The research focuses on investigating into the type and amount of ship-generated wastes handled...

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The phrase marine pollution challenges navigate from the globe via ships to the

local, being ports; as remained a truism. This is so, because oceans are been used

as highways for shipping, tourism, commerce, and the world’s navies.

Pollution in the world’s oceans causes a significant threat to marine life and is

recognized as one of our highest environmental concerns. While there are many

sources of marine pollutions, one concern is ship-generated wastes. According to

Butt (2007), as shipping accounts for about 20% of global discharges of wastes and

residues at sea, the protection of the marine environment can be enhanced

significantly by containing discharges of all kind of ship-generated wastes and

cargo residues into the sea and ports. The pollution generated by ships including

liquid and solid wastes that are legislated through the requirements of the

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as

modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/78) and the International Safety

Management (ISM) Code, both of which are under the auspices of the International

Maritime Organization (IMO). The legislation is also in place through the

European Union (EU) setting requirements for ports to provide reception facilities

of 80

for ship-generated wastes that cannot be disposed of at sea in compliance with the

MARPOL 73/78 regulations (Butt, 2007).

MARPOL 73/78 adopted by International Maritime Organization (IMO)

established regulations and responsibilities concerning the illegal discharge of oil,

chemicals, sewage, and garbage into the sea during normal operations.

Governments, for example, are given the responsibility of providing adequate

reception facilities for oil and chemical residues, garbage, sewage, ozone-depleting

substances, and exhaust cleaning system residues. The provision of adequate

reception facilities is an essential requirement for reducing and eventually

eliminating pollution from ships (Tanzer et al., 2008).

According to Dashan and Apaydin (2012) The Convention includes regulations on

the prevention and minimization of pollution from ships occurring through both

accidental releases and routine operations. Such convention currently includes six

technical Annexes which are Annex I: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution

by Oil, Annex II: Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid

Substances in Bulk, Annex III: Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances

Carried by Sea in Packaged Form, Annex IV: Prevention of Pollution by Sewage

from Ships, Annex V: Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships, and Annex

VI: Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships (http://www.imo.org).

of 80

http://www.imo.org/

Common waste treatment methods of ship-generated wastes include recycling for

oil, oil filters, batteries, aerosols, fluorescent tubes, scrap metals, glasses, electronic

equipment, and refrigerators, incineration for oily rags, sludge and medical waste,

biological treatment for bilge water, photochemical waste, sewage and grey water,

and land filling for general garbage, food waste, incinerator ash (Butt, 2007).

Nigeria been a member state since 1962 of IMO, but recently, at the national level

in 2006, through its agent; Nigeria Ports Authority (NPA), as part of the Federal

Government Public Private Partnership Initiative, signed a Build Operate Transfer

(BOT) Contract with African Circle Pollution Management Limited (ACPML) for

the establishment and Management of MARPOL Port Reception Facilities and for

the Management of ship generated waste and cargo residue at the four

Navigational districts of Lagos, Port Harcourt, Warri and Calabar as required in

compliance with international legislation (MARPOL 73/78 ) has attracts a great

deal of interest within the port premise (ACPML Report, 2011).

of 80

1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Recycling at sea does not appear to be a viable solution for dealing with ship-

generated wastes, even onboard very large ships. A more practicable approach is

the establishment of an adequate reception facility at the ports receiving large

volumes of these ship-generated wastes. In addition, unless information on how

much, what type, when it will land and the future trends are made available, the

maritime industry is unlikely to control the excess of some operators in waste

management. At the same time, ports find it difficult to manage all of the different

kinds of waste received from ships that call. Marine pollution has already affected

the marine environment and will continue to do so in the ports unless inexpensive,

effective, and efficient waste disposal systems, such as port reception facilities are

put in place (Butt, 2007). Accordingly, there is a need to acquire much more

information on the issue in order to encourage the port reception facilities

operators’ towards a positive response.

Like all other ports, Tin Can Island Port faces these common shipping related

marine environmental challenges, which are not limited to; ships’ waste reception

and ultimate disposal of the ship-generated waste. The overall quantity of maritime

traffic in the Tin Can Island Port is very significant. From the Nigerian Ports

Authority Annual Statistical Abstracts, the researcher estimates an enormous

increase of ships that call to the port to about sixteen per cent (16%) between 2008

of 80

and 2011. Moreover, it is expected that this growth rate will be increasing, due to

the increase in maritime traffic demand to the port.

As evident, the increased ship calls into Tin Can Island Port have resulted to a

significant quantity of ship-generated wastes into the port reception facilities.

Between 2008 and 2011 research period, there were about thirty-two per cent

(32%) increase of garbage and eighteen per cent (18%) increase of oily wastes (this

includes sludge, bilge) into Tin Can Island port reception facilities. These

enormous increase of ships calling at the Tin Can Island port and the waste

generated by the vessels calling at the port has prompted the question on what

would be the future estimates and trend of ship generated waste quantities in Tin

Can Island Port?

1.3AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH

The aim of the research is to Investigates Ship-Generated Wastes in Tin Can Island

Port.

Specific objectives of the research work are outlined below:

i. To determine the traffic of ship calls to Tin Can Island Ports within 2008

to 2012 research period?

of 80

ii. To determine the volume of ship-generated wastes handled (by type and

amount) in Tin Can Island Port over a 4 year research period.

iii. To forecast the future volume of ship-generated wastes to be handled for

next four years in Tin Can Island Port.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

In order to achieve the objectives of this research study, the research study will

attempt to provide answers to the following research questions:

i. What is the traffic of ship calls to Tin Can Island Ports within the

research period?

ii. What is the trend distribution of the volume of ship-generated waste (by

type and amount) within the research period?

iii. What will be the estimated growth of ship-generated wastes that would

be handled in Tin Can Island port by 2016?

1.5RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

In a bid to give the research work the required sense of direction and to provide

answers to the research questions, the following hypothesis will be tested:

of 80

NULL HYPOTHESIS (HO)

i. The future volumetric amount of ship generated wastes forecasted, is

significantly different from the upper limit of mean estimated values (at

95% confidence level).

1.6SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

A research of this kind is expected to make theoretical and practical contributions

into the Maritime Industry. This research provides a basis for closer understanding

of the Nigeria’s port reception facilities and the ship-generated waste (by type and

amount) it contains, in line with the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

Solutions could then be sought after, regarding the average ship-generated wastes

handled in the port and port reception facilities available or not available in the

port. In addition, the research study will also forecast the demand of the ship-

generated waste concerning the enormous increase in ships call to Tin Can Island

Port and the waste it could be generating in neatest future.

This research is likely to be useful to Ships'/ship Owners' (for a higher

turnover/profit with a minimum of time loss through waste collecting activities,

documentation, waste costs and general harbour costs); Port/Harbour Authority

(to fulfill the (local) markets demand in harbour facilities); Shipping Agents (a

higher turnover/profit/provision for his company and the shipping company who

of 80

hires their services); and the Government (to provide, a cleaner waters by

stopping/reducing the amount of littering at sea. They will achieve this by

stimulating the use of (cost effective) Port reception facilities).

In conclusion, the results of this research might be a use for some public and

private organizations conducting new port waste reception planning studies or

research. Although the results of this research indicated that the model can be

suitable to determine waste quantities and ship requirements at Tin Can Island Port

waste reception for the next three-year period, a more comprehensive work is

recommended to predict the future values of these parameters for extended time

ranges.

1.7SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE RESEARCH

This research is a prelude and indeed a pioneering work in the Maritime sector,

especially in a developing country like ours. The research focuses on investigating

into the type and amount of ship-generated wastes handled during the research

period of 2008 to 2012 and to estimates future waste quantities in Tin Can Island

ports, Lagos, Nigeria using ARMA forecasting model of time series analysis.

Scarcity of funds and limited time for the collections and with the inconsistency

and incompleteness of the information or data provided has therefore made it

of 80

eminent to conduct a thorough and meaningful analysis necessary to complement

this information with follow-up interviews and internet research.

1.8GEOGRAPHICAL AREA AND MAP.

The research investigates only the Tin Can Island Port. Tin Can Island Port is

located in Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria on latitude 6° 26' 3" N and longitude 3° 21' 1" E

of about seven kilometers (7km) due west of the city center of Lagos across Lagos

Harbor.

Source: Google (Accessed on 15th of July 2014).

of 80

1.9 DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS

i. Adequacy: The word adequacy as used in the MARPOL Annexes means

that Port Reception Facilities meet the needs of ships using the ports

without causing undue delay.

ii. Cargo Residue: Means the remnants of any cargo material on board in

cargo holds or tanks, which remain after unloading procedures and

cleaning operations, are completed, and shall include loading/unloading

excesses and spillage.

iii. Discharge: Discharge is defined in MARPOL as any release howsoever

caused from a ship and includes any escape, disposal, spilling, leaking,

pumping, emitting, or emptying.

iv. Garbage: As defined in MARPOL Annex V, means all kinds of victual,

domestic, and operational waste excluding fresh fish and parts thereof,

generated during the normal operation of the ship and liable to be

disposed of continuously or periodically except those substances, which

are defined or listed in other Annexes to the Convention.

v. MARPOL 73/78: Means the International Convention for the Prevention

of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978

relating thereto, and as amended from time to time.

of 80

vi. Oil: means petroleum in any form including crude oil, fuel oil, sludge, oil

refuse and refined products (other than petrochemicals) including at least

those substances listed in the Appendix I to the Annex I of MARPOL

73/78.

vii. Oily mixture: means a mixture with oil content.

viii. Oil tanker: means a ship constructed or adapted primarily to carry oil in

bulk in its cargo spaces and includes combination carriers and any

chemical tanker when they carry a cargo or part of cargo of oil in bulk.

ix. Port: Means a place or a geographical area made up of such

improvement works and equipment as to permit, principally, the

reception of ships, including fishing vessel and recreational craft.

x. Port Reception Facility (PRF): This refers to any fixed, floating or

mobile facility capable of receiving MARPOL residues/wastes from

ships and fit for that purpose.

xi. Slop tank: means a tank specifically designated for the collection of tank

draining, tank washings and other oily mixtures.

xii. Ship or Vessel: Means a sea-going vessel of any type whatsoever

operating in the marine environment and shall include hydrofoil boats,

air-cushion vehicles, submersibles and floating craft.

of 80

xiii. Ship Agent: Is the representative of the interests of the ship owner in the

port.

xiv. Ship-Generated Wastes: This phrase is used throughout this research to

refer collectively to all waste streams that are generated on board ships

during normal operations and during cargo operations.

xv. Waste Treatment: This includes a recycling or elimination procedure,

including preparation of waste for recycling or elimination.

of 80

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND BACKGROUND

Marine pollution is a problem that affects the entire world and comes from many

sources. The kinds of waste generated on ships and dumped into the ocean have

had negative impacts on marine environments for decades. Marine pollution

negatively affects industries related to the ocean, such as fishing and tourism.

