Feature 4 | SHIPBOARD WATER TREATMENT Adding ballast to the convention
Te ballast water treatment (BWT) convention is sailing into its eighth year of not being ratified, while some still hold out hope that it will be ratified by the end of 2012, what impact has the delay had on the market?
needed, but only representing 26.46% of the Worlds tonnage leaving a further 8.54% still needed for the convention to be ratified. Other large owner led flag state countries
C
that have larger tonnage have held back on ratifying the convention due to the growing list of outstanding issues that need to be resolved, such as how the convention will be enforced, how useful the Type Approval process is from the owner’s perspective and where the US stands with it regulations for ballast water treatment systems. Te outcome of the IMO bulk liquids
and gases (BLG) 16th session meeting in February this year stated that further work was needed on how the convention would be enforced. It stated that: “The Sub-Committee continued its work on developing a draſt circular on ballast water sampling and analysis protocols, intended to provide general recommendations on methodologies and approaches to sampling and analysis to test
for
compliance with standards set out in the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004 (BWM Convention). Te work will continue at the next session, in particular, to address the concerns of some delegations regarding the manner of confirming compliance in accordance with
urrently, the BWT convention stands with 33 States that have ratified the convention, fulfilling the 30 states
the sampling and analysis protocols, with the view to its finalisation.” Sampling has been a subject of debate
over the past number of years, as to how it would actually work and be implemented. Martyn Ayris, managing director, RWO GmbH Marine Water Technology comments: “There have been comments and concerns around testing and how this would be carried out. Tere are a number of different views; that of a tiered system is one. Tis will come down to what is reasonable and what’s enforceable and stands up in a court of law.” Te US Coast Guard (USCG) published
its guidelines at the end of March saying that it will move in line with the IMO. Commander Ryan Allain, Chief, Environmental Standards Division, US Coast Guard says: “Tat we have used a discharge standard along with the IMO’s.” As to how the USCG will treat non US ballast systems that enter US waters, Allain explains: “Tere are systems that have been type approved by foreign states. We have recognised this through the alternative management system.” He further explained that systems in the future will need to have not only a classification/ state approval, but also a USCG approval for the ballast system installed. He added that: “We look to take a holistic approach [to enforcement guidelines], same as we do for oily water separators.” In March this year withdrew its ballast system from the market after
water
concluding that the system, although Type Approved, might not offer the level of compliance required by a vessel engaged in international trade. This has been an unfortunate situation for the market, as Ayris comments: “You can view this as good or bad news. If you’re an owner then it’s bad.
Roger Strevens, solutions development manager, Wilhelmsen Technical Solutions, highlights the ship owner’s perspective.
66
It has also created concern in the market for other manufacturers. It is also not good from a competitor’s side as you need the competition.” Alfa Laval has also said that some ship
owners are starting to question Type Approval, as it only tests for certain types of waters, highlighting that a vessel in its lifetime may sail in many different types of water and the equipment onboard will need to handle this. Ayris adds that the test process is very prescriptive, in that you
Wilhelmsen Technical Solutions bows out of BWTS market
Norwegian-based Wilhelmsen Technical Solutions (WTS) has announced that it has taken its Unitor ballast water treatment system off the market and recalled the units which have already been sold. It took the decision based on verification testing that it took on its own itiative.
“The verification programme showed that the system at this stage of development will not, in our opinion, provide our customers with an effective, fully compliant solution for the varied and dynamic water conditions encountered by a vessel engaged in global trade,” says Petter Traaholt, president of Wilhelmsen Technical Solutions. WTS’s solutions development manager, Roger Strevens also highlights that Wilhelmsen has gained from these tests and that it will return to the ballast market in the future when it will be acting upon what it has learnt.
The Naval Architect May 2012
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80