Recent Technologies for Ballast Water Treatment

Ozone: Science & Engineering, 34: 174–195 Copyright © 2012 International Ozone Association ISSN: 0191-9512 print / 1547-6545 online DOI: 10.1080/01919512.2012.663708

Recent Technologies for Ballast Water Treatment Alex Augusto Gonçalves1 and Graham A. Gagnon2 1

Downloaded by [Mr Barry L. Loeb] at 04:00 21 June 2012

2

Federal University of Semi Arid (UFERSA), Animal Science Department, Mossoró, Rio Grande do Norte, 59625-900, Brazil Center of Water Resources Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1Z1

Concern about ballast-mediated bioinvasions into freshwater, estuarine and marine habitats is not limited to biodiversity per se but extends to its broader socio-economic impacts on agriculture, forests, fisheries, aquaculture, and other human activities dependent on the stability of living resources in a particular ecosystem. As a result, invasive species pose almost incalculable economic, socio-cultural and human health security risks. The importance of biological invasions was brought into greater focus as several devastating introductions in many countries occurred and given the limitations of the IMO (International Marine Organization) Guidelines. Consequently the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments was prepared and was adopted in a Diplomatic Conference in 2004. This Convention aimed to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the risks to the environment, human health, property and resources arising from the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens via ships’ ballast waters. This article describes recent ballast water treatment studies from scientific and academic community since the last IMO Convention in 2004, and the treatment that received basic and final approval by IMO. We examined different methods available on scientific media to treat ballast water (lab-scale and field-scale tests) and we concluded that a standardization of ballast water treatment still to be done to ensure the IMO Standard. Keywords IMO, International Marine Organization (IMO), Ballast water, Bioinvasions, Treatment, disinfection

Received 6/21/2011; Accepted 12/20/2011 Note: As the new technologies and researchers in this area are constantly changing, we would like to emphasize that the materials are current from February, 2004 (data of IMO Convention) to the date of submission of this article. Address correspondence to Dr. Alex Augusto Gonçalves, Federal University of Semi Arid (UFERSA), Animal Science Department, Av. Francisco Mota, 572, Bairro Costa e Silva, Mossoró, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, 59625-900. E-mail: [email protected]

174

INTRODUCTION Ships use ballast water (BW) to maintain their balance allowing adaptation for differences in cargo-weight and bunker oil. Modern shipping cannot operate without ballast water, which provides balance and stability to un-laden ships. Ships that are even fully laden with cargo will have some ballast for trim or will use ballast to adjust trim during storms or rough seas. The ballast is discharged when the ship loads cargo. A potentially serious environmental problem, therefore, arises when the discharged ballast water contains aquatic life. There are thousands of aquatic species that may be carried in ballast water, which includes microorganisms, seaweeds, micro-algae, small invertebrates, eggs, spores, seeds, cysts and larvae of various aquatic plant and animal species (Bailey et al., 2004; Brickman and Smith, 2007; Burkholder et al., 2007; Doelle et al., 2007; Eames et al., 2008; Gavand et al., 2007; Gray et al., 2005, 2006; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Holm et al., 2008; Hua and Liu, 2007; Lafontaine et al., 2008; McGee et al., 2006; Quilez-Badia et al., 2008; Smit et al., 2008; Tamburri and Ruiz, 2005; Veldhuis et al., 2006). The development of larger, faster ships completing their voyages in ever shorter times, combined with rapidly increasing world trade, means that the natural barriers to the dispersal of species across the oceans are being reduced. In particular, ships provide a way for temperate marine species to pierce the tropical zones, and some of the most spectacular introductions have involved northern temperate species invading southern temperate waters, and vice versa (IMO News, 2005). However, the vast majority of aquatic species carried in ballast water do not survive the voyage, as the ballasting and deballasting cycle and environmental conditions inside ballast tanks can be quite hostile to organism survival. When all factors are favorable, an introduced species may survive to establish a reproductive population in the host environment. It may even become invasive, out-competing native species and multiplying into pest proportions, thereby disrupting a native ecosystem (Bailey et al., 2004; Burkholder et al., 2007;

