Chaos brewing in ballast water

optimarin PR image

Source: Optimarin

The 15-year interval between the conception and entry into force of the IMO’s Ballast Water Management Convention left abundant opportunity for invasive organisms to do their nasty work, and despite the sector’s reputation for inertia, some shipowners grew tired of waiting. At the time, they were warned that early adopters of ballast water management (BWM) systems would suffer, having to spend more money to replace their ‘stranded assets’ in a few years’ time.

Unfortunately for various shipowners, that appears to be exactly what has happened. From around 120 systems which initially gained IMO G8 Type-Approval, more than half have turned out to be insufficient in US Coastguard (USCG) tests.

“In a couple of cases we have physically taken off a competitor’s system,” said EVP of sales at Norway’s Optimarin, Tore Andersen recently. “This is very costly for the [shipowner] that has to do it.”

Continue this article…

Already subscribed? SIGN IN now


Sign up for FREE to continue this article!

Want to read more before deciding on a subscription? It only takes a minute to sign up for a free account and you’ll get to enjoy:

  • Weekly newsletters providing valuable news and information on the shipping sector
  • Full access to our news archive
  • Live and archived webinars, podcasts and videos
  • Articles on innovations and current trends in the shipping industry
  • Our extensive archive of data, research and intelligence

Get more free content sign up today

Ready to subscribe? Choose from one of our subscription packages for unlimited access!