Professional Documents
Culture Documents
technology
Current status
February 2010
February 2010
Cover image: Coloured scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of marine diatoms (blue).
Lloyd’s Register, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively, referred
to in this clause as the ‘Lloyd’s Register Group’. The Lloyd’s Register Group assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any
person for any loss, damage or expense caused by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided,
unless that person has signed a contract with the relevant Lloyd’s Register Group entity for the provision of this information or advice
and in that case any responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms and conditions set out in that contract.
Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in any medium by electronic means or
otherwise, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form, without the prior
written permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be directed to the above address.
Where Lloyd's Register has granted written permission for any part of this publication to be quoted such quotation must included appropriate
acknowledgement to Lloyd's Register.
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 1
1. Introduction 3
2. Regulation 4
Ballast water quality and standards 4
The approval processes 5
3. Treatment processes 7
Background 7
Separation processes 8
Disinfection 9
5. Concluding remarks 19
1
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 3
Ballast water contains a variety of organisms including This revision of the guide provides updated information
bacteria and viruses and the adult and larval stages on suppliers and the solutions that they provide, and
of the many marine and coastal plants and animals. indicates the status of systems in relation to the approval
While the vast majority of such organisms will not process. An outline description of water treatment
survive to the point when the ballast is discharged, some processes and an appraisal of commercially available and
may survive and thrive in their new environment. These developing technologies for ballast water treatment are
‘non-native species’, if they become established, can also provided.
have a serious ecological, economic and public health
impact on the receiving environment. A summary both of the governing regulation that
ultimately makes ballast water treatment mandatory
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has forms Section 2 and water treatment technology as it
developed international legislation, the International relates to ballast water management, Section 3.
Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ These sections then provide the background knowledge
Ballast Water and Sediments, to regulate discharges of and context for an assessment of the commercial
ballast water and reduce the risk of introducing non- technologies either currently commercially available or
native species from ships’ ballast water. projected to be market-ready by 2010/2011 with
reference to their efficacy, technical and economic
The requirement for ballast water treatment has arisen viability and testing and approval status (Section 4).
from the requirements of regulation D-2 of the Full data, referenced against individual suppliers, are
Convention. In response to this, a number of provided in the Annex.
technologies have been developed and commercialised
by different vendors. Many have their basis in land- This is the third edition of the Ballast Water Treatment
based applications for municipal and industrial water Technology guide and revisions have been undertaken
and effluent treatment, and have been adapted to meet by the Institute for the Environment at Brunel University.
the requirements of the Ballast Water Management The continued assistance of the technology suppliers
Convention and shipboard operation. These systems who contributed much of the information published
must be tested and approved in accordance with the herein is gratefully acknowledged.
relevant IMO Guidelines.
3
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 4
2. Regulation
> 5000 m3 Ballast water exchange Ballast water exchange Ballast water
or treatment until 2016 or treatment until 2016 treatment only
Ballast water treatment only Ballast water treatment only
from 2016 from 2016
4
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 5
1
Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) IMO resolution MEPC.174(58) of 10/10/2008 which revokes MEPC.125(53).
2
Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection. An advisory body established in 1969 which advises the
UN system on the scientific aspects of marine environmental protection.
3
Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of active substances (G9) IMO resolution MEPC.169(57) of
04/04/2008 which revokes MEPC.126(53).
5
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 6
Basic Approval is the first step in the approval process feedwater quality. This makes appraisal of the
when using an active substance. In most cases Basic technologies difficult. The IMO ‘G8’ Guidelines for
Approval has been granted with caveats and the Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems are
request for further information for the purposes of therefore designed to create a level playing field for
Final Approval. Basic Approval is thus an ‘in principle’ assessment of technological efficacy. The stipulated
approval of the environmental impact of an active testing regime and protocols are prescriptive in nature
substance, which may then expedite inward strategic and costly to undertake. The sea-based test alone
investment or marketing within the supplier’s requires six months of testing based on a triplicated trial,
organisation and allow testing of a system at sea. with biological analysis to be completed within six hours
After Basic Approval for active substances, treatment of sampling. The land-based testing is based on specific
systems can be tested both on land and onboard ship organisms which therefore have to be either indigenous
according to the IMO Guidelines for Approval of Ballast in the water or cultured specifically for the test. The land
Water Management Systems (‘G8 guidelines’). Final based and shipboard testing is overseen by the Flag
Approval by the GESAMP BWWG will take place when Administration or a recognised organisation (generally
all testing is completed. Once final approval is granted a classification society).