A.A. Gonçalves and G.A. Gagnon

May–June 2012


Eames et al., 2008; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Oemcke and van Leeuwen, 2005). The release of ballast water currently constitutes one of the primary vectors for the global spread of aquatic invasive species – AIS (also known as non-indigenous species – NIS; non-indigenous marine species – NIMS; aquatic nuisance species – ANS; aquatic exotic species – AES; aquatic alien species – AAS; invasive alien species – IAS) ranging from juvenile stages, larvae and eggs of fish and larger zooplankton, to micro- and macroalgae, phytoplankton, bacteria and viruses. The human-mediated transfer of harmful organisms via shipping, specifically via ballast water transport, leading to the loss of biodiversity, alteration of ecosystems, negative impacts on human health and in some regions economic loss, has raised considerable attention especially in the last decade (Barry et al., 2008; Bolch and Salas, 2007; Brickman and Smith, 2007; Burkholder et al., 2007; David and Perkovic, 2004; Doelle et al., 2007; Eames et al., 2008; Endresen et al., 2004; Flagella et al., 2007; Gavand et al., 2007; Gray et al., 2006; Herwig et al., 2006; Holm et al., 2008; Jones and Corona, 2008; Jones et al., 2006; McCollin et al., 2007a,b; McGee et al., 2006; Murphy et al., 2006; Murphy et al., 2008; Niimi, 2004; Oemcke and van Leeuwen, 2004, 2005; Perrins et al., 2006ab; Roberts and Tsamenyi, 2008; Sano et al., 2005; Smit et al., 2008; Tang et al., 2006ab; Veldhuis et al., 2006; Wright et al., 2007a,b). Aquatic bio-invasions that have caused major impact to the host ecosystem are presented in Table 1, which also provides an overview of some known cases, but there are hundreds of other invasions, which have been reported around the world (IMO, 2004). The Global Environment Facility (GEF), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO), have all identified the issue of aquatic invasive species, including the transfer of harmful organisms in ships’ ballast water and sediments, as one of the greatest threats to global marine bio-diversity and ecosystems, and also a significant threat to coastal economies and even public health. Global economic impacts from invasive aquatic species, including through disruption to fisheries, fouling of coastal industry and infrastructure and interference with human amenity, are estimated to exceed 100 billion U.S. dollars per year (Doelle et al., 2007; Eames et al., 2008; IMO News, 2005; Murphy et al., 2008; Yang and Perakis, 2004). In response to this threat, in February 2004 IMO member States adopted the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, which provides a new international legal regime to address this problem. This Convention aims to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the risks to the environment, human health, property and resources arising from the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens via ships’ ballast waters (Brickman and Smith, 2007; Burkholder et al., 2007; Doblin and Dobbs, 2006; Gollasch et al., 2007; IMO, 2004; McCollin et al., 2007; Lafontaine et al., 2008; Quilez-Badia et al., 2008; Tamburri and Ruiz, 2005; Wright et al., 2007a,

2007b). A set of 15 guidelines supports the uniform implementation of the Convention (Table 2) and provides technical guidance to support the implementation of the Convention principles. The majority of these guidelines has already been adopted or was adopted at the October 2006 meeting of MEPC (Gollasch et al., 2007). Considering the importance of this topic, the purposes of this review were to: (i) recognize the importance of the biological invasion through ballast water; (ii) delineate the preoccupation from the IMO; (iii) show some elements needed for the understanding of ballast water management; (iv) show the current ballast water treatment technologies proposed and developed since the last IMO Convention in 2004; (v) show some interferences appeared during ballast water treatment; and (vi) provide an overview of ballast water treatment systems approved and which received basic approval by IMO.

BIOLOGICAL INVASION: A GLOBAL PREOCCUPATION The importance of biological invasions was brought into greater focus as several devastating introductions in many countries. In the United States, for example, the European Zebra Mussel Dreissena polymorpha has infested over 40% of internal waterways and is a major problem for industry, fouling all available hard surfaces, including cooling water intake pipes. In Southern Australia, New Zealand and the Mediterranean, the Asian kelp Undaria pinnatifida is invading new areas rapidly, displacing the native seabed communities. In the Black Sea, the filter feeding North American jellyfish Mnemiopsis leidyi has depleted native plankton stocks to such an extent that it has contributed to the collapse of entire commercial fisheries. In several countries, introduced, microscopic, ‘red-tide’ algae (toxic dinoflagellates) have been absorbed by filter-feeding shellfish, such as oysters (Barry et al., 2008; Bolch and Salas, 2007; Doblin and Dobbs, 2006; Drake et al., 2007; Eames et al., 2008; Flagella et al., 2007; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Jones and Corona, 2008; Oemcke and van Leeuwen, 2004 2005; van den Bergh et al., 2002). Diverse and abundant populations of dinoflagellate cysts have been found in ballast-water sediments. Cyst densities in ballast sediments are highly variable between ballast tanks on the same ship as well as between ships, ranging from undetectable to 22,500 cysts per gram of wet sediment. An unknown, but likely variable, proportion of sedimented cysts can germinate upon exposure to light and nutrients, even after 12 months of cold storage in a refrigerator. The presence and abundance of resting cysts represent a significant risk of their unintentional introduction via ships’ ballast water (and associated pathways) to locations beyond their present range. The sudden appearance of cysts of the toxic dinoflagellate Gymnodinium catenatum in sediment cores provides some of the best evidence for the anthropogenic introduction of such harmful organisms to coastal waters. Given the potential

