方案详情文
智能文字提取功能测试中
Marine Pollution Bulletin 114 (2017)860-866Contents lists available at ScienceDirect P. Tiselius, K.Magnusson / Marine Pollution Bulletin 114 (2017)860-866861 Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul Toxicity of treated bilge water: The need for revised regulatory controlPeter Tiselius a*, Kerstin Magnussonb University of Gothenburg, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences -Kristineberg, SE-45178 Fiskebackskil, Sweden"IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Kristineberg, SE-45178 Fiskebackskil, Sweden ARTICLEEINFO A BSTRACT Article history: 3 SeiReceived 18 September 2016Received in revised form 8 November 2016Accepted 9 November 2016Available online 14 November 2016 Keywords: Toxicity Water accumulating in the bottom of ships (bilge water), contains a mixture of oil, detergents and other com-pounds from on board activities. To evaluate ecological effects of released bilge water the chemical compositionand toxicity of treated bilge water from seven passenger ships was analysed. The oil content was below15 mg L, the threshold for legal discharge, in all but one ship.Still, significant reductions in feeding and repro-duction of Acartia tonsa were found after 48 h exposure in dilutions with 2.5-5% of bilge water. Mortality was sig-nificant at dilutions of 5-10% in 4 of the 5 bilge water samples. Surfactants were the most significant contributorto the toxicity on copepod vital rates and survival. Toxicity was also tested with Microtox where an ECso wasfound at dilutions between 4.3% and 52%. The results show that ecological effects might occur also in diluted sus-pensions of bilge water. Bilge waterOil pollutionSurfactantsCopepods O 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Release of oil from various shipping activities has over the past halfcentury caused enormous problems to aquatic ecosystems. Most atten-tion has been given to oil spills where marine biota initially are exposedto high oil concentrations which gradually are reduced throughe.g.evaporation, photo-oxidation and bacterial break-down of the oil com-ponents. Less attention is given to the effects of the legally accepted re-lease of smaller volumes of oil to the sea through activities likedischarge of bilge water, ballast water and cleaning of tanks. Recent es-timates indicate that the total chronic release of oil worldwide to theocean averaged 270,000 tons per year over the period 1990-1999,equal to the largest single oil spills from an oil tanker accident, the At-lantic Empress in 1979, or about one third of the total release of oilfrom the Deepwater Horizon Macondo well in 2010 (Farrington,2013). The input of oil from ship operations is continuous, so eventhough most oil fractions have a fairly rapid half-life they may causepermanently increased oil concentrations in areas with intense ship-ping. Marine biota in these areas hence run the risk of being chronicallyexposed to low but still elevated concentrations of oil. Bilge water is the water that accumulates in the bottom of the shipand it is generated from machinery leakage and wash-down of freshwater. It may contain fuel, hydraulic oils, lubricant oils, volatile organiccompounds, metals, detergents, degreasers and other chemicals derivedfrom activities on board a ship (US EPA, 2008). ( * C orresponding author. ) ( E-mail addresses: p et e r.t i s el ius @ bi o env . gu . se ( P. Tiselius), ke r stin .magnu s so n@iv l . se (K. Magnusson). ) ( h t t p:/ / d x.do i .org/ 1 0 .1 0 16 / j . marp o lbul.20 1 6.11.01 0 0 025-326X/O2016Elsevier Ltd. All ri g h ts reserved. ) The International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulates handlingof bilge water. The focus for regulation is set on the oil content of thedischarged bilge water since this is generally considered to be themost important toxic component. According to the International Con-vention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, (MARPOL 73/78)no water may be discharged into the sea if it contains ≥15 mg L-1ofoil. To meet the IMO regulations the bilge water is either treated enroute, in an oil separation system before being discharged to the seaor deposited at reception facilities on land. The treatment is complicateddue to its mixed content of chemicals in the water. The most problem-atic is the mixture of oil and surfactants derived from cleaning, whichprohibits the water from separating into two distinct phases. Despitethis, a recent study indicates that oily water separators mounted onthree container and bulk carriers significantly reduced most substancesfor which there are regulated concentration limits (McLaughlin et al.,2014) The chemical composition of bilge water varies both between ves-sels and also from day to day within a vessel. Cruise ships and passengerferries produce significantly more bilge water than ships of other cate-gories due to their complicated constructions and support for many pas-sengers (US EPA, 2008). In a survey by Det Norske Veritas (DNV) themedian production of bilge water was estimated to be 7500 L day-from