by GESAMP the Flag Administration will issue a
Type Approval certificate in accordance with the It can take up to two years from first submitting an
aforementioned guidelines. If the process uses no active application for Basic Approval for an active substance
substances the Flag Administration will issue a Type to completion of testing and acheiving approval under
Approval certificate without the need for approval the G8 guidelines. By February 2010, eight systems had
from the GESAMP BWWG. received type approval certificates, five of which have
been required to go through the full 'G9' active
Whilst there is a considerable amount of published substance approval procedure. It is almost certain that
information concerning the efficacy of the commercially more approvals will occur during 2010, with up to four
available or developing ballast water treatment systems likely to obtain basic approval and three others
technologies, these data have not all been generated final approval at MEPC 60 in March.
under the same conditions of operation, scale and
6
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 7
Solid-liquid separation is simply the separation of All of the above disinfection methods have been
suspended solid material, including the larger suspended applied to ballast water treatment, with different
micro-organisms, from the ballast water, either by products employing different unit processes. Most
sedimentation (allowing the solids to settle out by virtue commercial systems comprise two stages of treatment
of their own weight), or by surface filtration (removal by with a solid-liquid separation stage being followed
straining; i.e. by virtue of the pores in the filtering material by disinfection (Fig. 2), though some disinfection
being smaller than the size of the particle or organism). technologies are used in isolation. One ballast water
treatment technology also employs chemical
Disinfection removes and/or inactivates micro-organisms enhancement (ie coagulation/ flocculation) upstream
using one or more of the following methods: of solid-liquid separation; another uses titanium dioxide
• chemical inactivation of the microorganism (TiO2) to intensify ultraviolet irradiation.
Physical Disinfection
solid-liquid
separation
Chemical treatment: Residual control:
• Chlorination • Chemical reduction
Treatment:
• Electrochlorination
or electrolysis
• Ozonation
] (sulphite/bisulphite)
• Hydrocyclone
• Peracetic acid Physical
• Surface
• SeaKleen enhancement:
filtration
• Chlorine dioxide • Ultrasonic
treatment
OR • Cavitation
Physical
Chemical • UV irradiation
enhancement: • UV + TiO2
• Coagulation/ • Deoxygenation
Flocculation • Gas injection
• Ultrasonic
treatment
• Cavitation
7
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 8
Separation processes viable for ballast water treatment due to the relatively
As previously stated, the chemical or physicochemical low permeability of the membrane material.
unit processes used for disinfection are usually preceded
by physical solid-liquid separation, by either filtration or Hydrocyclone technology is also used as an alternative to
hydrocyclone technology. filtration, providing enhanced sedimentation by injecting
the water at high velocity to impart a rotational motion
The filtration processes used in ballast water treatment which creates a centrifugal force (Fig. 3b) which increases
systems are generally of the automatic backwashing the velocity of the particle relative to the water. The
type using either discs (Fig 3a) or fixed screens. Since the effectiveness of the separation depends upon the difference
standards relating to treated ballast water are size-based, in density of the particle and the surrounding water, the
technologies capable of removing materials above a particle size, the speed of rotation and residence time.
specific size are most appropriate.
Since both hydrocylcones and filters are more effective
Removal of larger organisms such as plankton (Table 1) for larger particles, pre-treatment with coagulants to
by filtration requires a filter of equivalent mesh size aggregate (or ‘flocculate’) the particles may be used
between 10 and 50µm. Such filters are the most upstream of these processes to increase their efficacy.
widely used solid-liquid separation process employed However, because flocculation is time dependent, the
in ballast water treatment, and their effective operation required residence time for the process to be effective
relates mainly to the flow capacity attained at a given demands a relatively large tank. The processes can be
operating pressure. Maintaining the flow normally advanced, however, by dosing with an ancillary powder
requires that the filter is regularly cleaned, and it is of high density (such magnetite or sand) along with the
the balance between flow, operating pressure and coagulant to generate flocs which settle more rapidly.
cleaning frequency that determines the efficacy of This is sometimes referred to as ‘ballasted flocculation’,
the filtration process. In principle, surface filtration and is used in some municipal water treatment
can remove sub micron (i.e. less than 1µm in size) installations where space is at a premium and has been
micro-organisms. However, such processes are not used in one of the systems included in this publication.