Technologies for Ballast Water Treatment

May–June 2012

175

TABLE 1. Examples of Aquatic Bio-Invasions (IMO, 2004)


Name

Native to

Introduced to

Impact

Cholera Vibrio cholerae (various strains) Cladoceran Water Flea Cercopagis pengoi Mitten Crab Eiocheir sinensis

Various strains with broad ranges Black and Caspian Seas

South America, Gulf of Mexico and other areas Baltic Sea

Some cholera epidemics appear to be directly associated with ballast water

Northern Asia

Western Europe, Baltic Sea and West Coast North America

Toxic Algae(Red/Brown/ Green Tides) Various species

Various species with broad ranges

Several species have been transferred to new areas in ships’ ballast water

Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus

Black, Asov and Caspian Seas

Baltic Sea and North America

North American Comb Jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi

Eastern Seaboard of the Americas

Black, Azov and Caspian Seas

North Pacific Seastar Asterias amurensis

Northern Pacific

Southern Australia

Zebra Mussel Dreissena polymorpha

Eastern Europe (Black Sea)

Asian Kelp Undaria pinnatifida

Northern Asia

European Green Crab Carcinus maenus

European Atlantic Coast

Introduced to: Western and northern Europe, including Ireland and Baltic Sea; eastern half of North America Southern Australia, New Zealand, West Coast of the United States, Europe and Argentina Southern Australia, South Africa, the United States and Japan

176

Reproduces to form very large populations that dominate the zooplankton community and clog fishing nets and trawls, with associated economic impacts Undergoes mass migrations for reproductive purposes. Burrows into river banks and dykes causing erosion and siltation. Preys on native fish and invertebrate species, causing local extinctions during population outbreaks. Interferes with fishing activities May form Harmful Algae Blooms. Depending on the species, can cause massive kills of marine life through oxygen depletion, release of toxins and/or mucus. Can foul beaches and impact on tourism and recreation. Some species may contaminate filter-feeding shellfish and cause fisheries to be closed. Consumption of contaminated shellfish by humans may cause severe illness and death Highly adaptable and invasive. Increases in numbers and spreads quickly. Competes for food and habitat with native fishes including commercially important species, and preys on their eggs and young. Spawns multiple times per season and survives in poor water quality Reproduces rapidly (self fertilising hermaphrodite) under favourable conditions. Feeds excessively on zooplankton. Depletes zooplankton stocks; altering food web and ecosystem function. Contributed significantly to collapse of Black and Asov Sea fisheries in 1990s, with massive economic and social impact. Now threatens similar impact in Caspian Sea. Reproduces in large numbers, reaching ‘plague’ proportions rapidly in invaded environments. Feeds on shellfish, including commercially valuable scallop, oyster and clam species Fouls all available hard surfaces in mass numbers. Displaces native aquatic life. Alters habitat, ecosystem and food web. Causes severe fouling problems on infrastructure and vessels. Blocks water intake pipes, sluices and irrigation ditches. Economic costs to USA alone of around US$750 million to $1 billion between 1989 and 2000 Grows and spreads rapidly, both vegetatively and through dispersal of spores. Displaces native algae and marine life. Alters habitat, ecosystem and food web. May affect commercial shellfish stocks through space competition and alteration of habitat Highly adaptable and invasive. Resistant to predation due to hard shell. Competes with and displaces native crabs and becomes a dominant species in invaded areas. Consumes and depletes wide range of prey species. Alters inter-tidal rocky shore ecosystem

A.A. Gonçalves and G.A. Gagnon

May–June 2012

TABLE 2. Guidelines to the Convention and Their Development Status

No.

