Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7837/kosomes.2018.24.6.785

Ship's Hull Fouling Management and In-Water Cleaning Techniques  

Hyun, Bonggil (Ballast Water Research Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Sciences & Technology)
Jang, Pung-Guk (Ballast Water Research Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Sciences & Technology)
Shin, Kyoungsoon (Ballast Water Research Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Sciences & Technology)
Kang, Jung-Hoon (Risk Assessment Research Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Sciences & Technology)
Jang, Min-Chul (Ballast Water Research Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Sciences & Technology)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety / v.24, no.6, 2018 , pp. 785-795 More about this Journal
Abstract
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has recognized the risk of hull fouling and announced '2011 Guidelines for the control and management of ship's biofouling to minimize the transfer of invasive aquatic species'and is planning international regulations to enforce them in the future. In this study, to effectively respond to future international regulation, we introduce the case of leading countries related to management of hull fouling and also investigate environmental risk assessment techniques for in-water cleaning. Australia and New Zealand, the leading countries in hull fouling management, have established hull fouling regulations through biological and chemical risk assessment based on in-water cleaning scenarios. Most European countries without their government regulation have been found to perform in-water cleaning in accordance with the IMO's hull fouling regulations. In the Republic of Korea, there is no domestic law for hull fouling organisms, and only approximately 17 species of marine ecological disturbance organisms, are designated and managed under the Marine Ecosystem Law. Since in-water cleaning is accompanied by diffusion of alien species and release of chemical substances into aquatic environments, results from biological as well as chemical risk assessment are performed separately, and then evaluation of in-water cleaning permission is judged by combining these two results. Biological risk assessment created 40 codes of in-water cleaning scenarios, and calculated Risk Priority Number (RPN) scores based on key factors that affect intrusion of alien species during in-water cleaning. Chemical risk assessment was performed using the MAMPEC (Marine Antifoulant Model to Predict Environmental Concentrations), to determine PEC and PNEC values based on copper concentration released during in-water cleaning. Finally, if the PEC/PNEC ratio is >1, it means that chemical risk is high. Based on the assumption that the R/V EARDO ship performs in-water cleaning at Busan's Gamcheon Port, biological risk was estimated to be low due to the RPN value was <10,000, but the PEC/PNEC ratio was higher than 1, it was evaluated as impossible for in-water cleaning. Therefore, it will be necessary for the Republic of Korea to develop the in-water cleaning technology by referring to the case of leading countries and to establish domestic law of ship's hull fouling management, suitable for domestic harbors.
Keywords
Ships' hull fouling; Ships' hull fouling management; Environmental risk assessment; Biological risk assessment; Chemical risk assessment;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Alzieu, C. and M. Heral(1984), Ecotoxicological effects of organotin compounds on oyster culture. In: Ecotoxicological Testing for the Marine Environment; G. Persoone & al. (Eds.), Ghent & Inst. Mar. Scient. Res., Belgium, Vol. 2, pp. 187-196.
2 ANZECC(1996), Working together to reduce impacts from shipping operations: code of practice for antifouling and in-water hull cleaning and maintenance. Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Canberra, p. 10.
3 Beaumont, A. R. and M. D. Budd(1984). High mortality of the larvae of the common mussel at low concentrations of tributyltin, Marine pollution bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 11, pp. 402-405.   DOI
4 Brand, L. E., W. G. Sunda and R. R. Guillard(1986), Reduction of marine phytoplankton reproduction rates by copper and cadmium. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp. 225-250.   DOI
5 Champ, M. A. and P. F. Seligman(1996), Organotin: environmental fate and effects, London: Chapman & Hall.
6 Chan, F. T., J. J. MacIsaac and S. A. Bailey(2015), Relative importance of vessel hull fouling and ballast water as transport vectors of nonindigenous species to the Canadian Arctic, Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Vo. 72, No. 8, pp. 1230-1242.   DOI
7 Cheung, K. C., M. H. Wong and Y. K. Yung(2003), Toxicity assessment of sediments containing tributyltin around Hong Kong harbour, Toxicology letters, Vol. 137, No. 1-2, pp. 121-131.   DOI
8 Coutts, A. D. and B. M. Forrest(2007), Development and application of tools for incursion response: lessons learned from the management of the fouling pest Didemnum vexillum, Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, Vol. 342, No. 1, pp. 154-162.   DOI
9 Coutts, A. D. M. and B. M. Forrest(2005), Evaluation of eradication tools for the clubbed tunicate Styela clava, Cawthron Report, Vol. 1110, p. 48.
