailments last year, 39% were caused by track flaws.

Railroad companies should be responsible in determining the state and frequency of their track inspection and maintenance, depending on the speed of their trains. The higher maintenance standards and more stringent the inspections they implement are, the faster their freight trains will be allowed to travel.

Ottawa’s Transport Minister, Lisa Raitt, has recently imposed a speed limit on freight trains carrying hazardous and dangerous goods through areas with residents of more than 100,000. Currently, there is a directive issuing rail companies to stick to the 64kph speed limit, as well as increasing the inspections along key routes commonly used for transporting dangerous goods.

Canadian Pacific and Canadian National have also imposed a 56kph speed limit on their freight trains, according to a government news released a few days after.

Mining has been one of the most important industries in Australia. It made great impacts not only on the national economy but in immigration patterns as well. In early 1840s, silver and copper began to be mined and in 1851, deposits of gold was discovered in New South Wales and Victoria. Australia is also known as the leading supplier of coal, iron, nickel, uranium and zinc. Aside from its ores, Australian mines also produce opals and diamonds.

However, these hidden bounties found below the ground were not extracted without a price.

During the 19th century and early 20th century up to the present, like most of the countries, Australia had a few safety regulations for miners. This resulted in numerous mining accidents and fatalities across the nation.

Here are some recent Australian mining accidents that led to injuries and fatalities:

• In January 17, 2014, a 53-year-old man died due to a mud rush in the mine’s lower levels at Mount Lyell mine in Queenstown. Mud rush is an occurrence in which there is a sudden inflow of mud from the underground openings.

Mine site in Queenstown. Photo c/o The Mercury

• Walls of Austar Coal Mine collapsed when a major burst of coal from the rib occurred last April 15, 2014. Eight miners were working about 500 meters below ground when the incident happened. Unfortunately, two men were trapped and after several hours both were pronounced dead.

Coal Mine in Paxton. Photo c/o The Herald

• An electrician working at Grasstree Mine died underground due to asphyxiation in May, 2014. According to the reports, he entered a part of the mine that was being inertised (means a part of the mine is sealed because it is filled with inert gas to reduce the risk of explosions and fires).The said portion was not clearly marked as “inaccessible”.

Miner dies of asphyxiation at a Coal Mine. Photo c/o Mining Australia.

• In North Queensland, 8th of June 2104, one of the workers of Mt. Isa Copper Mine died after he fell about 100 meters and landed on an ore stored in the pass. He was a member of a three-man team tasked to replace ventilation fans

Mount Isa Copper Mine. Photo c/o MountIsaMines

• In Grasstree underground coal mine near Middlemount, north-west of Rockhampton, a large piece of rib material struck a 45-year-old worker leading to his death. He was inserting tubing and grouting holes when the incident happened last December 11, 2014.

Entrance to the coal mine. Photo c/o ABC News

• South Australia has recorded its first workplace fatality for 2015 last February 10 when a man died after he was struck in the chest by falling rocks underground at Olympic Dam mine site.

• A tyre on a large mining truck has exploded at the Dawson coal mine located in the Bowen Basin, February 16, 2015. One contractor died and another was seriously injured. A thorough investigation has been called because it happened to be the third fatal tyre-related incident at Anglo American Mines in Central Queensland.

An exploding tyre killed one mine worker and injured another at a central Queensland coal mine. Photo c/o Sourceable News

• Finally, at the Blackwater Mine of Billiton Mitsubishi Alliance, a man died. The accident involved a raptor transporter vehicle according to the company.

Man killed in vehicle rollover. Photo c/o Brisbane Times

As grim as these incidents may be, they are very far from the worst mining accidents recorded in history. The worst in Australia occurred in New South Wales, near Mount Kembla in 1902, where 96 men died due to an explosion. The 1942 accident in Manchuria took away an astonishing 1,549 lives and this is likely the world’s worst mining disaster.

Thailand – The Transport of Ministry aims to solve aviation safety problems, which have been becoming urgent because of the alarming increase in air disasters in the past few weeks. This includes using Article 44 to recertify 41 airlines before July of this year.

Under Article 44, Thailand Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha has the absolute power to push orders in 45 to 60 days which normally takes several years in the government. Having aviation safety as one of the country’s top concerns, they used Article 44 to make aviation in the country comply to ICAO’s standards and regulations.

Airlines and aviation agencies have met up to come up with plans of fixing past and possible aviation crisis, and mitigating risks. The group has pointed out several issues that need to be fixed in the coming months, such as proper budgeting, hiring aviation experts as consultants, as well as coming up with short-term action plans.

