About the Project | Project Timeline | Barge and Ship Treatment Trials | Full-Design Studies | Literature Reviews | Abstracts, Presentations & Reports | Project Members | Funders | Contacts The Great Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project was established in 1996 to accelerate development of practical and effective ballast treatment technologies for ships. It is supported by grants from the Great Lakes Protection Fund and several state and federal agencies (funders). The Project, co-led by the Northeast-Midwest Institute and the Lake Carriers' Association, has forged a productive partnership between natural resource protection and maritime industry interests to undertake problem solving work with mutual credibility. The Project team has also assembled a Steering Committee that consists of representatives from the shipping industry, environmental organizations, state and federal governments, port authorities, and the research community. Throughout the process, the Project has developed biological and engineering performance evaluation protocols, and provided early feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of ballast treatment systems to vendors, ship owners and policy-makers. All of the treatment systems tested have undergone substantial re-design in response to project "early returns". The result is a better set of potential ballast treatment tools to protect receiving coastal ecosystems, sooner. The Project has carried out many types of ground-breaking work, including: a survey of pathogens arriving into the Great Lakes, extensive field evaluations of flow-through treatment systems, full-scale engineering design studies, an International Ballast Technology Investment Fair and an economic analysis evaluating treatment industry prospects. Current activities of the Project include a full-scale treatment system installation on an operating commercial tanker that routinely visits the Great Lakes (more).
PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS OF BALLAST TREATMENT SYSTEMS The centerpiece and ongoing emphasis of the Project are our field trials at high flow of commercially-available ballast treatment equipment. These trials, which take place both onboard commercial operating vessels and a stationary barge-based experimental platform, begin to answer critical questions that both the maritime industry and natural resource protection advocates may have relative to treatment performance. Critical operational questions include whether the system fails after extended use, the amount of intake flow that may be lost due to operation of the equipment, power and maintenance requirements, and the systems' efficiency at achieving its design purpose. While critical biological questions include how effective the equipment is at removing or destroying zooplankton, phytoplankton, bacteria and viruses from the intake stream and the extent to which these organisms may regrow, die-off or interact with each other during a retention period. Each piece of equipment evaluated so far has been subjected to both operational and biological test protocols. The results are currently being assembled, presented and published in both engineering and biological venues. The biological and operational protocols, test findings, and technological improvements that ensued in the test systems' designs as a consequence of weaknesses identified by the Project, are all important products of the Project treatment trials. Ship Trials onboard: M/V Algonorth | Barge Tests of Screen Filtration | Barge Tests of Depth Filtration + UV | Barge Tests of Screen Filtration + UV vs Cyclonic Separation + UV | Ship Trials onboard M/V Regal Princess | Ship Installation + Tests: M/T Aspiration
The Project performed these shipboard trials using a deck-mounted Automatic Back-Flush Screen Filter (ABSF) designed by Ontario Hydro Technologies, Inc. Two filter units (a 250 µm pre-filter and a 25, 50, 100 or 150 µm polishing filter) were installed in series on the ship's deck along with a diesel pump piped to draw water either from the ship's ballast tanks or the sea. Biological trials used matched control and treatment upper wing tanks equipped with cable trolleys for direct tank sampling using identical plankton net transects. The design of the experimental platform is described in detail by Parsons et al (1997b) Operational assessment results can be found in Parsons & Harkins (1999). Biological effectiveness results can be obtained from Cangelosi et al (1999). Further information and findings appear as a chapter in a book published in 2002 (Cangelosi, 2002). 1In 1998, Project filtration trials have continued on the stationary barge platform. These tests of the Automatic Back-Flush Screen Filter (ABSF) system under harbor conditions onboard the stationary barge platform were more rigorous and controlled than the M/V Algonorth tests. The effectiveness of 25 µm ABSF was compared with 50 µm ABSF at Duluth/Superior Harbor in Lake Superior. Mechanical tests showed the commercially-available ABSF at 50 µm to be more operationally efficient and better suited to shipboard application than at 25 µm. However, both screens showed strong performance in terms of percent particle removal above the nominal rating. Operational assessment results can be found in Parsons & Harkins (1999). Biological evaluations showed that ABSF at 50 µm is a powerful tool for removing zooplankton from the water column at high flow though secondary treatment would be needed as there are only subtle advantages when using it for bacteria treatment. The tests also showed that there are slight benefits of pushing ABSF to 25 µm, and that the filters did not increase (relative to controls) the number of smaller particles in the discharge stream by breaking-up algal filaments or colonies. The objectives, methods, and findings of the operational tests conducted here are published in Parsons & Harkins (2000). Biological experimental design and results can be obtained from Cangelosi et al (1999). Results are also appear as a chapter in a book published in 2002 (Cangelosi, 2002).