Pollutants including oil, chemicals, garbage, sewage, and food waste are all being

dumped into the ocean and ports. At the same time, ports find it difficult to manage

all of the waste received. Marine pollution has already affected the marine

environment and will continue to do so in the ports unless inexpensive, effective,

and efficient waste disposal systems, such as port reception facilities are put in

place (Butt, 2007).

2.1 Legal background of Marine Pollutions.

At the international level there are two fundamental instruments that deal with

certain aspects of ship-source pollution: the 1982 United Nations Convention on

the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS Convention) and the International Convention for

the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978

(MARPOL 73/78).

of 80

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) had been a specialized agency of

the United Nations, which sets a regulatory framework to guide participating

nations in the development of laws in the field of maritime transport. The IMO’s

mandate covers the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine

pollution by ships. Most of the IMO’s work is done through technical committees.

The Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) was established in 1973,

and is responsible for coordinating activities in the prevention and control of

pollution of the marine environment from ships. In 1973, the IMO hosted a

conference, which resulted in the development of the International Convention for

the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (http://www.imo.org).

According to IMO (2010), IMO facilitates the cooperation required under

MARPOL in a number of ways: 1) through meetings, particularly of the MEPC, in

which signatory States debate issues related to pollution legislation and State

response; 2) through maintaining a database of the obligatory reports submitted

and 3) by technical assistance on a regional or country basis. The IMO also

publishes technical documents, such as the Manual on Oil Pollution, for example.

of 80

http://www.imo.org/

2.1.1 MARPOL: the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution

from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/78)

The MARPOL Convention, adopted at the International Maritime Organization

(IMO) in 1973 and modified by the Protocol of 1978, deals with the prevention of

pollution from ships and the protection of the marine environment from discharges

of harmful substances to the sea. It establishes criteria for discharges at sea and

also an obligation for the ship master to report any pollution incident which is

defined as ‘a discharge above the permitted level’. It also imposes a duty to

cooperate between States parties to the Convention in the sanctioning of such

violations.

In particular, article 4 (4) of the Convention stipulates: ‘The penalties specified

under the law of a Party pursuant to the present article shall be adequate in severity

to discourage violations of the present Convention and shall be equally severe

irrespective of where the violations occur.’

MARPOL includes six annexes:

Annex I containing Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil;

Annex II containing Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious

Liquid Substances in Bulk;

of 80

Annex III containing Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by

Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form;

Annex IV containing Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Sewage

from Ships;

Annex V containing Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage

from Ships;

Annex VI containing Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from

Ships.

All annexes have been ratified by the requisite number of States (representing a

gross tonnage of more than 50%), and have therefore all entered into force.

Annexes I and II of MARPOL have been ratified by 152 states, representing 99.2

per cent of the world's shipping tonnage.

2.1.1.1 Annex I: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil.

Annex I, Regulation 15 provides that ‘any discharge into the sea of oil or oily

mixtures from ships shall be prohibited’. Regulations 15 (D) of annex I provide

that whenever visible traces of oil are observed on or below the surface of the

water in the immediate vicinity of a ship or its wake, a prompt investigation should

be undertaken, taking into account such elements as wind and sea conditions, the

track and speed of the ship, other possible sources of the visible traces in the

of 80

vicinity and any relevant oil discharge records. Operational discharges are

estimated to make up 45% (and shipping accidents 36%) of vessel-sourced oil

entering the environment (GESAMP, 2007). The environmental and socio-

economic damage caused by oil pollution is determined by a range of factors,

including: type of oil; physical, biological and economic characteristics of the

location; amount and rate of spillage; and time of year (EMSA, 2009).

In general, light refined products (e.g. gasoline, diesel) and light crude oils do not

persist on the surface of the sea for any considerable length of time due to rapid

evaporation of the volatile components, and they are more likely to disperse and

dissipate naturally, especially in rough seas. Such oils tend to be more toxic and

can result in mortalities of marine plants and animals if sufficient concentrations of

oil enter the water column through wave action and are not rapidly diluted by

natural sea movements. In contrast, heavy crude oil and heavy fuel oils, whilst

generally lower in toxicity, are considerably more persistent in the marine

environment due to the lesser volatile compound content. Hence, they do not

readily evaporate, disperse or dissipate naturally and rough sea conditions are more

likely to accelerate the emulsification process. See figure 1, next page;

of 80

Figure 1: Fate of oil spilled at sea showing the main weathering processes (Source: ITOPF17).

2.1.1.2 Annex II: Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid

Substances in Bulk.

In MARPOL annex II, ‘noxious liquid substance’ means any substance indicated

in the Pollution Category column of chapter 17 or 18 of the International Bulk

Chemical Code or provisionally assessed under the provisions of regulation 6.3

(MARPOL) as falling into Category X, Y, Z, or other. In accordance with

regulation 6.3, the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee issues an

annual circular with the provisional categorization of liquid substances. The

annexes to the circular provide lists of noxious liquid substances with associated

categories and minimum carriage requirements, which have been established

through Tripartite Agreements and registered with the IMO Secretariat (IMO,

2010).

of 80

Figure 2: Image of Illegal discharge of a MARPOL annexes II substance above the waterline.

2.1.1.3 Annex III: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Harmful

Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form

According to annex III, regulation 7, jettisoning of harmful substances carried in

package form (including empty packaging) is prohibited except where necessary

for the purpose of securing the safety of the ship or saving life at sea, or when

appropriate measures have been taken to regulate the washing of leakages

overboard. Harmful substances in packaged form should be transported in

accordance with regulations on packaging, marking, labelling, documentation,

stowage and quantity limitations. Marine pollutants, including those in packaged

form, are defined under the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG

Code) and should be marked with a ‘marine pollutant’ symbol, as shown in figure

4, below.

of 80

Figure 3: Marine pollutant symbol

2.1.1.4 Annex IV: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from

Ships

Annex IV applies only to certain categories of ship. Regulation 11, article 1,

provides that discharge of sewage from ships other than passenger ships in all areas

and discharge of sewage from passenger ships. The annex requires ships to have

either a sewage treatment facility, a disinfecting system, or a sewage-holding tank

(IMO, 2002). In accordance with the Regulation, untreated sewage must be

discharged at a distance of at least 12 nautical miles from shore; however, if the

ship has a sewage treatment facility it may discharge waste at least three (3)

nautical miles from shore. Sewage (black water) waste, if discharged near land, can

cause harm to ecosystems and pose a public health threat. Sewage can contain

harmful nutrients, bacteria, pathogens, diseases, viruses, and parasites. Passenger

ships (cruise ships and ferries) make up approximately 8% of the world shipping

fleet. Overall passenger figures in Europe are dropping but there is an increase in

of 80

the number of cruise passengers, from 3.1 million to 5.5 million between 2005 and

2010 (Maritime Knowledge Centre, 2012).

Cruises pose a particular problem due to the relatively large amount of sewage

waste produced and because the majority of cruise ships travel close to the

coastline, where ecosystems are more sensitive. Approximately 50 tonnes of

sewage per day are produced by an average cruise ship, between 20 and 40 litres

per person per day. (Butt, 2007).

2.1.1.5 Annex V: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from

Ships

Annex V applies to all ships and prohibits the discharge of garbage into the sea

(regulation 2; regulation 3). There are a number of exceptions, which are listed in

regulations 4-7 of the annex. According to Butt (2007), a ship carrying about 3000

passengers can generate approximately 50-70 tons of solid waste each week. This

annex sets restrictions on the handling of garbage, including all food, domestic,

and operational waste (IMO, 2002). The annex completely prohibits the dumping

of plastics at sea. It is further divided into six categories, including: (1) plastic, (2)

floating wrapping, lining or packaging material, (3) ground paper products, rags,

glass, metal, bottles, (4) paper products, rags, glass, metal, bottles, and crockery,

(5) food waste, and (6) incinerator ash (Carpenter &MacGill, 2003, p.28).

of 80

Plastic is recognized as particularly problematic as it persists in the marine

environment; it does not fully degrade, but only breaks down into increasingly

small particles. This means that it is dangerous to wildlife both because it can

directly entangle, harm and suffocate, but because it is easily ingested across the

food chain. Some additives to plastics are toxic, and plastics can attract other toxic

compounds in the water, increasing toxicity. Approximately 6.5 million tonnes of

plastic a year are estimated to enter the oceans from vessels (Derraik, 2002).The

diagram below shows what types of garbage are likely to be discharged by

different vessel types:

Figure 4: Sources of litter [Garbage from Ships] MFSD GES. (2011)

2.1.1.6 Annex VI: Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships

Air pollutants of primary concern are ozone depleting substances, sulfur oxides,

and nitrogen oxides (IMO, 2002). For economic reasons many vessels use heavy

of 80

fuel oil (HFO) which has very high sulphur content (90% higher than petrol or

conventional diesel). The emissions from burning this type of fuel include high

levels of nitrogen oxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons.

