Jul 12: U.S. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) has issued its finalized advisory report -- Efficacy of Ballast Water Treatment Systems -- responding to a request from the Agency's Office of Water (OW) [See WIMS 5/24/11]. OW requested SAB to provide advice on technologies and systems to minimize the impacts of invasive species in vessel ballast water discharge. Vessel ballast water discharges are a major source of non-indigenous species introductions to marine, estuarine, and freshwater ecosystems of the United States.
Ballast water discharges are regulated by the EPA under authority of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) under authority of the National Invasive Species Act (NISA). At present, Federal requirements for managing ballast water discharges rely primarily on ballast water exchange; however changes to federal ballast water regulations are under consideration. On August 28, 2009, the USCG proposed revising their existing rules to establish numeric concentration-based limits for live organisms in ballast water. The proposed rule would initially require compliance with a "Phase 1 standard" that has the same concentration limits as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) D-2 standard and subsequently require compliance with a more stringent "Phase 2 standard." EPA's existing CWA general permit for vessels will expire on Dec. 19, 2013. In its revisions to the vessel general permit, the EPA is considering numeric standards that limit the number of live organisms in discharged ballast water.
To prepare the report, the SAB Panel reviewed a "Background and Issues Paper" prepared by OW and USCG (June 2010) as well as information on 51 existing or developmental ballast water management systems (BWMS) provided by OW and the public, although detailed data were available for only 15 BWMS.
In addition to responding to four specific charge questions, the SAB Panel indicated, ". . .the Panel's overarching recommendation is that the EPA adopt a risk-based approach to minimize the impacts of invasive species in vessel ballast water discharge rather than relying solely on numeric standards for discharges from shipboard BWMS. The Panel found that insufficient attention has been given to integrated sets of practices and technologies that could be used to systematically advance ballast water management. These practices include managing ballast uptake to reduce the presence of invasive species, reducing invasion risk through operational adjustments and changes in ship design to reduce or eliminate the need for ballast water, development of voyage-based risk and/or hazard assessments, and treatment of ballast water in onshore reception facilities. The Panel recommended that a comprehensive analysis be done to compare biological effectiveness, cost, logistics, operations and safety associated with shipboard BWMS and onshore reception facilities."
Access the complete 154-page review (click here). Access the Ballast Water Advisory panel website for background information and further details (click here).
4 comments:
Hello all,
The ballast water treatment system can easily be integrated into existing on-board processes and systems. The modular design means that it can be configured to suit the available space and piping layout of ballast water systems. This is true for all pump capacities and ship types. Clean-ballast is fully automated but with the possibility of both local and remote operation. Thanks a lot!
I just finished reading congressional meetings and testimony along with this blog and I find it quite interesting that the problems of ballast water are usually only talked about as invasive species. Sadly invasive species are not the only problem as other toxic pollutants, nuclear waste water, human bacteria and virus, cholera, oil, dispersant used to hide oil spilled, etc. are probably more dangerous to human health than invasives such as zwbra mussles. You can usually judge those who wish to create strong protection for Americas environment and her peoples health, by those who dare to speak to these problems rather than just invasives. The problems of bacteria and virus for example are the problems that require installation of technology, and sadly very few politicians from either party dare to mention human health as problematic with ballast water discharges.
The problem of ballast water has a long history of being addressed by the Coast Guard with out much accomplished or enthusiasm to protect American waters. The continued problem of ballast water pollution from bacteria, virus, nuclear waste water, oil, tar balls, and other invasive s is still obviously problematic. The concept of state rights being used to protect state waters as a results of the Federal governments failure to act should be respected, but until we have leadership in our country that will address ballast water with comprehensive legislation to address all the issues and quell the state rights issues used by some to curtail enforceable, concise and meaningful plans to create national legislation requiring mandatory installation of technology,(under the guise of stronger state regulations) shipping will not bother to spend the money.
Legislation with a short time line mandating expenditures by shipping to install technologies, while authorizing the Coast Guard to take on a mission of inspection, testing, and surveillance will be the only way to ensure that short cuts and total compliance will be adhered to by foreign sea captains representing foreign economic interest delivering foreign manufactured products. Legislation creating comprehensive Coast Guard authorization to protect our countries against the use of these systems as a tool to discharge biological or toxic substances as a weapon of terror, destruction, or just the greed of shipping’s economic interest is the best fix.
Sadly it looks as though under this commander and chief the Coast Guard will continue to follow the IMO an international organization primarily made up of foreign economic interest and their dilution is the solution plan.
The following is from a report prepared for congress in DEC 2009 “Although estimates of the costs of ballast treatment may be imprecise and vary from vessel to
vessel, there is some general agreement on average costs.14 For example, it may cost an estimated
$400,000 per vessel for modification of container/bulk vessels to use onshore ballast water
treatment facilities at California ports. More generally, the cost of retrofitting vessels to treat
ballast water has been estimated at between $200,000 and $310,000 per vessel for mechanical
treatment and around $300,000 for chemical treatment.15 Most of this expense will be borne by
foreign shipping companies, as the U.S. flag fleet is a small percentage of the global fleet,16 and
likely passed along to consumers of products imported on these ships.”
Our largest employers are providing the largest employment opportunities in America as store clerks selling foreign made goods, and in a election year as Americans are out of work and employment numbers will matter, do not expect much of a change in the Coast Guard policy under this commander and chief who has not bothered to address the problem for the last three years. Unfortunately the continued health risk and destruction resulting from a weak Coast Guard plan will continue to affect Americas economic structure, health and environment long after the election results of 2012.
All the contents you mentioned in is too good and can be very useful. I will keep it in mind, thanks for sharing the information keep updating, looking forward for more posts.Thanks
commercial water treatment companies
Post a Comment