Clean
Vortex finder water
overflow
Pressure
housing Typical
Inlet
trajectory
of light
Stacked particle
discs
spaced at
50-200µm
Typical path of
a larger heavier
particle
Dirty water in
Underflow
Clean water out
containing solids
(a) (b)
The efficacy of these processes varies according to the Menadione, or Vitamin K, is unusual in that it is a
conditions of the water such as pH, temperature and, natural product (although produced synthetically for
most significantly, the type of organism. Chlorine, whilst bulk commercial use) and is relatively safe to handle. It is
relatively inexpensive is virtually ineffective against cysts marketed for use in ballast water treatment under the
unless concentrations of at least 2 mg/l are used. proprietary name Seakleen® by Vitamar, LLC. As with
Chlorine also leads to undesirable chlorinated other disinfectant chemicals, it is not without a history
byproducts, particularly chlorinated hydrocarbons and of application elsewhere and has been used in catfish
trihalomethanes. Ozone yields far fewer harmful farming where it is liberally spread into water. Over
byproducts, the most prominent being bromate, but three tonnes of menadione are used annually for this
requires relatively complex equipment to both produce application alone.
and dissolve it into the water. Chlorine dioxide is
normally produced in situ, although this presents Physical disinfection
a hazard since the reagents used are themselves Of the physical disinfection options ultraviolet irradiation
chemically hazardous. (UV) is the most well established and is used extensively
in municipal and industrial water treatment applications.
Peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide (provided as The process employs amalgam lamps surrounded by a
a blend of the two chemicals in the form of the quartz sleeve (Fig.3) which can provide UV light at
proprietary product Peraclean) are infinitely soluble in different wavelengths and intensities, depending on the
water, produce few harmful byproducts and are particular application. It is well known to be effective
relatively stable as Peraclean. However this reagent is against a wide range of microroganisms, including
relatively expensive, is dosed at quite high levels and viruses and cysts, but relies on good UV transmission
requires considerable storage facilities. through the water and hence needs clear water and
unfouled clean quartz sleeves to be effective.
For all these chemicals pre-treatment of the water with
upstream solid-liquid separation is desirable to reduce
the ‘demand’ on the chemical, because the chemical
can also react with organic and other materials in the
ballast water.
9
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 10
The removal of water turbidity (i.e. cloudiness) is The remaining physical disinfection processes do not
therefore essential for effective operation of the system. inherently require use of pre-treatment. However, the
UV can be enhanced by combining with another efficacy of both processes is subject to limitations.
reagent, such as ozone, hydrogen peroxide or titanium Deoxygenation takes a number of days to come into
dioxide which will provide greater oxidative power than effect due to the length of time it takes the organisms
either UV or the supplementary chemical to be asphyxiated. However, most voyages will exceed
reagent alone. this time period so this should not be a significant
constraint.
10
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 11
11
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 12
Suppliers employees) all of which have been set up within the past
This publication considers only suppliers of complete 15 years. Fourteen different countries are represented by
systems for ship based ballast water treatment rather these 40 companies, with the predominant nation being
than suppliers of unit operations, although individual the US (Fig. 5).
proprietary unit operations (e.g. filters, electrochlorination
devices, disinfectant chemicals and UV sterilisers) may be It is apparent from Fig. 5 that since September 2008, the
included as part of the systems reviewed. number of suppliers of ballast water treatment systems
and the number of countries in which they are based
Basic technical information is available from 47 has increased significantly.
companies, and 40 of these took part in the survey, to
produce this February 2010 edition, compared to 28 Technologies
respondents in September 2008. This is a 42% increase in The combination of treatment technologies utilised by
the 18 months since the guide was last updated. the various suppliers are summarised in Table 3; since
Information from each of the 40 companies which one supplier Hyundai offers two systems, there are 41
responded in detail to the survey (Table 3) is presented in systems in total. All of the products for which
the Annex. Where available on web sites, or from other information is available, other than those based on gas
sources, information on the other 7 companies listed in injection, are either modular or can be made so.