passenger ships, 360 L day- from offshore ships, and50 L dayfrom tankers and cargo vessels (Sjofartsdirektoratet,2009). The corresponding amount of oil being released from a passen-ger ship, assuming a maximum allowed oil content of 15 mg L-,would be 112 g oil day-, from an offshore ship 6 g oil dayandfrom tankers and cargo vessels 1 g day- ship. Large cruise shipswith gross tonnage from 20,000 to 78,000 operating off Alaska produced 5-20 mof bilge water per day equal to 75-300 g oil day- in legal dis-charges (US EPA, 2008). There is to our knowledge no data on the vol-umes of other components discharged with the bilge water. An important group of chemicals present in bilge water are thesurfactants. Many surfactants are known to be toxic in themselves andmixtures of oil and surfactants may be more toxic than each of the indi-vidual components, either caused by synergistic effects of the actualtoxicity the two components or as a result of an increased dissolutionof the crude oil by the dispersant making it more bioavailable for the ex-posed organisms (Greer et al.,2012; Wu et al., 2012; Almeda et al.,2014b). In general, toxicity tests of crude oil on planktonic species have beencarried out with just the water-soluble fraction of the oil since this oftenhas been considered to be the only bioavailable fraction (e.g. Berdugo etal., 1977; Berrojalbiz et al., 2009).However, oil discharged to sea wateralso occurs as droplets either formed by natural factors (wind, waves) orby dispersants applied after oil spills (Mukherjee and Wrenn, 2009). Ithas been shown that suspended oil droplets in the size range of foodparticles can be ingested by several species of zooplankton and henceadd to the uptake of oil (Lee et al., 2012; Almeda et al., 2014a, 2014b,2014c). Surfactants in bilge water are also likely to contribute to the for-mation of oil droplets, which might hence affect the toxicity of the oilfraction. Since the bilge water is released in the water column,plankton-ic species in areas with intense shipping are prime targets for environ-mental effects. Zooplankton, larvae and phytoplankton are particularlyat risk since they have limited capabilities to avoid areas of oil-contam-inated water. The aim of the present study was to investigate the toxicity on themarine environment of treated bilge water from large passenger ferriessailing in Swedish waters. No effort has been made to rank differenttreatment technologies. The toxicity of the bilge water from sevenferries collected before and after treatment was tested with Microtox,a screening test with marine bacteria. Since zooplankton is the primegroup affected by a continuous release of contaminated water to thesea, further experiments were conducted using treated bilge waterfrom four of the ferries recording the survival and sub-lethal effects onthe marine copepod Acartia tonsa. 2. Material and methods 2.1. Bilge water sampling Treated bilge water, after passage through an oily water separator,was collected between May 2015 and February 2016 from seven Table 1 ( T reated bilge water samples collected f r om ships A-G. Samples from ships A1, A2, B1 andB2 were taken both at beginning of the bilge water treatment, EO (=Early Operation) andat the end of the treatment, LO ( =L ate Operation). ) Sampling date Ship ID Chemical Test with Test with analyses Microtox Acartia tonsa 7 May 2015 A1Eo X X X 8 May 2015 A1Lo X X 2 June 2015 A2Eo X X X 3 June 2015 A2Lo X X 26 May 2015 B1Eo X X X 27 May 2015 B1Lo X X 15 June 2015 B2Eo X X 15 June 2015 B2Lo X X 17 Nov 2015 B3 X X 1 June 2015 C1 X X X 11 Nov 2015 C2 X X 11 June 2015 D1 X X X 15 June 2015 D2 X X 2 Dec 2015 D3 X X 26 Nov 2015 E X X 27 Nov 2015 F X X 10 July 2015 passenger ships (ships A-G) ranging iin size from 119,700-52,000 gross ton. Sampling was done between one and three timesfrom each ship (Table 1). The oil separating equipment differed be-tween the ships. Water from ships A and B was pumped from a storagetank to the treatment system without any mixing. The chemical compo-sition of the bilge water may therefore depend on the level of the stor-age tank and on what time in the treatment process the sampling wascarried out. Samples were therefore taken both at early operation (EO,Table 1) and late operation (LO). The bilge water in ships C to G wasmixed during treatment and samples were taken only once at each sam-pling occasion. All sampling was done when the ships were in the portand not during operation at sea. The ship-mounted measuring instru-ments always reported the oil content to be <15 mg L, which is theupper limit for bilge water to be released into the sea. The collectedbilge water was stored in dark 1 L glass bottles at 4°℃ in the dark untilchemical analysis and toxicity tests. 2.2. Chemical analyses All sampled bilge water was analysed for the total oil index and car-bon fractions (>C10-C12,>C12-C16,>C16-C35 and>C35 -
还剩5页未读,是否继续阅读?
继续免费阅读全文产品配置单
Modern Water (英国现代水务)为您提供《舱底污水中生物毒性检测方案(水质毒性分析)》,该方案主要用于废水中综合检测,参考标准《暂无》,《舱底污水中生物毒性检测方案(水质毒性分析)》用到的仪器有生物毒性分析仪 Microtox LX、Modern Water 便携毒性监测仪 Microtox® FX。
我要纠错相关方案