The Cold Hard Facts
In the first 2 months of 2012, there were ten divers killed on the job world-wide. While ten is confirmed, the number is probably somewhat higher. If you are a working diver, that fact alone should shock you to the core. But when you also realize that 60% of those deaths occurred while using SCUBA equipment, the shock (at least for me) is interlaced with anger. Jacques-Yves Cousteau, co-inventor of the original self-contained equipment stated repeatedly until the day that he died that SCUBA was developed “so the common man may explore the wonders of the deepâ€. Most everyone on this planet can recite that quote, verbatim. What most do not know, however, is that Cousteau was very disappointed to see his invention utilized by working divers. He stated to Andre’ Galerne (a mutual friend) that he had expected that divers would see in short order that it was designed solely for recreation. Looking at the statistics for 2012, that apparently has not been the case. And the statistics were not much rosier in other years. The Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) conducted research on inland (near shore) diving fatalities world-wide between 2005 and 2010, and they found that in 29% of all deaths the MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR was that the diver was using self-contained diving equipment, as opposed to surface supplied. I’m a relative newcomer to the industry, starting out in 1975, but for that entire time it has been common knowledge that self-contained diving equipment had no place on the job site.
Why is SCUBA used?
Reasons given for using SCUBA vary: “we have always done it this wayâ€, “it is impossible to do this with surface supplied diving gearâ€, “helmet gear is old-fashionedâ€, “we were not aware that they had invented any other wayâ€, “the military uses SCUBA, and if it wasn’t safe, they wouldn’t use itâ€, and my all-time favorite: “it can only be done safely in SCUBAâ€. When you dig past the layers of lies, excuses and reasons, the truth always comes out – it is cheaper to use SCUBA to perform many jobs than it is to use proper commercial diving equipment. With all of the advances in lightweight equipment technology, the argument often used that “you need so much equipment†barely holds water, but the cost difference is substantial. The offshore oil industry finally saw the light (after dozens of needless diver deaths) and now do not allow any diving work performed in SCUBA. The Scuba Replacement Pack (SRP) is a familiar site on offshore diving sites, and the time has come for the idea to be used elsewhere. Can you imagine the government of a country hiring recreational pilots with an ultra-light aircraft to perform aerial photography? Once the body count started to climb, can you imagine it continuing? Are divers lives worth less?
Why is SCUBA unsafe?
Working underwater has its challenges, even when done properly. The environment we work in does not support life – period. If that was all, that would be challenge enough. But when you take into account the fact that time spent at depth requires proper decompression to safely eliminate the inert gas load on the diver, and that the diver is unable to see a host of other things that put him at risk and take required action, one thing becomes abundantly clear: the diver cannot safely run the dive from the bottom, which is where SCUBA diving falls far short. It has often been said that “a safe supervisor makes a safe operation†and that is definitely the case in surface supplied diving operations. The breathing medium, decompression schedule management, and decisions which can only safely be made with knowledge of surface conditions are all controlled by the supervisor. In the case of diving operations, CONTROL = SAFETY, and SCUBA diving operations do not allow sufficient control to make the operation safe.
How do we stop this?
On the personal level, it is simple – no one can force you to work in an unsafe manner. You always have the option of quitting. It is a hard truth, but there it is. On the regional, national and global scale, it is more complicated than that. One would think that educating the regulatory bodies involved about the facts (with statistics) would cause them to desire to do the right thing. But as hard as it may be to believe, even the most advanced certification body world-wide has a "commercial scuba" certification. That is not unlike having a certification for window cleaners to work on high-rises without staging. But then again, there are politicians involved, so possibly political pressure will be the only answer. These same politicians are under unbelievable pressure from the fish farms, and fish harvesters to allow continued use of SCUBA, regardless of how many die in the process. So possibly the only avenue to take here is to educate the public, and allow them to apply the pressure. Regardless, it is time to do something and stop this needless carnage.
Recommended Comments