The obvious goal for shipowners choosing a treatment system | Forum

Topic location: Forum home » General » General Chat
kidybera Jul 25 '17
From this simple example you understand whereas the exact here in tangible operation often is incorporated in the range from 100 - 50%, reduce in some extreme cases, several type approved systems out there will not be able to face this. The difference in performance is usually significant. Whereas DESMI Ocean Guard’s RayClean system can treat water with UV-T around 100 - 33%, other systems are on a e.g. UV-T array of only 100 - 86%.

While ICS among others are right that some sort approved systems available on the market will not be able to fulfill the IMO discharge standards under normal operating conditions, we presume the solution is just not to change the full type approval procedure. Rather, the remedy should be to build a clear summary of the limitation of most type approved BWTS. This could be a job for the IMO. With such a review ship owners can gain confidence that they may make the right number of BWTS for his or her fleet, at relation to cost, footprint power consumption etc., and also, along with perhaps more importantly, depending on performance in the systems.

the obvious goal for shipowners choosing a treatment system, though IMO ratification beingshown to people there and a large list of system manufacturers still seeking USCG type approval, they're in an unenviable position of proceeding having an investment which will not meet their longer-term needs, says the organization.

Vessels sailing in U.S. waters are going to be required to adhere with USCG ballast best dj in vancouver standards and also the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Vessel General Permit (VGP), together with state ballast water regulations. As a temporary measure, the USCG is accepting using Alternate Management System (AMS) which might be typed approved by other countries on the basis on the existing IMO guidelines.
The Forum post is edited by admin Jul 27 '17