The studies revealed that ABSF + UV was much more effective than CS + UV at inactivating zooplankton. While CS + UV; ABSF + UV; and UV-alone were all equally effective at inactivating phytoplankton growth, ambient culturable bacteria, and coliphage MS-2. This suggests that UV is the operative component for these biological endpoints, and the pre-treatment does not significantly enhance UV effects at these sites. Retention time in the dark for 18 hours prior to sampling did not alter any treatment's effectiveness at inactivating zooplankton or phytoplankton, however, culturable bacteria numbers in the UV treatments increased to control levels after 18 hours of retention. The study also showed that CS (using the system tested) was not an equivalent substitute for filtration, having no significant effect on zooplankton numbers or mortality in the discharge stream. In addition, CS did not improve the performance of UV in the locations tested. The equipment vendor has indicated that the CS is nonetheless a valuable treatment system component for removing the heavier particles from the intake stream which could damage the UV lamps. The work also showed that UV alone significantly reduces phytoplankton and bacteria growth, but physical/chemical conditions strongly influence UV performance. Regrowth is also an issue, suggesting that UV treatment on both the intake and the discharge is advisable. Preliminary biological findings are available upon request in Cangelosi et al (2001a). While Cangelosi et al (2001b) and Cangelosi et al (2001c) summarize both the barge-based research and the M/V Regal Princess tests (below). Further biological experimental design and results will be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. Operational findings were published by Parsons & Harkins (2002).
Experiments were undertaken in both Two Harbors, MN and Duluth, MN comparing the effectiveness of ABDF alone with UV alone and ABDF + UV in combination. The same experimental procedures as those employed in 2000 were followed with the addition of a zooplankton grow-out experiment. The grow-out experiment was designed to explore delayed mortality and recovery or reproductive effects resulting from the UV treatment. Mechanical/operational tests showed acceptable performance of the system, but would require an upgrade of most ship pumps. The evaluations showed ABDF did not demand the same large pump pressure drop to facilitate cleaning, and therefore could perform well using existing pumps. In addition, depth filters are not uniplanar, and therefore could entrain organisms more efficiently because the organism will "tumble" through the depth filter width exposing both the long and short dimensions to filter pores. The 50 µm depth filter planned for installation on the Stolt M/T Aspiration may therefore out-perform the screen filter of the same rating. Preliminary biological and operational findings will be available soon.
This experiment offered the unique opportunity to measure the influence of the shipboard environment on treatment performance. For each taxonomic grouping, the MV Regal Princess tests comprised 1) "Flow-Through" studies, in which the effects of a single pass through the treatment system were measured through in-line pre- and post-treatment sampling (providing a baseline against which to detect ballast tank effects); 2) "Time 0" studies, which measured the effects of treatment versus no treatment on water pumped into and immediately removed from a ballast tank (to detect effects of physical exposure to a ballast tank and system); and 3) "Time 18-24 Hour" studies, which measured the effects of treatment versus no treatment on water held in a ballast tank for 18-24 hours (to detect the cumulative effects of retention time in a ballast tank on treatment effectiveness). The studies focused on zooplankton and bacteria interactions with the treatment system and the ship. Cangelosi et al (2001b) and Cangelosi et al (2001c) summarize both the barge-based research and the M/V Regal Princess tests. Further biological experimental design and results will be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal.