Title

Work progress

G1 G2 G3 G4

Guideline for Sediment Reception Facilities Guideline for Ballast Water Sampling Guideline for Ballast Water Management Equivalent Compliance Guidelines for Ballast Water Management and Development of Ballast Water Management Plans Guideline for Ballast Water Reception Facilities Guidelines for Ballast Water Exchange Guidelines on Risk Assessments under Regulation A-4 Guidelines for the Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems Procedure for Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems that make use of Active Substances Guideline for Approval and Oversight of Prototype Ballast Water Treatment Technology Programmes Guideline for Ballast Water Exchange Design and Construction Standard Guidelines for Sediment Control on Ships Guidelines for Additional Measures Including Emergency Situations Guidelines on Designation of Areas for Ballast Water Exchange Guidelines for Port State Control

Adopted at MEPC 152(55) (13 October 2006) Adopted at MEPC 173(58) (10 October 2008) Adopted at MEPC 123(53) (22 July 2005) Adopted at MEPC 127(53) (22 July 2005)

G5 G6 G7 G8 G9 G 10


G 11 G 12 G 13 G 14 G 15

Adopted at MEPC 153(55) (13 October 2006) Adopted at MEPC 124(53) (22 July 2005) Adopted at MEPC 162(56) (13 July 2007) Adopted at MEPC 174(58) (10 October 2008) Adopted at MEPC 169(57) (04 April 2008) Adopted at MEPC 140(54) (24 March 2006) Adopted at MEPC 149(55) (13 October 2006) Adopted at MEPC 150(55) (13 October 2006) Adopted at MEPC 161(56) (13 July 2007) Adopted at MEPC 151(55) (13 October 2006) Adopted at MEPC.129(53) (22 July 2005)

Updated from Gollash et al. (2007); BLG: IMO Sub-Committee on Bulk, Liquid and Gases; FSI: IMO Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation; MEPC: IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee. Guidelines updated from List of MEPC Resolutions (www.imo.org).

for toxic dinoflagellates (and harmful microalgae in general) to affect human health and fisheries resources on a global scale, and the economic burden they place on local, regional and national economies (Bolch and Salas, 2007; David and Perkovic, 2004; Eames et al., 2008; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Smayda, 2007). Microbial organisms are also the major constituents of ships’ board and ballast water used for ship balance. A recent research has also demonstrated that human pathogens such as Clostridium perfrigens, Salmonella species, Escherichia coli, Vibrio cholerae and enteroviruses, are carried in ship ballast water (Chelossi and Faimali, 2006; Drake et al., 2007). Microorganisms can be found in several locations within a ship (ballast water, residual sediment and water, and biofilms formed on interior tanks surfaces) each of which will be considered separately. The load of bacteria and viruses in ship ballast water, as well as the biofilm that affects the ballast tank, can have a significant ecological and public health impact (Drake et al., 2007; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Tang et al., 2006a,b). Some vessels declare no-ballast-on-board (NOBOB) status when entering the Great Lakes, and are exempt from existing ballast exchange regulations. Such regulations in ballasted ships are intended to purge NIS from ballast tanks, and kill those remaining in the tanks with high salinity water. Due to design constraints, these ballast tanks typically contain residual water and sediment that support an abundance and variety of live invertebrate species, and hundreds of thousands of viable invertebrate diapausing eggs, including those of NIS

(Bailey et al., 2006; Drake et al., 2007; Gray et al., 2005, 2006). Dormant stages of aquatic invertebrates have reportedly evolved as a mechanism for both dispersal and survival, allowing populations to endure conditions intolerable for active life stages. Recent work has also demonstrated that many freshwater taxa can survive exposure to saltwater as diapausing eggs when buried in sediments (Bailey et al., 2004; Gray et al., 2005). Diapausing eggs may enter the system either directly by disturbance of the residual sediment during de-ballasting, or, more likely, as live individuals after hatching within the ballast tanks. Designing treatment strategies to reduce the risk posed by diapausing invertebrate eggs could prove difficult because they are contained within the ballast sediments and are not easily flushed from the tanks, and because the eggs are resistant to a wide array of adverse conditions including freezing, desiccation, disinfection, and anoxia (Gray et al., 2006). Bailey et al. (2004, 2006) indicated an earlier study that diapausing eggs of the cladocerans Daphnia longiremis Sars and the rotifer Brachionus calyciflorus Pallas could be rendered non-viable by exposure to saltwater. The effect of temperature and salinity on hatch rate or on viability of diapausing eggs has been investigated only briefly, with a few studies conducting incubation trials at various salinities or temperatures independently. As ballast water exchange (BWE) with saline water has been proposed as a tool for the prevention of freshwater biological invasions via transoceanic shipping, the topic of salinity tolerance and temperature effects must be investigated more thoroughly.