Most Annex VI pollutants originate in the ship’s engines. Air emissions from ships

affect the environment through changes to the atmosphere, e.g. acid rain, as well as

decreasing overall air quality for populations living near shipping routes and in

ports. (Oceana, 2006).

2.1.2 UNCLOS: the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNCLOS: the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted in

1982 and entered into force in 1994. It regulates a variety of issues related to

shipping but for the purpose of this research, only certain provisions will be

highlighted, namely those provisions that relate to the enforcement issues with

respect to pollution by illegal discharges of oily and noxious substances to the sea.

2.1.2.1 Enforcement by flag States

Article 217 provides for the enforcement by flag States. When the ship commits a

violation (e.g. MARPOL violation involving illegal ship source pollution), the flag

State shall open, on its own initiative, an immediate investigation and, where

appropriate, institute proceedings in respect of the alleged violation, irrespective of

where it occurred.

of 80

Moreover, any State can actually request the flag State to investigate the alleged

violation. If there is sufficient evidence, the flag State shall institute proceedings

against the vessel without delay and inform the IMO and the requesting State.

2.1.2.2 Enforcement by port States

Article 218 provides for the enforcement by ort States. Articles 219 and 220 also

include provisions applicable by port States. In relation to violations that occurred

within the territorial sea or the exclusive economic zone of the port State, article

220 provides that the State may institute proceedings in respect of the vessel that

committed the violation when this vessel is voluntarily within a port or at an off-

shore terminal of that State.

In relation to an illegal discharge from the vessel that occurred outside of the

internal waters, territorial sea or Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the port State,

article 218 provides that the port State may undertake investigations and, where the

evidence warrants, institute proceedings in respect of that vessel, if the vessel is

voluntarily within a port or at an off-shore terminal of that port State.If the

discharge occurred in the internal waters, territorial sea or EEZ of another State,

the relevant port State may only institute proceedings at the request of the coastal

State where the violation occurred or of a State damaged or threatened by the

discharge, as well as the flag State, unless the discharge is likely to cause pollution

in its own waters or in the EEZ, then it is free to institute proceedings on its own

of 80

initiative. The records of the investigation carried out by a port State at the request

of the coastal, flag or another State will be transmitted to them.

2.1.2.3 Enforcement by coastal States

Article220 provides for the enforcement by coastal States. Articles 111, 211 and

226 are also relevant for the enforcement by coastal States. Article 211 (and in

particular paragraphs 4 and 5) creates a legal basis for the coastal States: it

provides that the coastal States may, in the exercise of their sovereignty within

their territorial sea, adopt laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction and

control of marine pollution from foreign vessels, including vessels exercising the

right of innocent passage. Such laws and regulations shall not (in accordance with

part II, Section 3 of the Convention) hamper innocent passage of foreign vessels.

They may also adopt laws and regulations in respect of their exclusive economic

zones for the purpose of prevention of pollution from vessels if these laws give

effect to generally accepted international rules and standards established through

the competent international organization or general diplomatic conference

(GESAMP, 2007)

2.1.2.4 Notification to the flag State and other States concerned

Both port and coastal States shall promptly notify the flag State or any other State

concerned of any measures against foreign vessels (article 231). The proceedings

initiated by a port or coastal State in respect of MARPOL violations committed by

of 80

a foreign vessel outside the territorial sea of the State, shall be suspended upon

taking of proceedings by the flag State within six months of the date on which the

proceedings were first instituted – the suspension lasts until the flag State has

arrived at a final conclusion, then the suspended proceedings are also terminated.

The flag State that requested the suspension shall in due course make available to

the State that previously instituted the proceedings access to the file and the

records to the proceedings (article 228). The proceedings will not be suspended if

they relate to a case of ‘major damage’ to the coastal State or if the flag State in

question has repeatedly disregarded its obligations to effectively enforce MARPOL

(UNCLOS article 228).

2.2 SHIPS-GENERATED WASTE TYPES IN INLAND NAVIGATION

According to Phare (2000), waste generated by inland navigation can be divided

into two major groups, namely ship-borne waste and waste originating from cargo.

On the one hand, ship-generated wastes result from the operation of the vessel

(these are mainly oily and greasy ship-generated wastes) and, on the other hand,

from the activities of crew members or passengers on board. Wastes originating

from cargo consist of residual charges, washing water and slops.

2.2.1 Ship-generated waste

Ship-generated wastes are originated from the operation of the vessel itself (oily

and greasy ship-generated wastes) and the activities of persons on board. As a

of 80

result, the amounts generated strongly depend on the condition of the vessel and/or

the number of persons on board.

2.2.1.1 Oily and greasy ship-generated waste

Bilge water is oil contaminated water from the bilge of vessels. It is generated by

cleaning procedures or leakages of the body shell and gets contaminated with oil,

gas oil or grease. The oil content of bilge water averages 14.3 % (push boats: 16.7

%), the fluctuation range varies from 5 % and 15 %. The amount of bilge water

generated is influenced by the age, construction, equipment and maintenance of the

vessels as well as the demanded engine activity, which itself depends on several

other factors such as; upstream or downstream way, cargo load, etc. (Phare, 2000).

A bilge primary tank is a tank, which makes use of a cascade to separate oil from

oily bilge water by gravity, with drainage facilities for the oil on the top to enable

primary separation of oily bilge water. Refer to the example of a bilge primary tank

shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Example of a bilge primary tank.

of 80

Waste oils are used oil or other unusable oil from engines, gear or hydraulics. They

are produced sporadically, especially at times of oil changes for engines and

aggregates. In Germany, the average amount of waste oils, collected by (mobile)

bilge water collection vessels together with bilge water, ranges between 100 and

125 litres per ship and service. If the whole amount of oil is changed, the amount

can be up to 500 litres in twin-engine vessels (Gabriel, 2001).

According to Gabriel (2001), other (solid) oily and greasy wastes are used filters

(used oil and air filters), used rags (polluted floor clothes and cleaning rags),

containers (empty, polluted bins) and packaging materials. In Germany, the

amount of other oily and greasy ship wastes collected average between 10 and 20

kg/ship service.

2.2.1.2 Other ship-generated waste

Within this sub-group, wastes originating from the activities of the persons on

board (domestic sewage, domestic refuse) as well as other hazardous wastes, which

cannot be disposed together with the other wastes because of their properties, are

subsumed.

According to Donau (2008), Domestic sewage and sewage sludge are wastes

originating from the living processes of the persons on board. Domestic sewage

consists of waste water from toilets, kitchens, bathrooms, washing machines, etc.

of 80

Sewage sludge is a residue generated by the operation of a purification plant on

board. According to Dorgeloh, Kaiser, Reitz, (2007), Cargo vessels, generated

amounts on board are much smaller due to the fact that there are only a few

persons on board. However, big quantities of domestic sewage and sewage sludge

are produced by passenger transport vessels. As regards originated amounts,

calculations have to be done separately for passenger liners/cruising boats and

cabin vessels due to differences in operation and equipment. For cabin vessels the

total amount of water can be estimated from 150–230 l/person/day.

2.2.2 Waste originating from cargo

Besides ship-generated waste, the cargo related wastes are wastes comprising the

second big sub-group of wastes generated by inland navigation (Donau, 2008).

These wastes are different from ship-generated waste as their characteristics

depend on the nature of transported cargoes. However, they can be either

hazardous or non-hazardous, which affects the procedure of disposal and

treatment.

2.2.2.1 Residual charges

Accordingly to (Phare, 2000), the residual charges are distinguished mainly by the

use of a drying system utilized for fulfilling certain standards of cleaning the

storage room/tank:

of 80

Residual charge: liquid cargo remaining in the tanks or in the piping after

unloading without using a drying system, and dry cargo remaining in the hold after

unloading without using brooms, power sweepers or extraction facilities.

Packaging materials and aids for storage are part of the cargo load.

Cargo residue: liquid cargo that cannot be removed from the tanks or the piping

by the drying system, and dry cargo which cannot be removed from the hold by

using power sweepers or brooms.

Handling residue: dry or liquid cargo that is spread on the vessel outside the

cargo hold (e.g. on the gang board) during the transhipment process.

2.2.2.2 Washing water, Ballast water and Rain water, Slops

According to the European Maritime Safety Agency (2007), washing water is

produced as a result of washing the clean-swept or vacuum cleaned cargo hold or

stripped cargo tank; the ballast water or rainwater of the cargo hold and the cargo

tank are counted to the category of washing water. Slops are a mixture of residual

charges and washing water, rust or sludge, which can be pumpable or not

pumpable.

2.2.2.3 Other shipload wastes

This term encompasses wastes derived directly from other shiploads. Wastes can

be thinners, paints, varnishes, aggressive chemicals or biological products that may

come from containers handled improperly or secured inadequately. Although these

of 80

wastes can be expected to have low periodical amounts, their handling is strongly

related to accidental pollution. Therefore, special attention has to be paid to proper

collection and treatment processes and conditions that are taken into account in

regulations on both national and supranational level. However, these regulations

can be seen as a basis for the development and implementation of port reception

facilities.

2.3 Production of oily waste by vessels

According to INTERPOL (2007), the volume of oily waste generated and/or stored

on board a vessel depends on various factors. These include, for example:

Type, age and size of vessel;

Type and age of equipment related to oil separation and storage;

Maintenance of vessel and equipment;

External factors such as availability of Port Reception Facilities;

The report further gave three categories of oily waste generally accumulated on

board large vessels. These are:

a. Oily bilge water, defined in MARPOL annex I as water, which may be

contaminated by oil resulting from things such as leakage or maintenance

work in machinery spaces. Any liquid entering the bilge system including

bilge wells, bilge piping, tank top or bilge holding tanks is considered oily

of 80

bilge water. In addition to oil, bilge water often contains quantities of

detergents and solvents.

b. Oil residue (sludge), defined in MARPOL annex I as the residual waste oil

products generated during the normal operation of a ship such as those

resulting from the purification of fuel or lubricating oil for main or auxiliary

machinery, separated waste oil from oil filtering equipment, waste oil

collected in drip trays, and waste hydraulic and lubricating oils.

c. Oil cargo (refined product or crude oil) residues on tankers.