10 de Castro, I. B., F. C. Perina and G. Fillmann(2012), Organotin contamination in South American coastal areas, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 184, No. 3, pp. 1781-1799.   DOI
11 De Stasio, B. T., M. B. Schrimpf and B. H. Cornwell(2014), Phytoplankton communities in Green Bay, Lake Michigan after invasion by dreissenid mussels: Increased dominance by cyanobacteria, Diversity, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 681-704.   DOI
12 Hearin, J., K. Z. Hunsucker, G. Swain, A. Stephens, H. Gardner, K. Lieberman and M. Harper(2015), Analysis of long-term mechanical grooming on large-scale test panels coated with an antifouling and a fouling-release coating, Biofouling, Vo. 31, No. 8, pp. 625-638.   DOI
13 Hyun, B., S. H. Baek, K. Shin and K. H. Choi(2017), Assessment of phytoplankton invasion risks in the ballast water of international ships in different growth conditions, Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 423-434.
14 Hyun, B., K. Shin, M. C. Jang, P. G. Jang, W. J. Lee, C. Park and K. H. Choi(2016), Potential invasions of phytoplankton in ship ballast water at South Korean ports, Marine and Freshwater Research, Vol. 67, No. 12, pp. 1906-1917.   DOI
15 IMO(2005), International Concentration on the control of harmful antifouling systems (AES) on ship, 2005 Edition, IMO, London, p. 69.
16 Kang(2018), Development of risk assessment for control technology to reduce transfer fo ships' biofouling: In-water cleaning technique.
17 MEPC(2011), Guidelines for the Control and Management of Ships' Biofouling to Minimise the Transfer of Invasive Aquatic Species.
18 Kim, N. S., S. H. Hong, J. G. An, K. H. Shin and W. J. Shim(2015), Distribution of butyltins and alternative antifouling biocides in sediments from shipping and shipbuilding areas in South Korea, Marine pollution bulletin, Vol. 95, No. 1, pp. 484-490.   DOI
19 Kotrikla, A.(2009). Environmental management aspects for TBT antifouling wastes from the shipyards, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90, S77-S85.   DOI
20 Leung, K. M., J. R. Wheeler, D. Morritt and M. Crane(2001), Endocrine disruption in fishes and invertebrates: issues for saltwater ecological risk assessment, Coastal and Estuarine Risk Assessment, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp. 189-216.
21 Morrisey, D. and C. Woods(2015), In-water cleaning technologies: Review of information, MPI Technical Paper.
22 Morrisey, D. J. Gadd, M. Page, J. Lewis, A. Bell and E. Georgiades(2013), In-water cleaning of vessels: Biosecurity and chemical contamination risks, MPI Technical Paper, 2013/11, Wellington, New Zealand, p. 267.
23 Moller, J. K. and F. Stuer-Lauridsen(2016), Non-indigenous species from hull fouling in Danish marine waters.
24 Sapozhnikova, Y., E. Wirth, K. Schiff and M. Fulton(2013), Antifouling biocides in water and sediments from California marinas, Marine pollution bulletin, Vol. 69, No. 1-2, pp. 189-194.   DOI
25 Nimmo, D. R. and T. L. Hamaker(1982), Mysids in toxicity testing-a review, In Ecology of Mysidacea (pp. 171-178), Springer, Dordrecht.
26 Readman, J. W.(2006), Development, Occurrence and Regulationof Antifouling Paint Biocides: Historical Review and Future Trends, In Antifouling paint biocides, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 1-15.
27 Ruiz, G. M., T. K. Rawlings, F. C. Dobbs, L. A. Drake, T. Mullady, A. Huq and R. R. Colwell(2000), Global spread of microorganisms by ships, Nature, Vol. 408, No. 6808, p. 49.   DOI
28 Silkina, A., A. Bazes, F. Vouve, V. Le Tilly, P. Douzenel, J. L. Mouget and N. Bourgougnon(2009), Antifouling activity of macroalgal extracts on Fragilaria pinnata (Bacillariophyceae): a comparison with Diuron, Aquatic toxicology, Vol. 94, No. 4, pp. 245-254.   DOI
29 Thomas, K. V. and S. Brooks(2010), The environmental fate and effects of antifouling paint biocides, Biofouling, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 73-88.   DOI
30 Suk, J. H.(2018), A Study on the Regulatory Framework Related to Ship's Biofouling. The Korea Institute Of Maritime Law, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 139-173.   DOI
31 Woods, C., O. Floerl, I. Fitridge, O. Johnston, K. Robinson, D. Rupp, N. Davey, N. Rush and M. Smith(2007), Evaluation of the seasonal efficacy of hull cleaning methods, Biosecurity New Zealand Technical Report, ZBS2005-22, p. 119.
32 Zhou, J. L.(2008), Occurrence and persistence of antifouling biocide Irgarol 1051 and its main metabolite in the coastal waters of Southern England, Science of the total environment, Vol. 406, No. 1-2, pp. 239-246.   DOI
33 Yebra, D. M., S. Kiil and K. Dam-Johansen(2004), Antifouling technology - past, present and future steps towards efficient and environmentally friendly antifouling coatings, Progress in organic coatings, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 75-104.   DOI