The departure of four decrepit, chemical-laced former US Navy vessels from the US East Coast last month to northeast England has re-ignited the row over the multi-million dollar global ship-breaking industry.

A coalition of environmental groups and local residents last week won a legal ruling temporarily blocking any work on dismantling the ships, as they approached Britain after the 4,000-mile (6,400-kilometre) journey.

But, ironically, environmentalists' usual complaint about ships being broken up is that they are mainly sent to third-world countries, mostly in Asia, to be recycled in often hazardous conditions.

Anywhere between 600 and 700 large ships are broken up each year, about 95 percent of which are sent to India, China, Pakistan or Bangladesh, said Paul Bailey, an expert on ship-breaking at the International Labour Office in Geneva.

This number was only likely to grow after the European Union banned single-hulled vessels from entering its waters, meaning that a lot of ships that were relatively new would now have to be scrapped, he said.

Many of the vessels are ramshackle and contaminated with chemicals including asbestos, heavy diesel and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), a now-banned type of chemical compound once used for insulation and electrical equipment.

For workers in the third world where ships are often just dismantled on a beach, occupational hazards included explosions, falling chunks of steel and the inhalation of toxic substances, said Bailey.

"They're trading health and safety for the opportunity to earn some money. And for poor countries they also need the steel. It saves them export currency that they don't have to use to buy iron ore or import steel," he told AFP.

But it is not only companies in the developing world that are looking to cash in on the potentially lucrative ship-breaking business.

Able UK, based in Hartlepool, northeast England, is being paid 14.8 million dollars (13.0 million euros) to dismantle 13 "ghost ships" from a bigger fleet which has been rusting in the James River in Virginia for years.

A US court ruling prevented the nine other ships from sailing, pending a further hearing.

The company claims to have "probably the most environmentally friendly facility" in the world to recycle the ships, which it says "contain a small amount of hazardous materials" but no toxic cargo.

The contract also provoked howls of protest from US companies which had been bidding for the work. Other ships from the same fleet have also been sent to local firms to be disposed of.

Able UK's lawyers argued that the court ruling last week preventing initial work starting would result in "very considerable financial losses" of about 220,000 pounds (320,000 euros, 366,000 dollars) a week.

But environment groups rejoiced at the decision, calling for the vessels to be returned to the United States. They argue that Britain does not have the capacity to deal with such specialist work.

"Global ship-breaking is a massive environment problem," said Mike Childs, a campaign director at Friends of the Earth.

"We believe each developed country ought to be self-sufficient in breaking up their own ships in high-quality facilities that protect the environment and guarantee worker safety," he told AFP.

"America should deal with its own waste. It has the capacity and it has the skills and we think it has a moral obligation to deal with its own waste."

TERRA.WIRE