The components of bilge water and quantities produced vary considerably from

vessel to vessel, but the waste generated is usually a thinner and lighter than sludge

waste. It is also comprised of more varied elements. Quantities of sludge waste by

comparison, are more consistent in composition and quantity, at about 1-2% of the

volume of fuel oil consumed on board. Sludge is much thicker and heavier than

bilge water, and more persistent. The properties of oil cargo residues will depend

on the type of cargo carried.

Vessels over 400 gt are also required to be fitted with oil filtering equipment that

may include any combination of a separator, filter or coalescer, and also a single

unit designed to produce an effluent with oil content not exceeding 15 ppm.

The International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) certificate and appendix will

contain information about the tanks and equipment on board that particular vessel

of 80

for the handling of oily waste. The vessel will also have piping and tank diagrams

for the various systems. The IOPP certificate, piping diagrams and Oil Record

Book should contain a tank plan. The ship’s Oil Record Book contains instructions

on the information, which must be recorded relating to oil transfers as well as the

mandatory log of oil, sludge and bilge water transfers.

2.4 Collection of oily waste

Trucks or mobile tanks can be used for small volumes, ranging from 5 – 25 m3 at a

time. They are therefore employed for collection of bilge water, slops, sludges and

small volumes of tank washings, but not for collecting dirty ballast. Trucks are

employed if they can come alongside the ship. They are obviously not suitable for

ships at anchor, loading/unloading jetties not accessible by truck.

Examples of a simple mobile tank used for collecting oily wastes from ships and a

vacuum truck equipped with pumps are shown below.

Figure 6: Example of a mobile tank and a vacuum truck.

of 80

2.4.1 Selecting a collection method

Selecting the appropriate means for collecting oily wastes in a port depends on the

following factors:

a. the volume of waste to be collected per ship;

b. accessibility of the ships by road/quayside or only over water;

c. the required flexibility of the collection facilities.

Table 1: Collection characteristics

Collection method Volumes/flow rates Access to ships Flexibility

Truck Small By road High

Barge Small – medium By water Medium

Costs are, in a way, of secondary importance: the collection means must in the first

place be appropriate for a particular port. As an example: a truck is obviously

much cheaper than a barge, but a truck is completely useless for collecting wastes

if it does not have access to the ship (ships at anchor, jetties). A barge is capable of

receiving larger volumes than a truck, but again that is irrelevant if only small

volumes are delivered in a port.

2.4.2 Ship-generated waste treatment

Waste can be treated in a variety of ways on board ships; methods of treatment,

notwithstanding the requirements of MARPOL 73/78, being dependent on the age

of 80

of the vessel, facilities on board and the owner’s environmental commitment.

Common methods of waste treatment are listed in table 2.

Table 2: Ship-generated waste treatment options

Compactors Reduces volume by compaction to allow for storage until waste can be discharged ashore

Comminuters Reduces food scraps to fine shreds that can then be washed out of machine and discharged to sea

Pulpers Reduces paper and cardboard to papier-mâché which can then be discharged to sea

Shredders Used to grind bone, metal, glass and plastic which can then be either stored or discharged to sea

Incinerators Used to burn garbage that cannot be recycled and falls under MARPOL Annex V, this excludes all hazardous wastes and most plastics. Bottom ash is then removed and either discharged at sea or stored for discharge ashore

Sewagetreatmentplants

A variety of plants are in use for treatment of both grey and black water. Modern plants include advanced water purification (AWP) systems and membrane bio-reactors

2.4.3 Normal disposal of waste

There are very few options for legal disposal of sludge and bilge water waste.

Sludge and bilge water waste are pumped to, and then contained in, various

holding tanks. The oily water that is collected in the bilge wells and transferred

into holding tanks can be transferred ashore via a fixed transfer system, provided

there is enough storage capacity on board. However, there is often a large amount

of water in the waste, and disposal ashore is often not considered cost efficient by

the vessel. If not transferred ashore, the bilge water waste should be processed by

of 80

the oil filtering equipment. Sludge should be either stored on the vessel for

eventual disposal ashore, or burnt in the incinerator in areas where this is

permitted.

Oil filtering equipment consists of any combination of separator, coalescer or other

equipment that separates oil and water, and is commonly referred to as an Oily

Water Separator (OWS). This equipment is required to be designed and tested to

separate oily water mixtures to a maximum limit of 15 parts oil to one million parts

water (15 ppm). The equipment may be fitted with an Oil Content Meter (OCM)

and automatic stopping device that prevents the discharge of any effluent above the

15-ppm limit, but this is only required on vessels over 10,000 gt. Such equipment

must be approved to international standards under MARPOL. The approval

standards are specified in IMO Resolutions.

2.4.4 Maintenance and training costs

Ship maintenance and repair is costly. Some operators might neglect to properly

maintain equipment such as pipes, pumps, and OWS, making the pollution

prevention system ineffective. Training crew in proper use of anti-pollution

equipment also involves costs.

of 80

2.4.5 Waste disposal costs

There are two possible costs associated with disposing of waste: 1) the direct cost

of using port reception facilities, and 2) a potential indirect cost if the ship has to

stay for a length of time in port to use Port Reception Facilities.

Calculating the costs of disposing of waste in Port Reception Facilities is

complicated given the vast range of vessel types, sizes, and ages, the length of

voyage, and the wide variety of charges in different ports. In addition, the costs per

gross tonne of waste delivered, and costs per type of waste, may vary considerably.

According to the European Union, Directive 2000/59 /EC regulate fees for waste

on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues. However,

the Directive leaves considerable scope for variation in the transposition to national

law. Ports should implement cost recovery systems, which promote the use of port

reception facilities whilst ensuring that ships contribute significantly towards the

costs (at least 30%). There is often an indirect fee for ship-generated waste

included in the port fee, although this very rarely covers the full costs. There are a

wide variety of systems in place: the indirect fee might only cover a contribution to

operation of reception facilities, with a direct fee payment for all waste delivered;

it might cover waste delivered up to certain limits, with additional payments for

waste in excess of the threshold; there may be a high deposit, with the option to

reclaim part of it if port reception facilities are not used, etc (Ramboll, 2012). For

of 80

incompliant vessels, there is still a considerable financial incentive not to deliver

ship-generated waste in port.

2.5 Ports and Port Reception Facilities

According to Ball (1999), reducing marine pollution will require cost-effective

ways for ships and shipping companies to unload their waste efficiently, so ships

are both willing and able to use the port facilities instead of discharging while at

port. There are many ports around the world that have a well-established

infrastructure and procedure for disposing of ship generated waste. Studying these

ports and their inner workings may lead to a solution to the proportionally large

volume of waste that cannot be processed in certain ports. The different varieties of

equipment used for unloading waste vary with scale and the particular type of

waste being removed. In terms of scale, larger facilities tend to have mobile

features like road tankers, barges, and similar land based vehicles to go to where

the ship is docked, and often to transport the waste to a storage facility (Ball,

1999).

2.5.1 Adequacy within a Port.

For a port to fit the IMO’s definition of adequacy, there are some requirements a

port must follow. Advanced planning by both the harbor and the crewmember

of 80

responsible for waste management is a key to the success of a well-run port waste

facility (IMO, 2002).

It is the job of the crewmember is to communicate with the port’s waste

management personnel to express the ship’s specific needs for waste removal once

in port. The information transferred should be types of waste, i.e. Annex I-VI, and

the quantity to be removed. Paperwork filled out and sent to the port includes a

Standardized Advanced Notification Form, which defines the waste reception

needs of the ship in a manner defined by the IMO.

Overall, Ball (1999, p. 38) lists five major considerations for collection facility

adequacy:

1. Ports should cater to all types of waste landed at a port;

2. Reception facilities should be conveniently located;

3. Facilities should be easy to use;

4. Facilities’ use should provide a cost incentive;

5. Periodic inspections should be made to ensure adequacy.

Once the waste is brought to the port, there are a number of requirements for an

adequate port reception facility. The reception facility must be able to

accommodate Annex V, or garbage removal, in its segregated form, which means

that the port should have a way to dispose/recycle each of the six types of garbage

of 80

defined by the IMO. In discharging petroleum-based products, or Annex I wastes,

the port should have the fitting for the standard connection arrangement to the

waste system of the ship, as well as storage and processing equipment for oily

wastes. Ports used for depositing other annexes must have facilities for those kinds

of wastes, though Annexes I and V are the most common. In addition to catering to

the type and volume of wastes brought to these facilities, ports should also make an

effort to ensure that the reception facilities are convenient and provide cost

incentives for their use. Inexpensive or mandatory payment and minimizing delays

can act as these incentives. Periodic inspections should also occur to maintain

compliance with MARPOL. While an adequate facility is defined by the IMO, it is

the job of individual countries to enforce requirements related to adequacy (IMO,

1999).

David Condino (personal communication, October 1, 2010) notes that the volume

of this waste is also important. A port that occasionally hosts cruise ships but can

only provide accommodation for a portion of their waste is not adequate (IMO,

2002).

As ships operate on tight schedules, a facility also must not to cause undue delay in

the removal of these wastes. A modern and efficient set of waste reception

equipment will go unused if it is in a remote part of the port or is not operational

of 80

for the same hours as is the remainder of the port. Another major requirement is

that ships must give advanced notice of their waste disposal needs. This allows the

ports time to prepare, though it is hard for smaller ports to monitor for this

advanced notice on a 24-hour schedule.