Transport Minister Prajin Juntong

Transport Minister Prajin reported that airlines such as Thai AirAsia, Thai Airways, NokScoot, and Nok Air, are sending 18 aviation experts to assist in drafting an updated aviation safety manual, which they are aiming to complete by mid-year. There will also be aviation experts coming in from Canada this month to team-up with the group, which will be joined by officials from the US, Singapore, Australia, Japan, China, and South Korea, in the latter part.

Once the safety manual is drafted and approved, 41 airlines that are currently operating in Thailand, made up by 13 Thai and 28 foreign airlines, will be granted new operating certificates starting in June. This, to meet the safety standards implemented by the ICAO or the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The Ministry will also recertify seven airlines carrying dangerous goods in and out of the country.

The Transport of Ministry will update the Prime Minister within this month on the aviation safety moves they are planning to undertake and implement, as well as their plans of meeting with the head of the ICAO.

Members of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) have called on to the government to impose criminal acts on those companies and individuals who are misdeclaring their shipment of dangerous goods.

The move was made after the shipment of dangerous goods has been commonly misdeclared when transported. IATA’s cargo committee head James Woodrow called the attention of the government and the entire industry to unite to combat the misdeclaration of dangerous goods during the 9^th World Cargo Symposium held in Shanghai last March 12, 2015.

Meanwhile, IATA Director General and CEO Tony Tyler outlined the significance of transitioning to a paperless freight. He also stressed the necessity of following international handling standards when it comes to pharmaceutical goods shipment. Furthermore, he talked about the matters concerning the safe transportation of lithium batteries.

The seriousness of Tyler’s last point in his speech was given highlight by IATA Cargo Committee head and Cathay Pacific Cargo chief James Woodrow. Woodrow urged his fellow transport companies to stop people and organizations from shipping their non-declared dangerous goods by air.

Woodrow said, “Flagrant abuses of dangerous goods shipping regulations, which place aircraft safety at risk, must be criminalised, as are other actions which place aircraft safety at risk.” He also added, “Government authorities must step up and take responsibility for regulating producers and exporters.”

Non-declared dangerous goods pose threats to air transportation

The air cargo industry has seen an increasing number of misdeclared shipments including mislabelling of batteries. The shipment often comes from e-commerce websites that make use of normal postal services when shipping items bought by customers online.

The speech of Woodrow also echoed IATA CEO Tony Tyler’s comments. Tyler noted that a supplier on Ali Baba has misdeclared the wattage of batteries to be able to send the shipment without getting air restrictions. The batteries were actually 300-watts but were relabelled as 100-watts.

The relabelling of batteries can cause potential harm according to a latest study conducted by US FAA. The research concluded that batteries that are not properly packaged can threaten aircraft safety as this can cause fires.

Tyler said, “Disappointingly, we are seeing some wilful non-compliance in the area of lithium batteries.” He also added, “The rise of e-commerce and the ability of small businesses to export to a global audience have created a significant new market of shippers who are not necessarily familiar with the rules.”

IATA has made a guideline written in Chinese regarding lithium battery shipping. This was to raise awareness among the Chinese people as well as the government officials regarding the issue.

Tyler said, “Regulators need to step up. The industry is doing what it can, but without oversight, surveillance and where necessary, enforcement, compliance at the source of the shipment will be limited.”

Move to combat non-declaration and mislabelling of dangerous goods

IATA said it has been working with e-commerce sites like Ali Baba. The association aims to help educate shippers from the potential harm that is caused by non-declaration of dangerous goods. It furthers the campaign by calling on post offices to initiate labelling of dangerous goods. Furthermore, IATA has called on other shipment companies to disseminate the information widely for the benefit of the public.

IATA Cargo head Glyn Hughes said, “The problem is not with the regulations, but with people who don’t conform to regulations.”

Meanwhile, Woodrow said that widening the awareness of potential risks is a must. He also added that non-declaration of shipped items should be regarded as criminal offence. He also said that counterfeit batteries should be regulated heavily as they are also causes of potential risks and harm.

Woodrow also added that shippers who comply with the rules are ensured that they will not be affected by stringent measures. “We must increase the level of shipment assessments and trusted shipper programmes, in order that those who comply with the regulations are not unduly impacted, and call upon reputable manufacturers in the hi- tech sector to join us in this demand,” he said.