Table 3 has been incorporated into the guide. Of the
suppliers, around one third are part of a multi-billion All of the systems reviewed have undergone preliminary
dollar turnover international group of companies with pilot trials. The published data from these trials has
significant activity in marine and/or engineering areas. The shown the systems to be generally effective with
remainder appear to be SMEs (small to medium reference to the IMO treated water standards applicable
enterprises, generally defined as having less than 250 to discharged ballast water shown in Table 1.
Other
Other
4
Korea 8
US US
3 10 UK* 15
3
Norway Norway
3 3 Germany
Germany Japan Korea Japan
3 4
4 4 4
Fig 5. Technology suppliers have increased from 28 in 2008 to 41 in 2010. `Other' comprise Australia, China,
Denmark (2), Finland, France, Greece and South Africa.
*one UK supplier also based in the Netherlands.
12
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 13
(a) (b)
Fig. 6 Summary of treatment technologies used for (a) physical pre-treatment, and (b) disinfection. Note one or
more disinfection options may be used. `Other' treatments include the use of coagulant before filtration (1), heat
treatment (1) and non-chlorine chemical disinfection (3).
Of the systems considered the majority employ upstream Whilst there are a range of disinfection processes used
filtration for solid-liquid separation (Fig. 6a), with the for ballast water treatment, the majority of the systems
filter pore size primarily in 30-50 µm range. Only one are based on either electrolytic treatment (electrolysis or
system (Hitachi) employs pre-coagulation upstream of electrochlorination) or UV irradiation (Fig. 6b). In one
the filter. This particular system employs magnetic case (Alfa Laval system), the UV irradiation is
particles to accelerate the clarification process supplemented with titanium dioxide (TiO2) to intensify
(‘enhanced flocculation’). A magnetic separator is then the oxidative power of the UV light.
used prior to filtration to remove particles. One supplier
uses cartridge filters which are not backwashable. Three The electrolytic treatment products have different design
suppliers employ hydrocyclones. features but all essentially employed a direct current to
electrolyse the water. Electrolytic technologies provided
All solid-liquid separation processes produce a waste for ballast water treatment may be designed to generate
stream containing the suspended solids. This waste either chlorine, as in the classic electrochlorination
stream comprises the backwash water from filtering process, or other oxidative products. Those designed for
operations or the underflow from the hydrocyclone chlorine generation rely on the salinity of the feedwater
separation. These waste streams require appropriate for effective chlorine generation; supplementary brine is
management. During ballasting they can be safely necessary when the abstracted ballast water is fresh.
discharged at the point where they were taken up. This is not an issue for chlorination, of which there
On deballasting, the solid-liquid separation operation is are three examples, using either chlorine gas or
generally by-passed. hypochlorite. There are only single examples of the use
of chemicals such as SeaKleen, vitamin K and non-
oxidising biocides. One supplier, Sea Knight, uses bio-
remediation following deoxygenation.
13
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 14
> $100
$20-100 2
5
NA
< $20 21
11
Table 4 Summary of plant footprint, height and capital and operating expenditure
*System flow rate
14
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 15
A ballasting, B discharging, C during voyage, D bypass filter on deballasting, VD Determined by vessel size.
*Maximum treatment flow currently available (>10m3/h indicates no stated maximum)
**includes pipework
***Assumes waste heat utilised
15
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 16
Capital cost information is more widely available in 2010 process efficacy. This type of technology is also the only
compared to 2008, however, just over half of the one where, technically, a decrease in corrosion
suppliers regard this information as confidential. From the propensity would be expected (and, according to one
19 sets of data provided, the capital cost of a 200 m3/h supplier, has been recorded as being suppressed by 50-
plant ranges from $20,000 (by Mexel Industries) to 85%), since oxygen is a key component in the
$600,000, with a mean value of around $281,000, corrosion process. The water is re-aerated on
which is $100,000 less than in September 2008. For a discharge.