According to information on (MEPC.83 (44)), Action on pollution from ships and

management of waste generated on board ships are governed by international rules

in MARPOL 73/78. The regulations concerning sludge and waste are the

following:

a. Sufficient reception facilities: All ports should be provided with sufficient

reception facilities for oily residues such as dirty ballast, tank-washing water

etc., and solid waste. Furthermore, the facilities must have enough capacity,

not causing ships any undue delay. If the reception facilities are inadequate,

the ship should also notify the port in 24 hours before arrival.

b. Placards of disposal requirements: Every ship of 12 meters or more in

length shall display placards notifying passengers and crew of the disposal

requirements. Furthermore, the placards should be in the official language of

the ship's flag State and in English, French, or Spanish for ships travelling to

other States' ports or offshore terminals.

c. Prohibition of waste disposal at sea: Disposal of waste into the sea is

illegal. This regardless if it’s mixed or sorted. An exception is separated

of 80

food waste, which is allowed if it´s disposed more than 12 nautical miles

outside the coast.

d. Standard discharge connection: All ships must have a standard discharge

connection for the disposal of oily water. This in order to enable pipes of the

oil reception facilities in the ports to be connected with the ship´s discharge

pipeline.

e. Waste management plans and record of waste: All ships of 400 gross

tonnages and above and every ship certified to carry 15 people or more must

have established a waste management plan. This includes written procedures

for collecting, storing, processing, and disposal of waste, including the use

of equipment on board. The waste management plan should also point out

the person responsible for carrying out the plan and should be in the

language spoken by the crew. In addition, these ships must provide a waste

record book, to record all disposal and incineration operations. In addition,

an oil record book should be available for inspection and should be

documented for at least three years.

f. Inspection of ships and the right to retain ships: When clear ground

occurs for believing that the captain or crew are not familiar with essential

shipboard procedures relating to the prevention of pollution of oil or waste,

the ship is subject to inspection. If the set requirements have not been

of 80

followed, the ship is not allowed to leave port until the requirements are met.

If traces of oil are observed in the vicinity of a ship, the government is

responsible to investigate whether there has been a violation of any

regulation.

2.6 Successful waste and pollution management strategies

A port that has a successful waste management policy and practice is able to

process all kinds of waste that a ship may bring in as long as due notice is given to

the port. However, not all ports do actually provide reception facilities for the

kinds of waste they receive.

Carpenter and McGill (2003) completed a study about portside reception facilities

in ports in the North Sea. The results of the 66-port survey were that most ports

offered some reception facilities. For Annex I, or oil based waste, 47 ports offered

facilities for lubricating oil, 42 covered oil sludge, 43 covered oily bilge water, 28

covered dirty ballast water, and 34 offered oily tank washing facilities. This study

indicates that over half of the ports surveyed offer some facilities for disposing of

petroleum-based waste, often with provisions for multiple kinds of waste handling.

For Annex II, noxious liquids, only 27 out of 66 ports could receive chemical

waste, while 38 could not support any chemical tanker reception. Fewer than half

of the ports provided facilities for Annex V for all varieties of trash, but only one

of 80

supplied facilities for only one type of trash. Overall, these data indicate that there

are many ports that do not accommodate all types of waste, but there are

surrounding ports that may offer the remainder of the facilities needed. This model

of having specific facilities unavailable at a certain port but available at a nearby

port allows for functionality in the North Sea without excessive infrastructure. In

some cases, this may also require waste disposal at ports where ships did not

originally intend on visiting. In the Caribbean, there are several initiatives that

focus on cleanup and public awareness (UNEP, 2009). Many states participate in

the International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) program, which collects data about marine

litter and coordinates local communities in waste cleanup. Awareness for solid

waste management and litter prevention take place in many separate initiatives.

Since much of the waste analyzed on coastlines comes from individuals, public

awareness of clean programs and practices is seen as very important (Steven et al,

2010).

2.7 Current and Ongoing Initiatives Regarding Waste Handling on Ships and

in Ports.

2.7.1 Standardization of Waste Handling on Ships and in Ports.

According to the IMO´s Action Plan on tackling the inadequacy of port reception

facilities (2010), as the waste fractions and waste containers vary between ports a

need for an establishment of a standardized methodology exists. This would

of 80

facilitate harmonization of the various requirements and the waste disposal in

ports. Today there are no implemented standards available regarding colour coding

and labelling of generated waste fractions but shipping companies use their own

developed standards. Today the International Organization for Standardization

(ISO) is however developing two standards related to the subject, ISO 16 304 and

ISO 21 070. ISO 16 304 concerns arrangements, management and operation of

port waste reception facilities and has an expected completion date of late February

2014. ISO 21 070 which concerns management and handling of shipboard waste

including a standard for reception bins and containers to be used at ports, labelling

and colour coding of the generated waste fractions. The standard is expected to be

completed in December 2011.

2.7.2 Tackling the Inadequacy of Port Reception

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has in 2010 completed a three-

year’s work on an action plan in order to tackle the inadequacy of port reception

facilities regarding waste handling and capacity. The action plan contained work

items grouped in the following six categories (IMO, 2010).

a. Reporting: This concerned the development of a “Standard Advance

Notification Form” of waste to be disposed of by the ships and a “Waste

Delivery Notification Form” which now have been adopted. This was done

of 80

in order to decrease the risk of causing undue delay of ships in ports and to

provide uniformity of records throughout the world.

b. Equipment Technology: This involved a survey of whether any technical

obstacles existed which would complicate the waste disposal in ports. In the

study, no such technical challenges could be identified. The work item also

involved the standard, ISO 21 070 where IMO has been involved in the

work by reviewing and commenting the standard which is under

development.

c. Types and Amount of Waste: This work item concerned a review, of type

and amounts of waste generated on ships and of the type and capacity of port

reception facilities. By this, information on what kind of waste and the

amounts generated on ships and delivered to ports was obtained. The

information has been used as input to ISO developing the standards

mentioned.

d. Information on Port Reception Facilities: This concerned increasing

information on port receptions facilities and to make the information more

accessible. This included for example assessment of port receptions facilities

carried out and the outcome of it such as inadequacies and any technical co-

operation assistance that may be needed. It also involved making waste

of 80

management plans and detailed information of the port authority more easy

to access.

e. Regulatory Matters: This item concerned the “IMO´s manual on port

reception facilities” in which areas needed to be updated were identified due

to new legislations. The actual revision of the manual has not been initiated

yet. It also involved the development of a Guide to “Good Practice on Port

Reception Facilities” in which practical advices are found.

f. Technical Cooperation and Assistance: This concerned the development

of a programme to assist for example development countries in developing

port reception facilities.

2.7.3 Port Reception Practices.

According to IMO publication (MEPC.83 (44)) “Guidelines for the

Implementation of Annex V of MARPOL.” the following practices are obtainable:

a) Although legal requirements for PRFs will vary depending on the port

State’s implementing legislation, good practices for PRFs should include

procedures that facilitate better integration with shipboard and landside

residue/waste management practices. Such integration and cooperation with

inland waste disposal operations should allow ultimate disposal of ship

generated waste to take place in an environmentally appropriate manner.

of 80

b) The reception facility should be adequately prepared to receive Annex V

residues/wastes as segregated on board and should supply suitable

receptacles to facilitate the landing of segregated waste for recycling.

Procedures for reception of segregated residue/waste should parallel the

standards for the Management and Handling of Shipboard Garbage as

specified in ISO 21070, when it is issued. PRF operators and port authorities

within State Parties should work with national and local government

officials, regional administrators, commercial interests, and local waste

disposal infrastructure managers to develop landside waste disposal

strategies, including waste segregation, that encourage reduction, reuse, and

recycling of ship generated wastes landed ashore at PRFs. Reception facility

providers should seek out resale/recycling options for reusable/recyclable

waste when not prohibited by local laws.

c) In the case of oil, noxious liquid substances and other dangerous goods or

harmful or hazardous substances, port and reception facility operators should

adhere to the guidance provided in relevant publications such as the

International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers and Terminals (ISGOTT), or the

International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code.

d) The reception facility should also be adequately prepared to receive

MARPOL residues/wastes in accordance with any local quarantine

of 80

requirements, for example by providing suitably sealed receptacles and

ensuring that MARPOL residues/wastes can be transported and disposed of

in accordance with regulations. Port State authorities should also be aware of

the need for appropriate treatment and disposal sites and should seek to

ensure that these are available through public or private arrangements.

e) The necessary connection arrangements for the discharge of machinery bilge

residues and sludge residues are provided for in regulation 13 of Annex I to

MARPOL. These standard dimensions for flanges and discharge connections

will apply to all ships and should therefore allow the reception facility to

standardize its own connection pipes accordingly.

f) Following delivery, the reception facility should provide the master with a

Waste Delivery Receipt. IMO has standardized the format of this document

to facilitate its use and application.

g) Although the port structure in a State Party may or may not accommodate

cost/pricing schemes and/or other incentives for MARPOL residue/waste

delivery ashore, reception facility services should be provided at a

reasonable cost.

of 80

2.7.4 Trends in ship-generated waste delivery

The entry into force of the PRF Directive in 2002 increased the attention from

authorities, and the awareness within shipping organizations, of the problem with

illegal discharges of ships’ waste as well as the need to identify measures to reduce

discharges. Despite this, some ships continue to discharge waste illegally at sea.

On a global level it is assumed that only about 27 per cent of all ship waste is

delivered to reception facilities, while the majority is dumped or incinerated

(Sheavly and Register, 2007).

