Bridge ban under review as Nuyina's refuelling saga drags on

Lead

Australia's Antarctic icebreaker, the RSV Nuyina, continues to be barred from travelling under Hobart's Tasman Bridge, forcing the vessel to undertake a 674-kilometre detour to refuel at Burnie in Tasmania's north-west. The situation, described as a 'refuelling saga' by multiple outlets, has persisted since 2023 and has added almost $900,000 to the ship's annual fuel bill.

Recent developments indicate that TasPorts is considering new modelling that could determine whether the vessel can safely transit under the bridge, while the federal government has rejected a proposed interim solution involving road tankers. The state government, which had promised to find a permanent fix by July 31, now concedes it will not meet that deadline.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting from the ABC, Australia's public broadcaster, has been extensive, with three separate articles examining different facets of the issue. One piece focused on the bridge ban itself, detailing the harbourmaster's decision and the simulations that led to it. Another adopted a critical tone, highlighting the federal government's rejection of Tasmania's interim proposal, with language describing the proposal as 'far from acceptable.' A third provided a more explanatory take, addressing common questions about why the ship cannot transit under the bridge.

Across these reports, the facts presented have been consistent: the ban was implemented in 2023 due to 'directional stability' concerns; the ship must make a 674-kilometre detour to refuel at Burnie; and the state government is considering multiple options. Where they differ is in their emphasis, with the critical piece focusing on the state's failure to meet its promise, while the others take a more neutral stance.

Key Claims

The bridge ban stems from a 2023 assessment by TasPorts' harbourmaster, who determined that the Nuyina lacked the required directional stability to safely transit under the Tasman Bridge. According to documents obtained through right-to-information requests, the decision was based on 109 computer simulations, in which the virtual ship struck the bridge's central pylons four times, and would have collided a further 10 times had the simulations not been stopped mid-journey.

The ship's size is not the issue, as the Nuyina's 35-metre beam is well within the 73-metre gap between the bridge's central pylons. Instead, the problem is its rounded hull and relative lack of directional stability, which made the harbourmaster deem the transit unsafe, even with the ship's built-in redundancies.

The state government is currently weighing three potential solutions: a barge, a holding tank, or the possibility of allowing the Nuyina to transit under the bridge, subject to new modelling. According to a State Growth spokesperson, "TasPorts is considering new modelling to determine if there is any feasibility of the vessel travelling under the bridge." This option is described as the "third of three potential live options currently being examined," with work to continue "over the coming months."

The state government's earlier proposal to use road tankers as an interim solution was rejected by the federal government, according to testimony at a Senate estimates hearing. Sean Sullivan, deputy secretary of the federal environment department, said no agreement had been reached and that a longer-term solution was still being pursued.

Consequently, the Nuyina will continue to refuel at Burnie, and the state government will not meet the July 31 deadline for a refuelling solution, as promised in a 2024 deal with the Commonwealth.

Perspectives

From the state government's perspective, the bridge ban is a safety decision made by the harbourmaster, based on rigorous simulation. The government is actively exploring alternatives, including a barge, a holding tank, or potentially revisiting the bridge transit with new data. The rejection of the road tanker proposal is seen as a setback, but work continues.

The federal government, meanwhile, maintains that the safety of the bridge and the environment are paramount. It rejected the interim road tanker proposal as 'far from acceptable,' and is pushing for a longer-term solution that would allow refuelling at Hobart's Selfs Point depot, as originally envisaged.

For the Australian Antarctic Division and the ship's operators, the ongoing detour represents a significant logistical and financial burden, with the additional $900,000 annual fuel bill. There is also a symbolic aspect, as the Nuyina's home port is Hobart, and the inability to refuel there undermines the original intent behind the vessel's $528 million construction.

The broader community may recall the 1975 Tasman Bridge disaster, when a bulk carrier collided with the bridge's pylons, causing a partial collapse and the deaths of 12 people. This history underscores the seriousness of the safety considerations that continue to guide the harbourmaster's decisions.