On Christmas Day, a critical power outage struck Estonia when the Estlink 2 undersea cable, a vital energy link between Finland and Estonia, was severed. At 12:26 local time, the disruption was detected, prompting immediate investigations. Radar data from Marine Traffic, a vessel tracking service, pinpointed the cargo ship Eagle S in the vicinity of the cable at the time of the incident. The ship’s recorded movements suggest a potential connection to the cable break. The Eagle S maintained a consistent speed of seven to eight knots as it traversed the cable’s location. Shortly thereafter, the vessel continued westward for approximately eight kilometers before abruptly slowing down and coming to a complete stop. The ship then executed a turning maneuver, circling around before resuming its original course. This unusual activity raised suspicions about the ship’s involvement in the cable failure.
The movements of the Eagle S captured by Marine Traffic sparked an investigation and subsequent boarding of the vessel by Finnish authorities. Experts analyzed the ship’s trajectory and behavior to understand the possible sequence of events. Hans Liwång, a professor of defense systems at the Swedish Defence University and researcher in marine systems at the Royal Institute of Technology, weighed in on the potential scenario. He deemed it unlikely that the Eagle S had dragged the cable for any significant distance, discounting the theory of an extended entanglement. Instead, Liwång posited that the ship’s movements indicated a different scenario: the Eagle S likely snagged and severed the cable with its anchor. The subsequent slowdown and turning maneuver might have been a result of the anchor becoming entangled with something on the seabed, possibly a bottom formation, an old cable, or another underwater obstacle.
The possibility of a deliberate deceleration also entered the equation. Liwång suggested that the slowdown could have been intentional as the crew prepared to retrieve the anchor. If they had achieved their objective, reducing speed would have facilitated the winching process. The ship’s recorded speed of seven knots, equivalent to approximately 13 kilometers per hour, raised questions about the feasibility of passing over the cable at such a velocity with the anchor deployed. Liwång affirmed that it was technically possible, and perhaps even necessary, to maintain such a speed for steerage. A certain degree of momentum is required to maintain control of the vessel, and dropping below five knots would significantly compromise maneuverability.
The Estlink 2 cable, a critical infrastructure component, plays a crucial role in the power transmission between Finland and Estonia. Spanning a total length of 170 kilometers, with 145 kilometers submerged underwater, it has an average transmission capacity of 650 megawatts. The cable runs from Andersböle in Porvoo, Finland, to Püssi in Estonia, ensuring a reliable flow of electricity between the two countries. The outage resulting from the cable break predominantly impacted the Estonian side, highlighting the country’s dependence on the connection. Fortunately, the Estlink 1, a separate undersea cable also linking Finland and Estonia, remained operational, mitigating the severity of the power disruption. However, the damage to Estlink 2 presented a significant challenge, and initial estimates projected a repair timeframe of several months, underscoring the complexity and scale of the undertaking.
This incident underscores the vulnerability of critical undersea infrastructure and the potential for disruption due to accidents or deliberate acts. The investigation into the role of the Eagle S continues, and determining the precise cause of the cable break remains crucial. Understanding the circumstances surrounding the incident will aid in developing preventative measures and safeguards to protect vital undersea cables from future damage. The incident also highlights the importance of redundant systems, such as the parallel Estlink 1 cable, in mitigating the impact of such disruptions. The interconnectedness of energy grids across national borders necessitates robust infrastructure and contingency plans to ensure a stable and secure power supply.
The disruption caused by the Estlink 2 cable break served as a stark reminder of the intricate web of interconnected systems that underpin modern society. The reliance on seamless energy flow necessitates careful planning and investment in resilient infrastructure. The incident underscored the importance of international cooperation in addressing challenges related to cross-border infrastructure and the need for comprehensive protocols to address potential disruptions. As investigations proceed, a clearer picture of the events leading to the cable break will emerge, informing future strategies to protect vital undersea connections. The incident also highlighted the potential risks posed by maritime activities near critical infrastructure, emphasizing the need for increased vigilance and communication to prevent similar incidents in the future.