At the Tin Can Island Port Complex, the Environmental Department of Nigerian

Ports Authority (NPA) keeps a record of volumes of ship-generated waste

delivered in the Tin Can Island port. This overview of waste volumes provides

quays with a basis for sizing reception facilities. In 2011, for instance, 6229 tonnes

of waste was delivered; of which 267.9 tonnes were garbage while 5961.1 tonnes

were oil waste

2.7.5 Minimization and Management of Ship-generated Residue/Waste

Although not a direct requirement of MARPOL, minimizing the residue/waste

generated on board ships represents an environmental best practice, and should be

considered in a ship’s overall waste management practices. In relation to the

minimization of oily waste, an increased familiarity with the ship’s engine room

of 80

treatment systems coupled with the crew’s training in oily waste management and

recording will assist in reducing the amount of waste produced and improve the

overall onboard management of oily waste. The use of the Integrated Bilge Water

Treatment System (IBTS) will facilitate segregation of oily waste, allowing for the

storage of oil sludge, oil-water mixtures, and clean water separately.

According to IMO publication (MEPC.83 (44)) “Guidelines for the

Implementation of Annex V of MARPOL.” The most effective way of reducing

ship-generated residue/waste is to reduce materials that become waste at the

source. Efforts should be made to minimize packaging from ship stores, for

example, by establishing an agreement with the supplier to accept the return of the

packaging upon delivery, or to reduce the amount of packaging. Developing an

agreement with suppliers and manufacturers is not only important for more general

waste categories such as plastics, but essential for other maritime specific wastes

such as time expired pyrotechnics; used ropes, tails and wires; time expired

medicine; and batteries. The supplier and/or manufacturer should be able to

provide the specialist facilities for treatment or disposal of these products and

materials. On board waste management will also assist in minimizing ship-

generated waste. Ship operators and ship builders should consider further the

design of new ships to enhance waste treatment on board and consider introducing

operational measures, which can improve efficiency for existing ships.

of 80

2.7.6 The total volume and sizing of TCIP Complex reception facilities

The reception facilities, which currently serves the port holds incinerators; that are

equipped with scrubbers to minimize air pollution. A drum crushing machine with

a special cleaning system is also in place to treat hazardous waste, along with a

fixed 1,000 tonne capacity tank farm been designed to safely hold hazardous waste

while awaiting processing. In addition, four specially adapted garbage trucks on

ground of 25mt capacity each, also as part of the recent improvement on the

containment of Ship-Generated Waste at Tin Can Island Port is the purchase of

about four mobile trucks to carter for oily waste. Below is some of the various type

of reception facility in the port.The table below depicts information gathered from

the Nigerian Ports Authority on the types and capacities of reception equipment’s

currently available.

Table 3: Type and capacity of reception equipment.

S/n Type of SGW Handled Equipment Containment Type Capacity

1.Oily Waste (MARPOL Annex I) Trucks (x4) Mobile 33 tons

20 feet ISO Tank (1)

Mobile 25 tons

Small size vessel (x2)

Mobile 120m3 (Pump rate 25m3)

Large size vessel (x2)

Mobile 240m3 (Pump rate 25m3)

G-Force MK III Oily water treatment and processing plant.

Fixed 150 tons per hour5m3 per hour(expected to be upgraded to 15m3)

2. Garbage (MARPOL V) Small size vessel (x2)

Mobile 12 tons

Large size vessel (x2)

Mobile 12 tons

of 80

Figure 7: Reception Facilities catering for SGW in TCIP.

of 80

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 A BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE CHAPTER

In this chapter, the researcher presents how data is gotten from his sampling

population. He designs and describes the procedures and methods used in his

research work. He also describes the models (Auto Regression Moving Average;

ARMA, forecasting model.) which he applies as the methodology for various

statistical analysis and forecasting of the ship generated wastes in TCIP reception

facility. The researcher also uses NCSS software (www.ncss.com) in testing the

hypothesis stated.

3.2 RESTATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS

iv. What is the traffic of ship calls to Tin Can Island Ports within the

research period?

v. What is the trend distribution of the volume of ship-generated waste (by


vi. What will be the estimated growth of ship-generated wastes that would

be handled in Tin Can Island port by 2016?

of 80

3.3 RESTATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

i. HO: The future volumetric amount of Garbage waste forecasted is

significantly different from the upper limit of mean estimated values (at

95% confidence level).

ii. HO: The future volumetric amount of Oil wastes forecasted is significantly

different from the upper limit of mean estimated values (at 95% confidence

level).

3.4 RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design is the program that guides the researcher in the process of

collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data and information (Osuagwu, 2008).

Research design also defines the domain of generalizability; that is, whether the

obtained research interpretation can be generalized to a larger population or to

different situations. The question of whom to study, what to observe, when to

observe, and how to collect data are treated by research design (Osuagwu, 2008).

3.5 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY POPULATION

A study of this nature presents a number of data collections in the port vicinity.

The researcher’s sample frame for this research work is therefore based on the

Nigerian Ports Authority statistical data, from their annual report.

of 80

3.6 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT

In carrying out this research work, only the secondary data was used. This data was

gotten from the Nigerian Ports Authority Annual Statistical Abstracts Reports.

3.7 PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING/ANALYSING COLLECTED DATA

ARMA (Auto Regression Moving Average), known as one of time series analysis

that makes use of NCSS software (www.ncss.com) will be used to analyze and test

the validity of the research questions and the hypothesis stated. This will be based

on the available data gotten from the research study.

The ARIMA (or Box-Jenkins) method is often used to forecast time series of

medium (N over 50) to long lengths. It requires the forecaster to be highly trained

in selecting the appropriate model. The procedure discussed here automates the

ARIMA forecasting process by having the program select the appropriate model.

3.8 Auto Regressive Moving Average (ARMA) models

Autoregressive Moving-Average (ARMA) models form a class of linear time

series models which are widely applicable and parsimonious in parameterization.

By allowing the order of an ARMA model to increase, one can approximate any

linear time series model with desirable accuracy. [This is similar to using rational

polynomials to approximate a general polynomial; see the impluse response

of 80

function]. In what follows, we assume that {at} is a sequence of independent and

identically distributed random variables with mean zero and finite variance σ2.

ARMA models were popularized by a 1971 book by George E. P. Box and

Jenkins, who expounded an iterative (Box–Jenkins) method for choosing and

estimating them. This method was useful for low-order polynomials (of degree

three or less).

Forecasting is an important aspect of statistical analysis that provides guidance for

decisions in all areas of business. It is important to be able to make sound forecasts

for variables such as sales, production, inventory, interest rates, exchange rates,

real and financial asset prices for both short and long term business planning. In

essence, the success of any business or government organization depends on the

ability to accurately forecast its revenue and expenditure. Auto-regressive moving

average (ARMA) models provide a unifying framework for forecasting. These

models are aided by the abundance of high quality data and easy estimation and

evaluation by statistical packages.

of 80

3.8.1 Model Identification.

The notation ARMA (p, q) refers to the model with p autoregressive terms

and q moving-average terms. This model contains the AR (p) and MA (q) models,

The general ARMA model was described in the 1951 thesis of Peter Whittle, who

used mathematical analysis (Laurent series and Fourier analysis) and statistical

inference.

of 80

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents and analyzes the trends of the ship-generated waste streams

in the Tin Can Island Port from 2008 to 2012 using the Auto Regression Moving

Average (ARMA), known as one of the time series analysis model (Box et al.,

2009), which can also be used as a tool of NCSS software (www.ncss.com) for

various statistical analysis and forecast. In completing the objectives and analyzing

the hypotheses, the researcher obtained the available or current data on ship-

generated wastes from the Tin Can Island Port, Environment Department of the

Nigerian Port Authority. (See table 4.1). This gave insight into the total burden of

ship-generated waste on the Tin Can Island port, and description of results and

conclusions below.

of 80

http://www.ncss.com/

4.2 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ACCORDING TO

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

i. What is the traffic of ship calls to Tin Can Island Ports within the

research period?

Table 4.2a: Number of ships that call to TCIP between 2008 to 2012.

Nos. of Ships that call TCIP

Collated by the researcher.

Line Plot of Ship calls to TCIP between 2008 to 2012

Year

Ship_calls

2008 2009 2010 2011 20121250

1300

1350

1400

1450

1500

1550

Fig4.2a: Trend of ships called to TCIP.

of 80

Figure 4.2a above depicts available data gathered from the Nigerian Ports

Authority of ships that called at Tin Can Island port Complex. The numbers

represent how many ships visited the port during 2008 to 2012. The number of

ship calls at the port of Tin Can Island has increased steadily at a rate of four per

cent (4%) per annual between 2008 and 2011, from 1271 in 2008 to 1517 in 2011

and followed by a sudden decrease until 2012, but there seems to be no logical

explanation for this. No explanations were provided from the ports regarding this

decrease.

It is expected that this growth rate will increase to at least 5% per annual over the

next ten years with an estimated 2471 ship calls in 2021. Not only has the number

of ships arriving at the port will increase but also Gross Registered Tonnage (GRT)

and the ship generated waste; because of the future demand and throughputs to the

port. Increased ships calls have resulted in significant quantities of ship-generated

wastes, as depicts in figure 4.2b.

of 80

ii. What is the trend distribution of the volume of ship-generated waste (by


Table 4b : The amount of wastes from Transit ships into TCIP port Reception Facilities from 2008 to 2012

The Annex of MAROL 73/78

Annual Amount of Waste (m3)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Annex I 4907 8447 7013 5961 5416

Annex V 181 235 237 268 233

Total amount of SGW (m3) 5088 8682 7250 6229 5649

Collated by the researcher.

Annex 1: Includes Regulations for the prevention of pollution of oil composed of Bilge water, Sludge, Slop, Waste oil and Ballast.Annex V: Includes prevention of pollution by garbage from ship.Total amount of waste = Amount of waste in Annex 1 + Amount of waste in Annex V.