2000 m3/h plant, the equivalent values are $50,000 (again
Mexel) to $2,000,000 with a mean of $863,000, also • Systems in which chemicals are added normally need
lower than 2008. As with the opex, from the limited to be neutralised prior to discharge to avoid
information provided there appears to be no correlation environmental damage in the area of discharge. Most
between the quoted capex and the configuration of the ozone and chlorine systems are neutralised but some
process, and variations in price arise from differences in are not. Chlorine dioxide has a half life in the region of
assumptions made by the various suppliers regarding 6-12 hours, according to the supplier, but at the
inclusion or exclusion of specific components. Prices concentrations at which it is employed it can be safely
quoted must be regarded as tentative since some of these discharged after a maximum of 24 hours.
products are still under development and the price is to
some extent determined by the marketplace. • Essentially most UV systems operate using the same
type of medium pressure amalgam lamps. A critical
The footprint of the systems reviewed varies between aspect of UV effectiveness is the applied UV
0.25 and 30 m2 for a 200 m3/h unit, with a mean value dose/power of the lamp. This information has not
of 7 m2, according to the data provided by suppliers in been given by all suppliers. Another aspect of UV
relation to 37 systems. For a unit of ten times this flow effectiveness is the clarity of the water. In waters with
capacity, there is less information, since some suppliers a high turbidity or colloidal content, UV would not be
do not provide units of this size, and the minimum, expected to be as effective.
maximum and mean values are 1, 145 and 21 m2
respectively. One supplier (Atlas) gave data for both the • Most chlorination systems are applying a dose in the
control panel / electrolysis system and the pre-filter. region of 2 mg/l residual chlorine which has proven to
Optimarin stated that their system may be suspended be effective.
under the deck, giving a zero footprint. Thus, whilst
the units may be predominantly modular, this does not • Most ozonation suppliers are using an ozone dose of
imply that the footprint increases proportionately with 1-2 mg/l which has proven to be effective.
flow capacity.
• Deoxygenation plants are relatively simple devices if an
Other system characteristics inert gas generator is already installed on the ship and
Other technical features of the products are not in the latter case would take up little additional space.
necessarily common to all of them and are specific to
generic types of process technology. These process-specific • The biggest operating cost for most systems is power
facets can be summarised as follows: and for large power consumers (electrolytic and
advanced oxidation processes) availability of shipboard
• Deoxygenation is the only technology specifically power will be a factor.
developed for ballast water treatment and is effective
because the de-aerated water is stored in sealed ballast • For chemical dosing systems, power is very low and
tanks. However the process takes between one and chemical costs are the major factor. For these reasons
four days to take effect, and thus represents the only chemical addition may be better suited to small ballast
type of technology where voyage length is a factor in capacities.
16
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 17
18
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 19
19
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 20
20
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:08 Page 21
- - - - - - Yes 1 NA
125 none
Supplier Atlas-Danmark
Process Filtration and electrolysis Country Denmark
System used Ballasting + during voyage (filter bypassed on dischargiing) Web site www.atlas-danmark.com
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval applied for but not expected to be
granted at MEPC 60
kW / 1000 m3/ h services **Projected by manufacturer.
8.5 kg salt + 3.4m3 *** First value is for the panel and electrolysis system;
20 (max) the second is for the pre-filter.
desalinated water per 1000m3
21
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 22
Supplier Auramarine
Process Filtration + UV-C radiation Country Finland
System used Ballasting + discharging (filter bypassed on discharging) Web site www.auramarine.com
Cooling water
22
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 23
Supplier Ecochlor Inc. Partners Rolls-Royce Marine; Proflow Inc., Eka Chemicals
Process CIO2 Country US
System used Ballasting Web site www.ecochlor.com
Supplier Electrichlor Hypochlorite Generators Inc. Partners Garnett Inc., Vitamar, LLC
Process Filtration + electrolysis/electrochlorination Country US
System used Ballasting + discharging (filter bypassed on discharging) Web site www.electrichlor.com
- - - - ND 2006 3 240
>10 NA
23
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 24
- - NA NA 0 NA
Power requirement Additional Comments *Capacity: The E.T.I. BWTS is a modular system that can
kW / 1000 m3/ h services treat 227 to 1360 m3 of ballast water/h per module.