FULL-SCALE DESIGN STUDIES Regardless of whether a treatment system performs well in a barge-based situation, or even onboard a given operating ship, there are still major technical questions of scale-up and installation to be addressed for the wide variety of other shipboard environments. Clearly, shipboard treatment systems will evolve rapidly over time. However, an early engineering design study which identifies the primary cost triggers, physical or operational constraints and life cycle cost considerations is invaluable as a boiler plate for future designs. The Project therefore commissioned marine engineering and naval architecture firms to develop full-scale design studies of onboard ballast water treatment systems for a range of ship classes. Each of the studies evaluates life cycle costs of the installations as well as design options. The four firms were The Glosten Associates Inc., of Seattle, WA; Herbert Engineering Corp., of Alameda, CA; Hyde Marine Inc., of Cleveland, OH; and Fleet Technology Ltd., of Kanata, Ontario, Canada. Their studies examine installations in new and existing ships, including bulk cargo carriers, oil tankers, and container ships. The studies are complete and were presented at the International Ballast Treatment Investment Fair in September, 2001 and at a Society of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering conference in June 2001. Full Scale Design Ballast Treatment Studies Report (pdf)
Phase I - Conducted by the Cooperative Institute of Limnology and Ecosystem Research (CILER) at the University of Michigan. Combined biological and engineering expertise and a literature review to advise the Project on the first-ever installation of a filtration system on board a commercial operating vessel, the M/V Algonorth. This review provided important background on the biological problem of invasive species in the Great Lakes and the engineering issues associated with installation of treatment equipment. It also advised the Project on the installation and operational testing of the treatment equipment, and the design of the biological testing program. The report can be obtained from the CILER under the title "The Great Lakes Ballast Demonstration Project Phase I: Final Report", University of Michigan, authored by Parsons, Moll, Mackey and Farley, May 1997. Phase II - "Ballast Water Secondary Treatment Technology Review" - Conducted by Battelle, the review evaluated potential secondary treatment technologies such as ozone and ultraviolet radiation for their prospective capacity at killing organisms of interest. Because the Project is devoted to evaluations of commercially-available products, the review also provided an assessment of the maturity and capacity if the industry supporting possible ballast treatment products in each technological area. (Report) Global Market Analysis of Ballast Treatment Technology - Conducted by Royal Haskoning (Netherlands) for presentation at the Project's International Ballast Treatment Investment Fair. The study considered the various classes of ships and their needs, the types of treatment systems that may become available, and the current and potential requirements of individual countries and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in estimating a potential global market for ballast treatment. The report concludes that a potential $1 billion (US) per year may become available for ballast treatment once the IMO agreement is ratified. (Report) Ballast Water Research and Funding: A History and Analysis - A Northeast-Midwest Institute report that surveys global funding dynamics over time for ballast water management. The report analyzes the sources of domestic treatment technology development funds and looks for relationships between funding trends and public policy developments. (Report) (Appendix)
ABSTRACTS, PRESENTATIONS & REPORTS Battelle (1998). Ballast Water Secondary Treatment Technology Review. Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington DC., USA (Report) Cangelosi A (1999). Ballast Water Management: Developments in Policy and Technology. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, Cambridge MA, January 24-27, 1999 (Abstract) Cangelosi A, Knight IT, Balcer M, Gao X, Huq A, McGreevy JA, McGregor B, Reid D, Sturtevant R & Carlton JT (1999). The Biological Effectiveness of Filtration as an Onboard Ballast Treatment Technology. Proceedings of the Ninth International Zebra Mussel and Aquatic Nuisance Species Conference, Duluth, MN, April 26-30, 1999 (Abstract) Cangelosi A, Balcer M, Blatchley ER III, Dawson R, GAO X, Huq A, Knight IT, Mays NL, McGregor B, Reid D, Sturtevant R, Swan C, Taverna J, Wells C & Wright D (2001a). Experimental Studies Comparing Biological Effectiveness of Commercially Available Ballast Treatment Systems. Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington DC., USA Cangelosi A., Knight IT, Balcer M, Wright D, Dawson R, Blatchley ER III, Reid DM, Mays NL & Taverna J (2001b). Great Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project Biological Effectiveness Test Program (includes MV Regal Princess Trials). Proceedings of the Global Ballast Water Management Program (GloBallast) Symposium and Workshop, London, UK March 26-30, 2001(Report) Cangelosi A, Knight IT, Balcer M, Wright D, Blatchley ER III, Reid DM, Mays NL & Taverna J (2001c). Evaluating Bioeffectiveness of Flow-Through Mechanical Ballast Water Treatment Systems (Cyclonic Separation + UV and Filtration + UV) at the Pilot- and Full-Scales. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, New Orleans, LA, April 9-11, 2001 (Abstract) Cangelosi A (2002). Filtration as a Ballast Treatment Measure. In: Invasive Aquatic Species of Europe: Distributions, Impacts and Management (Leppakoski E, Olenin S & Gollasch S, eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Knight IT, Wells CS, Wiggins B, Russel H, Reynolds KA & Huq A (1999). Detection and Enumeration of Fecal Indicators and Pathogens in the Ballast Water of Transoceanic Cargo Vessels Entering the Great Lakes. Proceedings of the General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology, Chicago, IL. Abstract Q-71, p.546 (Abstract) Mays NL (2001). Ballast Water Research and Funding: A History and Analysis. Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington DC., USA (Report) (Appendix) Parsons MG, Moll R, Mackey TP & Farley RB (1997a). The Great Lakes Ballast Demonstration Project Phase 1: Final Report. Cooperative Institute of Limnology & Ecosystem Research (CILER), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Parsons MG, Harkins RW, Mackey TP, Munro DJ & Cangelosi A (1997b). Design of the Great Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project. Transactions SNAME 105: 323-348 Parsons MG & Harkins RW (1999). The Great Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project Filtration Mechanical Test Program. Proceedings of the Ninth International Zebra Mussel and Aquatic Nuisance Species Conference, Duluth, MN, April 26-30, 1999 (Abstract) Parsons MG & Harkins RW (2000). The Great Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project Mechanical Testing Program. Marine Technology 37(3): 129-140 Parsons MG & Harkins RW (2002). Full-scale Particle Removal Performance of Three Types of Mechanical Separation Devices for the Primary Treatment of Ballast Water. Marine Technology 39(4): 211-222 Parsons MG (2003). Considerations in the Design of the Primary Treatment for Ballast Systems. Marine Technology 40 (1): 49-60 Reynolds KA, Knight IT, Wells CS, Pepper IL & Gerba CP (1999). Detection of Human Pathogenic Protozoa and Viruses in Ballast Using Conventional and Molecular Methods. Proceedings of the General Meeting of the American Society of Microbiology, Chicago, IL, Abstract Q-318, p. 594 (Abstract) Royal Haskoning (2001). Global Market Analysis of Ballast Treatment Technology. Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington DC., USA (Report) Zo Y, Grimm C, Matte M, Matte G, Knight IT, Huq A & Colwell RR (1999). Detection and Enumeration of Pathogenic Bacteria in Ballast Water of Transoceanic Vessels Entering the Great Lakes and Resistance to Common Antibiotics. Proceedings of the General Meeting of the American Society of Microbiology, Chicago, IL, Abstract Q-317, p.594 (Abstract)
Great Lakes | Biological Pollution Home
|
|||||||||||||||||
The
Project undertook the first comprehensive evaluations of filtration
as a possible ballast treatment system component in 1997 at a flow
rate of 340 m3/hr onboard an operating commercial bulk cargo vessel
(M/V Algonorth) at various locations in the Great Lakes/St.
Lawrence Seaway System.
In
2000, the same barge platform was used to evaluate two ballast treatment
combinations: Automatic Backwash Screen Filtration (ABSF) at 40
µm + Ultraviolet Radiation (UV) and Cyclonic Separation (CS)
+ UV. Experiments were undertaken in both Two Harbors, MN and Duluth,
MN. For these tests, zooplankton viability and algal growth were
studied as well as effects on overall plankton concentrations. 
In
August of 2001, the biological effectiveness of a 100 µm
Automatic Backflushing Depth Filter (ABDF) and an upgraded Ultraviolet
Radiation (UV) system (design dose of 150 mWsec/cm2) were compared
alone and in combination with each other. The same barge platform
was employed for these tests as for the 2000 tests, except that
the CS unit was removed and the 100 µm ABDF installed in its
place, and the upgraded UV system replaced the system tested in
2000. 
In
the summer of 2000, the Project conducted biological experiments
evaluating the same Cyclonic Separation (CS) + Ultraviolet Radiation
(UV) combination on a full-scale ship installation (the M/V Regal
Princess) at 200 m3/hr. Catchment tubs were installed in the
ship's engine room and sample ports installed before and after the
combined treatment system to facilitate in-line sampling as well
as enable sampling of treated and untreated water stored in matched
ballast tanks. All ballast water was treated for a period of two
months prior to testing to minimize concern of leakage of untreated
water from other parts of the system into the treated water. The
MV Regal Princess plied Vancouver, BC to Alaska and back
during the testing.
In
2002, the 