Plot of the Volume of Garbage by the Volume of Oily Waste (m3)

Quantity of SGW Handled in TCIP (m3)

2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

1500

3000

4500

6000

7500

9000

Variable

The Volume of Garbage (m3)

The_Volume_of_Oil_Waste__m3_

Fig 4.2b: Trend of SGW handled in TCIP.

of 80

From the line graph above using NCSS software, an estimated 267.9m3 and 5961.1

m3 of oily wastes and garbage, respectively in 2011. Its curve shows a

continuous decrease of the oily ship generated waste streams during the

research period and this is usually linked with the fact that most at times

vessels’ calling to the TCIP would have discharged their waste at the last port

of call before the arrival to port.

While the type and characteristics of ship-generated waste determine in

principle which treatment method should be applied, the type and volume of

wastes expected to receive at the port determine the capacity of the reception

port.

4.3 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ACCORDING TO

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES.

4.3.1 TESTING OF NULL HYPOTHESIS ONE

i. HO: The future volumetric amount of Garbage waste forecasted is

significantly different from the upper limit of mean estimated values (at 95%

confidence level).

See Table 4c (ARMA report)

of 80

ARMA Report

Table 4c

Variable The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_MEAN

Minimization Phase Section

Itn Error SumNo. of Squares Lambda AR() AR() MA()0 3990.042 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 3931.503 0.1 0.01864761 0.04439292 -0.0052266682 3916.96 0.04 -0.03168761 0.02469798 -0.074323043 3918.43 0.016 0.01298899 0.0264683 -0.042851554 3915.497 0.16 -0.02160044 0.02737203 -0.076563865 3914.805 0.064 -0.01098085 0.03018161 -0.076364736 3914.135 0.0256 -0.005805737 0.03256413 -0.079743527 3911.473 0.01024 -0.02309641 0.03718297 -0.10393688 3892.793 0.004096 -0.1465404 0.0584964 -0.23317719 3553.128 0.0016384 -0.7932692 0.163102 -0.899677310 3314.231 0.00065536 -0.5298781 0.4351583 -0.90579411 2781.353 0.000262144 -0.3732815 0.5615191 -0.737791912 2549.304 0.0001048576 -0.324084 0.666812 -0.799022913 2562.821 4.194304E-05 -0.2809509 0.7012964 -0.732864714 2562.337 0.0004194304 -0.2819397 0.7003653 -0.732915615 2558.826 0.004194304 -0.2896735 0.6930952 -0.733415816 2550.286 0.04194304 -0.3106427 0.6737906 -0.737907917 2540.392 0.4194304 -0.3212744 0.6667232 -0.762096818 2542.755 0.1677722 -0.3185159 0.6710801 -0.781855319 2540.073 1.677722 -0.321032 0.6672807 -0.768828720 2540.406 0.6710886 -0.3202503 0.6684154 -0.7718669

Model Description Section

Series The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_-MEANModel Regular (2,0,1) Seasonal(No seasonal parameters)Mean 230.8Observations 5Iterations 20Pseudo R-Squared 35.281474Residual Sum of Squares 2540.073Mean Square Error 1270.036Root Mean Square 35.63757

Model Estimation Section

Parameter Parameter Standard ProbName Estimate Error T-Value LevelAR() -0.321032 0.4245536 -0.7562 0.449551AR() 0.6672807 0.3982887 1.6754 0.093862MA() -0.7688287 0.6026672 -1.2757 0.202058

of 80

ARMA Report

Variable The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_-MEAN

Asymptotic Correlation Matrix of Parameters

AR() AR() MA()AR() 1.000000 0.969776 0.142336AR() 0.969776 1.000000 -0.008001MA() 0.142336 -0.008001 1.000000

Forecast Section of The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_

Row Date Forecast Lower 95% Limit Upper 95% Limit6 2013 257.1 180.5 333.67 2014 223.8 139.0 308.78 2015 250.6 165.3 335.99 2016 219.8 131.8 307.8

Forecast and Data Plot

Plot of The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_-MEAN

Time

The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_-MEAN

2008 2010 2012 2014 2016120

175

230

285

340

Fig 4.3a: Trend and forecast of the volumetric of garbage waste handled in TCIP. Current data range from January 2008 (2008, 1) to December 2012 (2012, 12). Estimated data range from January 2013 (2013, 1) to December 2016 (2016, 12).

Auto correlations of Residuals of The_Volume_of_Garbage__m3_-MEAN

Lag Correlation Lag Correlation Lag Correlation Lag Correlation1 0.043206 2 -0.555033Significant if |Correlation|> 0.894427

of 80

In this section, time series analysis was performed for the total amount of garbage

waste over the research period (2008-2012) for Tin Can Island Ports Complex,

Lagos. The volumetric amount of garbage wastes was estimated for the four year

time period. The volumetric amount of garbage obtained from transit ships for

current and forecasting data were given in Figure 4.3a. According, to the results

from the forecast, the amount of garbage will decrease with time. The lowest and

the highest amount of mean are estimated 216m3 on December 2016, and 257m3 on

December 2013, respectively. It seems that the current data remains between the

upper and lower limit value of the estimated data, then the researcher, rejects the

null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis and conclude that the future

volumetric amount of garbage wastes forecast is significantly not different from

the upper limit of mean estimated values.

Hence, the current holding capacities for garbage wastes are adequate and capable

of receiving Annex V waste (according to MARPOL73/78 regulation) wastes from

ships and fit for that purpose of a reception facility at the Tin Can Island Port,

Complex, Lagos.

of 80

4.3.2 TESTING OF NULL HYPOTHESIS TWO

ii. HO: The future volumetric amount of Oil wastes forecasted is significantly

different from the upper limit of mean estimated values (at 95% confidence

level).

See Table 4d (ARMA report)

ARMA ReportTable 4d

Variable The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEAN

Minimization Phase Section

Itn Error SumNo. of Squares Lambda AR() AR() MA()0 8450880 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 6465786 0.1 -0.2068851 -0.1865299 0.143632 5038780 0.04 0.1859482 -0.2193239 0.68259563 4203472 0.016 0.1904593 -0.3960263 0.7178074 3538732 0.0064 0.2165655 -0.5452968 0.75933255 3098745 0.00256 0.2385589 -0.6609864 0.79799526 2997828 0.001024 0.2572963 -0.7095055 0.82991637 2981863 0.0004096 0.2814283 -0.7163215 0.83870598 2936624 0.00016384 0.3199534 -0.7245604 0.8526939 2817155 6.5536E-05 0.3770471 -0.7489824 0.877439110 2567852 2.62144E-05 0.4425914 -0.8061014 0.917649911 2192915 1.048576E-05 0.483293 -0.8914704 0.958480412 1923416 4.194304E-06 0.5073465 -0.9486058 1.04859513 1790911 1.677722E-06 0.513132 -0.9695227 1.15614314 5.087004E+08 6.710886E-07 0.5110338 -0.9741156 1.40991515 5.081842E+08 6.710886E-06 0.5110346 -0.9741161 1.40988516 5.030604E+08 6.710886E-05 0.5110425 -0.9741222 1.40958617 4.55358E+08 0.0006710886 0.5111084 -0.9741537 1.40666318 1.872909E+08 0.006710886 0.5114248 -0.9738294 1.38133119 3582636 0.06710886 0.5123972 -0.9714747 1.2709420 1758656 0.6710886 0.5131242 -0.9695802 1.181032

of 80

Model Description Section

Series The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEANModel Regular (2,0,1) Seasonal(No seasonal parameters)Mean 6348.8Observations 5Iterations 20Pseudo R-Squared 77.858759Residual Sum of Squares 1758656Mean Square Error 879328Root Mean Square 937.7249

Model Estimation Section

Parameter Parameter Standard ProbName Estimate Error T-Value LevelAR() 0.5131242 0.0501308 10.2357 0.000000AR() -0.9695802 0.1146326 -8.4582 0.000000MA() 1.181032 0.5890707 2.0049 0.044973

ARIMA Report

Variable The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEAN

Asymptotic Correlation Matrix of Parameters

AR() AR() MA()AR() 1.000000 -0.943301 -0.278950AR() -0.943301 1.000000 -0.052054MA() -0.278950 -0.052054 1.000000

Forecast Section of The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_

Row Date Forecast Lower 95% Limit Upper 95% Limit6 2013 10805.3 8595.1 13015.57 2014 9540.0 6268.6 12811.48 2015 3665.3 393.6 6937.19 2016 1877.8 -2129.7 5885.2

of 80

Forecast and Data Plot

Plot of The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEAN

Time

The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEAN

2008 2010 2012 2014 2016-4000

-1000

2000

5000

8000

11000

14000

Fig 4.3b: Trend and forecast of the volumetric of oily waste handled in TCIP. Current data range from January 2008 (2008, 1) to December 2012 (2012, 12). Estimated data range from January 2013 (2013, 1) to December 2016 (2016, 12).

Autocorrelations of Residuals of The_Volume_of_Oily_Waste__m3_-MEAN

Lag Correlation Lag Correlation Lag Correlation Lag Correlation1 0.163252 2 -0.095222Significant if |Correlation|> 0.894427

Also, in this section, the researcher made used of the time series analysis. The

volumetric amount of oily wastes was estimated for the four year time period. The

volumetric amount of oily waste (which includes the summed total of bilge water,

slop, sludge, ballast water etc.) obtained from transit ships for current and

forecasting data were given in Figure 4.3b. According, to the results from the

forecast, the amount of oily waste will decrease with time. Although a sudden

upshot was observed in December, 2013 with a forecast of 10805.5m3. The lowest

and the highest amount of mean are estimated 1877.8m3 on December 2016, and

10805.5m3 on December 2013, respectively. It seems that the current data remains

same between the upper and lower limit value of the estimated data, then the

of 80

researcher, rejects the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis and

conclude that the future volumetric amount of oil wastes forecasted is not

significantly different from the upper limit of mean estimated values.Hence, the

current holding capacities for oily wastes are adequate and capable of receiving

Annex I wastes (according to MARPOL73/78 regulation) from ships and fit for

that purpose of a reception facility at the Tin Can Island Port, Complex, Lagos.

of 80

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 SUMMARY

Ship-generated wastes in Tin Can Island Port, acceptance has been done in

accordance with MARPOL 73/78 Regulations (although, mainly Annex I and

Annex V). Available data about number of ships and volumes of wastes from

transit ships are continual kept in a database, and provided via the NPA Annual

Statistics Reports. According to results obtained from the available data, total

volume of oily waste collected from ships increased from 2008 to 2009 but there

was a sudden decreased between 2010 and 2012. According to estimations figured

out by NCSS software; the collected amount of oily waste and garbage will

decrease based on the estimated data of January 2013 to December 2016. The

volumetric amount of wastes was estimated for the four-year time period.