**Opex would be the cost of the power required to
100 Water (cooling) run the system.
50 NA
Power requirement Additional Comments *Basic approval at MEPC 54; final approval at MEPC 57
kW / 1000 m3/ h services
24
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 25
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval at MEPC 57; final approval at MEPC 59.
kW / 1000 m3/ h services ** as Hitachi Plant Technologies; original company
formed in 1910
NA NA
Power requirement Additional Comments * Assumes waste heat utilised. Pumping requires
kW / 1000 m3/ h services 13.27kW for 200 m3/h system
nil*
25
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 26
26
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 27
10/2008* 03/2010* 09/2009 03/2009 NIVA Spring 2010** Spring 2010** 1 300
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval at MEPC 58; final approval expected at
kW / 1000 m3/ h services MEPC 60
** Date projected by manufacturer
3 Water *** Established in 1912 and reformed in 2003
Power requirement Additional Comments *testing may not be strictly to IMO standards
kW / 1000 m3/ h services **modular system able to service most ranges of
ballast water flow
60 none
27
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 28
2010 2 No limit
0.5
Supplier Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. Ltd. Partner(s) JAMS; Marine Technology Institute;
Process Hydrodynamic shear, cavitation and ozonation Laboratory of Aquatic, Science Consultant Co;
System used Ballasting Shinko Ind; M.O. Marine Consulting; Mitsui O.S.K. Lines.
Country Japan
Web site www.mes.co.jp
28
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 29
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval MEPC 56; final approval MEPC 59
kW / 1000 m3/ h services ** power consumption reduced 40-50% if service air
already available
>70 ** Air
1
Nutech O3 and NK Co. Ltd. are independent companies, although their technologies are similar and share patents. Nutech O3 will remain an
independent company registered in USA after acquisition by NK Co. Ltd. and Nutech O3 may apply to utilise IMO approval awarded to NK Co. Ltd.
29
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 30
Supplier Oceansaver AS
Process Filtration + deoxygenation + cavitation Country Norway
System used Ballasting + discharging (filter and cavitation only) Web site www.oceansaver.com
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval MEPC 57; final approval at MEPC 58
kW / 1000 m3/ h services ** System footprint difficult to estimate, since several
sub-components and the largest of these can be
NA Cooling water located anywhere
Supplier Optimarin
Process Filtration + ultraviolet Country Norway
System used Ballasting + discharging (filter bypassed on discharging) Web site www.optimarin.com
Power requirement Additional Comments * Installation may be suspended under deck for
kW / 1000 m3/ h services reduced footprint
** Service area for filter included
220 Air
30
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 31
Supplier Qwater
Process Filtration + ultrasound Country US
System used Ballasting + discharging (filter bypassed on discharging) Web site www.qwatercorp.com
NR NR NA NA NA 04/2009 0 NA
NA NA
31
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 32
Supplier Resource Ballast Technology / Unitor BWTS Parter(s) Wilhelmsen Ships Equipment AS (Norway)
Process Cavitation, ozone, electrolysis and filtration Country South Africa
System used Ballasting Web site www.resource-technology.com
Power requirement Additional Comments *Basic approval given at MEPC 57; final at MEPC 59
kW / 1000 m3/ h services ** Projected by manufacturer
8 - 110 NA
32
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 33
Supplier Siemens
Process Filtration + electrochlorination Country USA, UK, Germany
System used Ballasting Web site www.siemens.com/sicure
Supplier Techcross
Process Electrolysis Country Republic of Korea
System used Ballasting Web site www.techcross.net
Power requirement Additional Comments * Basic approval given at MEPC 54; final at MEPC 57
kW / 1000 m3/ h services **Explosion proof Type approval certificate
*** Fuel costs
60 (seawater) NA
100 (freshwater)
33
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 34
NA NA
34
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 35
35
365923_BWTtext.qxd:Layout 1 5/3/10 14:09 Page 36
36
Lloyd’s Register EMEA Lloyd’s Register Asia Lloyd’s Register Americas, Inc.
T + 44 (0)20 7709 9166 T + 852 2287 9333 T +1 (1)281 675 3100
F + 44 (0)20 7423 2057 F + 852 2526 2921 F +1 (1)281 675 3139
E emea@lr.org E asia@lr.org E americas@lr.org
www.lr.org
February 2010