ICES Viewpoint background document: Impact from exhaust gas cleaning systems (scrubbers) on the marine environment (Ad hoc).

Shipping is a diverse industry that connects the world. The distribution and intensity of commercial shipping is increasing and there is a growing need to assess and mitigate the impacts of vessel activities on the marine environment. New global standards on sulphur content in marine fuels have led to an increasing number of ships installing exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS), also known as scrubbers, to reduce their emissions of sulphur oxides to the atmosphere. Ships equipped with a scrubber can continue to use heavy fuel oil, and the process results in discharges of large volumes of acidified water that contain a mix of contaminants, such as heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), oil residues, and nitrates. For the most common type of scrubber, open loop, this polluted water is directly discharged back to the sea, trading reductions in air pollution for increased water pollution. The scrubber discharge mixture has demonstrated toxic effects in laboratory studies, causing immediate mortality in plankton and exhibiting negative synergistic effects. The substances found in scrubber discharge water are likely to have further impacts in the marine environment through bioaccumulation, acidification and eutrophication. The impacts of scrubber discharge water can be completely avoided through the use of alternative fuels, such as distilled low sulphur fuels. Distilled fuels have the added benefit that they remove the threat of heavy fuel oil spills from shipping activities. If the use of alternative fuels is not adopted, and scrubbers continue to be considered an equivalent method to meet the sulphur emissions limits, then there is urgent need for:1) significant investment in technological advances and port reception facilities to allow zero discharge closed loop scrubber systems;2) improved protocols and standards for measuring, monitoring and reporting on scrubber discharge water acidity and pollutants;3) evidence-based regulations on scrubber water discharge limits that consider the full suite of contaminants

Exceptions and exemptions under the ballast water management convention – Sustainable alternatives for ballast water management?

Highlights • Data quality is very important for conducting a reliable risk assessment. • Same locations should be confined to smallest practicable areas within a port. • Nearly all shipping routes with adequate data resulted in high-risk outcomes. • Pelagic larval traits are key factors in natural dispersal modelling assessments.The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM Convention) aims to mitigate the introduction risk of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens (HAOP) via ships’ ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention has set regulations for ships to utilise exceptions and exemptions from ballast water management under specific circumstances. This study evaluated local and regional case studies to provide clarity for situations, where ships could be excepted or exempted from ballast water management without risking recipient locations to new introductions of HAOP. Ships may be excepted from ballast water management if all ballasting operations are conducted in the same location (Regulation A-3.5 of the BWM Convention). The same location case study determined whether the entire Vuosaari harbour (Helsinki, Finland) should be considered as the same location based on salinity and composition of HAOP between the two harbour terminals. The Vuosaari harbour case study revealed mismatching occurrences of HAOP between the harbour terminals, supporting the recommendation that exceptions based on the same location concept should be limited to the smallest feasible areas within a harbour. The other case studies evaluated whether ballast water exemptions could be granted for ships using two existing risk assessment (RA) methods (Joint Harmonised Procedure [JHP] and Same Risk Area [SRA]), consistent with Regulation A-4 of the BWM Convention. The JHP method compares salinity and presence of target species (TS) between donor and recipient ports to indicate the introduction risk (high or low) attributed to transferring unmanaged ballast water. The SRA method uses a biophysical model to determine whether HAOP could naturally disperse between ports, regardless of their transportation in ballast water. The results of the JHP case study for the Baltic Sea and North-East Atlantic Ocean determined that over 97% of shipping routes within these regions resulted in a high-risk indication. The one route assessed in the Gulf of Maine, North America also resulted in a high-risk outcome. The SRA assessment resulted in an overall weak connectivity between all ports assessed within the Gulf of the St. Lawrence, indicating that a SRA-based exemption would not be appropriate for the entire study area. In summary, exceptions and exemptions should not be considered as common alternatives for ballast water management. The availability of recent and detailed species occurrence data was considered the most important factor to conduct a successful and reliable RA. SRA models should include biological factors that influence larval dispersal and recruitment potential (e.g., pelagic larval duration, settlement period) to provide a more realistic estimation of natural dispersal

The liver of wrasse-morphology and function as a mirror of point source chemical impact.

International audienc

Funktionen von Makrophagen und ihren Aggregaten als histochemische Biomarker für Immunmodulation in Fischen verschiedener Klimazonen

[no abstract