Technologies for Ballast Water Treatment

May–June 2012

177


INTERNATIONAL LEGAL REGIME FOR BALLAST WATER TREATMENT The Ballast Water Convention will require all ships to carry out ballast water management procedures to a given standard. The importance of international standards and a uniform global approach cannot be over-emphasized when dealing with a trans-boundary industry like shipping (Brickman and Smith, 2007; Burkholder et al., 2007; Gollasch et al., 2007; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; Jones and Corona, 2008; Yang and Perakis, 2004). In addition to developing the new Ballast Water Convention, IMO has also joined forces with GEF and UNDP to implement the Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast). The development objectives of this technical cooperation programme are to assist developing countries to: (i) reduce the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in ships’ ballast water; (ii) implement existing IMO Guidelines; and (iii) prepare for the implementation of the new Ballast Water Management Convention. According to David and Perkovic (2004), ballast water sampling is very important for biological invasions risk management. The complexity of ballast water sampling is a result of both the variety of organism diversity and behavior, as well as ship design including availability of ballast water sampling points. Furthermore, ballast water sampling methodology is influenced by the objectives of the sampling study and is very complex due to differences in organisms’ dimensions and behavior, as well as to differences in ship construction including availability of sampling points. These issues impact selection of sampling method. There is no uniform ballast water sampling methodology currently established world-wide, and would also need to be further considered by relevant stakeholders (e.g., classification societies, shipbuilding industry) to provide for adequate dedicated sampling point/s on ships.

BALLAST WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES All approaches recommended under the IMO guidelines for ballast water treatment have limitations. The present IMO voluntary guidelines, and the current lack of a totally effective ballast water treatment solution and the serious threats posed by the introduction of invasive marine species, IMO member countries have agreed to develop a mandatory international legal regime in the future to regulate and treat ballast water (Barry et al., 2008; Champ, 2002; Gollasch et al., 2007; Gregg and Hallegraeff, 2007; McCollin et al., 2007a; Perrins et al., 2006b; Quilez-Badia et al., 2008; Tamburri and Ruiz, 2005). To address this pressing environmental issue several countries (i.e., Germany. Korea, Japan. Sweden, South Africa and Norway) either have implemented or are currently developing standards for ballast water treatment and discharge. In addition IMO recently adopted ballast water management standards to facilitate international coordination for implementing management practices (Burkholder et al., 2007; Christen, 2004; Endresen et al., 2004; Eames et al., 2008; Holm et al., 178

2008; IMO, 2009, 2010; Murphy et al., 2006; McCollin et al., 2007a). Scientific understanding about non-indigenous species introductions via ballast water mostly has been based upon studies of commercial cargo vessels. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) operates a large fleet, requiring unrestricted access to national and international waters to facilitate domestic commerce, and to protect and promote national interests. Some DoD ships, for example, warships and naval auxiliary ships, are exempted from compliance with IMO standards; such ships are encouraged to follow the standards insofar as reasonable and practicable (IMO, 2004, Article 3.2e) because some studies have been documented that these kind of ships transport non-indigenous aquatic species (Burkholder et al., 2007). Management and ballast water treatment measures recommended by the guidelines also included (Champ, 2002; Gollasch et al., 2007; IMO, 2004): • minimizing uptake of organisms during ballasting, by avoiding areas in ports where populations of harmful organisms are known to occur, in shallow water and in darkness, when upper- and mid-water organisms may rise in the water column; • cleaning ballast tanks and removing muds and sediments that accumulate in these tanks on a regular basis, which may harbor harmful organisms; • avoiding unnecessary discharge of ballast; and, • undertaking ballast water management procedures, including: exchanging ballast water at sea, replacing it with “clean” open ocean water. Any marine species taken on at the source port are less likely to survive in the open ocean, where environmental conditions are different from coastal and port waters; and non-release or minimal release of ballast water. Furthermore, IMO stipulates a performance standard (Annex 4, Resolution MEPC.174(58), Regulation D2) requiring discharged ballast water contain