The results of this study might be a use for some public and private organizations

conducting new Port planning studies. Although the results of this study indicated

that the model can be suitable to determine waste quantities at Tin Can Island Port

for the next four-year period, a more comprehensive work is recommended to

predict the future values of these parameters for extended time ranges.

of 80

5.2 RECOMMENDATION

Since ship-generated waste is the major source of marine litter worldwide, the

provision and improvement of adequate port reception facilities and services, along

with close cooperation between the West and Central Africa Members, will

contribute to reducing the generation of ship-generated waste and eventually to

protecting the coastal and marine environment in the West and Central Africa

region. In this regard, the West and Central Africa Members should enforce their

legislation and practices on the port reception facilities and services in compliance

with relevant international conventions such as MARPOL convention.

In the near future, the Tin Can Island Port need to (1) report their current status on

port reception facilities on a regular basis through the GISIS system which has

been developed by IMO (http://gisis.imo.org/Public/); (2) manage port reception

facilities to maintain the relevant equipments; (3) share and exchange relevant data

and information on port reception facilities among the West and Central Africa

members; and (4) educate port reception facility users, related companies and

organizations in order to facilitate the use of port reception facilities.

The Nigerian Ports Authority should co-operate with one another involving port

authorities, ship operators, port agents and waste collection service providers, in

order to improve port reception facilities and services for ship-generated waste in

the West and Central Africa. However, Nigerian Ports Authority must play an

of 80

http://gisis.imo.org/Public/

important function. The need to have data on the waste quantities received by ports

means that Port Authorities must gather information dealing with ships and agents

on one side and operators on the other side. At the same time, Nigerian Ports

Authority has to collect this information and to report reliable statistics to the West

and Central Africa. A listing of authorized Port Reception Facilities should be

published and diffuse besides detailed and clear transposing measures and clear

guidelines. Nigerian Ports Authority should also increase both the surveillance and

inspections on ports and organize official meetings with the stakeholders (ships,

shipping agents, waste operators and environmental authorities) concerning the

implementation of the Directives and the control of the marine pollution. Pollution

prevention requires the effort of all the States and should be discussed at IMO and

other worldwide forum in order to avoid the absence of most of the main oil

producers as the main international agreements (e.g. MARPOL) signing members

(see list of MARPOL Members’ State in the appendix page).

of 80

5.3 CONCLUSION

From the investigation on the ship generated waste in Tin Can Island Port, it was

discovered that the port is adequate and may not at the moment needs expansion.

As the estimated data from the forecast reveals that there is no significant increase

of port reception facilities as the current holding capacities are adequate to contain

the future demand of ship-generated wastes. From the analyses of the research

questions and hypotheses, the researcher will conclude with the following

strategies to aid the Nigerian government;

Polluter pays principle: This means that the polluter pays principle should

be applied.

Mandatory discharge of waste in ports: Before leaving port, ships should

discharge all ship generated wastes to a port reception facility available.

Examples of exceptions from mandatory discharges are in case of

inadequate reception facilities and if the ship only carries minor amounts or

quantity of wastes, that is insignificant.

Prevention of pollution from ships: Uniform requirements for the

provision of reception facilities for ship generated wastes should be applied.

of 80

Prohibition of incineration of waste on board: Incineration of ship

generated wastes on board ships while at the port should be strictly

prohibited.

Notification to port of a ship´s waste delivery: Ship should be given notice

to the port of its need to leave waste 24 hours prior to arrival (see appendix

for sample). If the voyage is less than 24 hours, the port must be notified

before leaving the previous port.

Obligation to leave waste in ports: It should be mandatory for ships to

deliver waste in ports, otherwise however agreed upon some exemptions

under the conditions that it is possible to keep the waste on board until the

next port.

of 80

REFERENCES

AUDIGE, M., (1995). Maritime Transport Serving West and Central Africa:

Trends and Issues. Sub-Saharan Africa Transport Policy Programme

Working Paper No.16 (1995). The World Bank and Economic Commission

for Africa.

Avril Siung-Chang. (1997). A review of marine pollution issues in the Caribbean.

Environmental Chemistry and Health, 19, 45-55.

Ball, I. (1999). Port waste reception facilities in UK ports. Marine Policy, 23(4-5),

307-327.

Butt, N. (2007). The impact of cruise ship generated waste on home ports and

ports of call: A study of Southampton. Marine Policy, 31(5), 591-598.

Box G.B., Jenkins GM., Reinsel G.C. and Liu L.M. (2009). Time Series

Analysis, 4.ed., Pearson Education, ISBN 0-13-147142-2.

Carpenter, A., & MacGill, S. M. (2003). The EU directive on port reception

facilities for ship- generated waste and cargo residues: Current availability

of facilities in the North Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 46(1), 21-32.

Comprehensive Manual on Port Reception Facilities (1999). – available at:

http://www.imo.org/Publications/mainframe.asp?topic_id=424 (product #

IA597E)

Chakrapani, D., &Libman, M. (2006). Case study of the organization of eastern

Caribbean state ship generated and solid waste management project. The

of 80

http://www.imo.org/Publications/mainframe.asp?topic_id=424

World Bank independent evaluation group (pp. 1-45). Washington

D.C.:The World Bank.

Developing Countries of the Wider Caribbean Region. (1994). Wider

Caribbean initiative for ship generated waste. (pp. 1-58). Washington

D.C.: The World Bank.

Dashan E. (2010) Management and disposal of ship generated wastes, Master

science thesis, Yildiz.

EMSA (2010). The world merchant fleet in 2010. Statistics from Equasis

(http://www.emsa.europa.eu/implementation-tasks/equasis-a-

statistics/items/id/472.html?cid=95)

Gregory, MR (2009). Environmental implications of plastic debris in marine

settings – entanglement, ingestion, smothering, hangers-on, hitch-hiking,

and alien invasions. Phil.Trans R Soc.B, 364, 2013-

2026(doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0265).

Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS) website:


Guidelines for the Implementation of MARPOL Annex V (2012) – available at


IB656E)

Guidelines for ensuring the adequacy of port waste reception facilities (resolution

MEPC.83(44)) – available at


of 80




http://www.emsa.europa.eu/implementation-tasks/equasis-a-

I598E)

http://www.imo.org/about/conventions/listofconventions/pages/international-

convention-for-theprevention-of-pollution-from-ships-(marpol).aspx

http://www.imo.org/conventions Prevention of Marine Pollution Conventions,

accessed on 07.09.14

http://www.n-imc.com/ropme.htm UNEP Regional Seas, accessed on 30.03.08

http://www.unep.org/abidjanconvention/ Abidjan Convention, accessed on

20.10.14

http://www.bollore.com/ Activities of The Bollore Group, accessed on 08.06.14

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

(MARPOL)

International Maritime Organization. (2006). Pollution prevention equipment

under MARPOL 2nd edition, Suffolk, U.K.: William Clowes Ltd.

International Maritime Organization. (2010). IMO. www.imo.org

International Maritime Organization. (2010). Notification of the establishment

of the date on which discharge requirements for the Wider Caribbean

Region Special Area under MARPOL Annex V shall take effect (IMO

Circular letter No.3053). London: International Maritime Organization.

International Maritime Organization, http://www.imo.org.

International Maritime Organization, (2010): International Maritime

Organisation. Available at:

http://www.imo.org/ourwork/environment/ballastwatermanagement/Pages/

Default.aspx. last access: June 2014

International Maritime Organization (1999). Comprehensive Manual on Port

Reception Facilities. London: Ashford Press.

NCSS Statisical Analysis & Graphic Software (2007) http://www.ncss.com

of 80

http://www.ncss.com/

http://www.imo.org/

http://www.imo.org/about/conventions/listofconventions/pages/international-

NEA (2009) Annex 2 – Ship Generated Waste Analysis

Palabıyık, H., (2003) “Waste Management Planning for Ship Generated Waste”,

Journal of Naval Science and Engineering, Volume 1, Number 2, July,

151-159.

Palomares, M. (2006). Prevention of marine litter pollution under IMO

conventions.Special lecture, The 1st NOWPAP Workshop on Marine

Litter, Incheon, Republic of Korea, U.N. Environment Programme.

Tanzer S., Demir H., Alkan G.B., Ucan O.N. and Bayat C. (2008). Ship waste

Forecasting at the Botas Technical University, Science Institute,

Environmental Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey (In Turkish).

The Basel Convention on the control of Trans-boundary Movements of

Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. (1992). Signed at Basel,

Switzerland, March 22, 1989. United Nations Treat series 1673, 1-57.

United Nations Environment Programme. (2009). Marine Litter: a Global

Challenge. Nairobi: UNEP.

United Nations Environment Programme, (2010, April 15). Caribbean

Countries Take Action to

World Shipping Register (n.d.). Sea Distances- Voyage Calculator [data set].

Retrieved from http://e-ships.net/dist.htm

of 80

http://e-ships.net/dist.htm

The research focuses on investigating into the type and amount of ship-generated wastes handled...

Environment

Transcript of The research focuses on investigating into the type and amount of ship-generated wastes handled...