Risk Mitigation Strategies author and Cathay Pacific airline ground safety manager Peter Hunt also talked about the risks airlines are confronted with regards to shipping batteries. Hunt said lithium ion batteries are potential risks that are deliberately disregarded by some while others have no idea about.

Ironically, battery banks were handed out for the delegates during the symposium. IATA warned that these battery banks must be inside a hand luggage and not to be placed inside aircraft holds.

Shippers Survey conducted to assess shipment satisfaction rates

IATA conducted Shippers Survey from among 336 respondents. Out of this number, 74% said they were satisfied with the cargo experience they have encountered. The respondents were also asked why they have selected air shipment over other cargo modes. A total of 33% of the respondents said they aimed for faster transportation time making them choose air cargo services. On the other hand, an increase for value proposition was called out by a panel for shippers.

In Melbourne, Australia, the Carmichael Mine of Indian multinational company, Adani, was defended in the Queensland court as a project that would not directly affect the world’s largest coral reef system, which is the Great Barrier Reef. A case was filed against the 16.5 billion dollar project by an environmental lobby that believes that the extracting of coals of the Carmichael Mine will have a terrible effect on the said natural reef, causing environmental, economic, and social problems.

Chairman Gautam Adani, Adani Group. Photo c/o The Hindu.

There is a great risk involved in the burning of coals to the climate level according to the Land Court, but it would not directly affect the Great Barrier Reef. This reef structure that is made of billions of tiny coral polyps is the world’s biggest structure made of living organisms that can be seen from outer space, and is also a world heritage site, and a very popular destination for tourists.

The Great Barrier Reef as a World Heritage Site

The Great Barrier Reef supports a wide diversity of life which includes vulnerable and endangered species, and it was selected as a world heritage site in 1981. It is one of the 7 wonders of the world according to CNN, and it was named as a state icon in Queensland by the Queensland National Trust.

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park protects a large part of the reef, and helps maintain it from being destroyed by different factors. It was said that the reef has lost half of its coral since 1985. The local groups in Australia such as the Aboriginal Australian and Torres Strait Islander Peoples consider the Great Barrier Reef as an important part of their culture and spirituality. Since the reef is a very famous destination for the tourists, their tourism economy generates over $3 billion every year.

The Great Barrier Reef at Risk

There are a lot of factors that could destroy the Great Barrier Reef. These includes fishing, coastal development, outdated fishing methods, pollution, industrialization, and the greatest threat to it all is no other than climate change. Climate change causes ocean warming which increases the process of coral bleaching. As global warming continues, the corals will not be able to keep up with the increasing ocean temperatures. It is said that climate change will soon take its toll on the reef for decades to come.

The Queensland Government is making all the necessary actions to save the Great Barrier Reef from destruction. However, the environmentalists refuse to accept that the Australian government might consider approving the development of the Carmichael Mine of Adani which will be the biggest coal port at Abbot Point, which is 50 km from the Whitsunday Islands.

Adani in Question

Adani’s plans of coming up and building the largest mine in the Galilee Basin is being questioned by the environmental group, Coast and Country. According to the Indian conservation group, when the coal is burnt overseas in the said mine, not only would the carbon emissions acidify and damage the Great Barrier Reef, but this will also greatly contribute to the climate change. They also claimed that the process of acidification overseas caused hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to industries in aquaculture.

During the hearing, a marine science professor from University of Queensland, and director of the Global Change Institute, Ove Hoegh Guldberg, described and presented a picture of a reef that would turn into a bacteria-dominated ecosystem if carbon dioxide emissions would increase. According to the director, if the emissions of said carbon dioxide would continue, there will be no more Great Barrier Reef with corals in twenty years.

Adani’s Defense

There is a UN agreement presented in the court that involves 200 countries that dictates that global warming should remain under 2 degrees Celsius, and that the threshold would actually be reached after an emission of around 850 giga-tonnes of carbon dioxide.

Adani’s lawyer, on the other hand, explained that mining coal is just not for the mere purpose of supply, but is done because of the demand and necessity of the people for it. He even further explained that if the project does not push through, other coal-fired power stations will eventually try to find other sources.

Peter Ambrose, defence lawyer of Adani, explained that the Carmichael Mine Project is comparable to that of a motorist driving a car, who has his vehicle emitting carbon dioxide, but the damage it would cause to the environment is not to be addressed to its manufacturer. He also explained that the extracting of coals itself wouldn’t pose any danger to the Great Barrier Reef.

Ambrose adds that there are even advantages that will surface when the mine project pushes through as there will be a lot of job opportunities for the unemployed, and the economy would even boost with coal royalties.