Ocean vessel assisted by two tugboats in Duluth-Superior harbor, Duluth, Minn. Photo by Jerry Bielicki
By RACHEL IOVAN
LANSING – Several years after Michigan and other Great Lakes states imposed tougher regulations on ships, there’s still a call by environmental groups, biologists and shippers for federal rules.
State standards for ballast developed piecemeal, and Carl Lindquist, the executive director of the Superior Watershed Partnership and Land Trust based in Marquette, said they were a step in the right direction. But ballast water is still carrying invasive species, he said.
“The current policy, while well-intended, is not comprehensive enough to address the issue,” said Lindquist, “The bottom line is that oceangoing ships continue to introduce invasive species into the Great Lakes ecosystem.”
A 2002 Michigan law required all vessels to report whether they’re following the best practices determined by the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE) to minimize the spread of invaders. Approved techniques include filtration, application of biocides or ultraviolet light, and heating methods.
Then in 2008, Michigan imposed additional regulations. They required all ships coming from the Atlantic Ocean and docking in the state to get a permit proving that treatment techniques were used at each port where they discharged ballast water. Violations carry a penalty of as much as $25,000 per day.
Ships use water for balance when they are light or have no cargo. When ships load cargo, that water is dumped in port, releasing foreign plants, animals and microorganisms.
Scientists say that ballast the main source of aquatic invasive species in the Great Lakes.
Because many of those aliens have no natural predators in the Great Lakes, they colonize and flourish, forcing out native species. The zebra mussel, round goby, spiny water flea and Eurasian ruffe are among the most ecologically and economically harmful invasive species brought into the lakes through ballast water, according to the DNRE.
Jay Lennon, a microbiology professor at Michigan State University, said it’s hard to determine if the regulations have averted additional invasions, “but we know that not regulating ballast water is not a good thing,”
A leading industry group, the Lake Carrier’s Association, says oceangoing vessels bring in invasive species, but Glen Nekvasil, the vice president of corporate communications for the association, said environmental organizations have been pushing nonoceangoing vessels, or lakers, to treat their ballast the same way.
The association, based in Cleveland, represents shipping companies that transport cargo within the Great Lakes.
Nekvasil said only oceangoing ships bring in invasive species, so treating ballast of lakers won’t stop their spread.
“Once something is in the system and has taken root, eradication is impossible and it’s going to spread,” Nekvasil said, “The lakes are interconnected, so even if we treat our ballast, species can still swim off on their own.”
Linquist, of the Superior Watershed Partnership, said although lakers aren’t to blame for introducing invasive species, they can speed their spread “exponentially” by transporting them from lake to lake.
Lindquist acknowledged that recreational and fishing boats also spread invaders but said the shipping industry should set the example.
Nekvasil said that while some treatment systems have been approved, most are compatible only with oceangoing vessels.
“Our ships are in and out of port in 10 hours or less, and the treatment systems are for ships in port for a day and a half,” Nekvasil said, “It would fail on our ships.”
Nekvasil noted that ballast water flows out of lakers at a rate of 80,000 gallons per minute, enough to fill roughly eight Olympic-sized swimming pools per hour.
Lakers aren’t required to treat ballast water before dumping it in ports. They must, however, report whether they discharged water using techniques recommended by the DNRE. They include minimizing uptake in shallow water, in areas where harmful pathogens are known to occur and at night.
Barry Burns of the DNRE’s Water Bureau said, “All they have to do is check a box to say they’re complying with the rules. They’re saying that they comply but there’s no enforcement.”
For example, he said he doubts that a ship docking at night would wait until morning to leave if it’s done unloading and has another shipment waiting.
“Their business is to keep moving,” Burns said.
Despite disagreements about how much state regulations protect the lakes, interest groups agree that a federal standard is needed.
The Lake Carrier Association’s Nekvasil said it’s difficult for shippers to comply with each state’s separate standards.
“We have to do this in Michigan, that in Wisconsin and something else in Minnesota,” Nekvasil said.
DNRE’s Burns said, “We’ve been pushing for years for tougher requirements for ballast water on ships, but the Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have been fighting us all the way.
“The feds are in the drivers seat on this,” he said.
Burns said an EPA advisory board is working on a standard for all U.S. ports.
And Linquist said, “There’s a lot of foot-dragging on doing the minimum, let alone the maximum, to protect the lakes.”
James Clift, the policy director for the Michigan Environmental Council, said, “The treatment requirements have been working pretty well, but pretty well is not necessarily good enough.
“I’m concerned that we’re increasingly at risk every year that we don’t do more,” said Clift.
(EPA,Coast Guard,Homeland Security, and 28 different state laws) It dose not take an Einstein to realize we need a comprehensive plan. Why do you think our President dose not act to protect people from human pathogens and virus in ballast water???
Here is the latest update on the Coast Guard delay plan.
“Ballast Water Discharge Standard:We have revised our expected publication date of the Ballast Water Discharge Standard rulemaking. It is now expected to publish in April 2011, rather than December 2010.”
It has been stated by those who favor ballast laws, that do not impose cost on shipping, using the ocean flush, that compliance with the ocean flush has prevented new introductions of invasive s. They talk of requirements equal to drinking water, good idea since our children swim getting water in their mouth, up their nose, etc. Perhaps if compliance is being adhered by the shipping industry, notorious for US tax evasion by registering ships in different countries, they would be willing to drink some of it to save on testing and insure confidence they are continuing to enforce regulations.
The salt water Flush is known to be affective only for some fresh water problems and it is known that sludge, bio films, cysts, etc, still contain and carry virus and pathogens even if the costly, dangerous, ineffective ocean flush is done without short cuts by foreign sea captains while in US waters. How is compliance in third world countries where there is no infrastructure to test foreign flag ships going to be insured so they do not continue to introduce deadly human disease such as cholera, which is not stopped by an ocean flush?
Since 2006 there has been quite a bit of scrutiny given to ships ballast water. Foreign sea captains have been more compliant, but without mandatory technology installation, when the hoopla is over the often dangerous, ineffective, costly ocean flush will again be regarded by industry as a cost, and it will again be business as usual.
Concerns already created in the great lakes should not be mixed through out the lakes. These existing algae problems etc., should and could be contained with mandatory technology installation. The procrastination to equip with technology is about money, not human health and the environment.
If ballast water technology creates an economic hardship for shipping, perhaps stimulus to the part of the shipping industry that will fly the US flag, not trying to avoid paying US tax, would be in order.
Lake Pontchartrain should be the wake up call that these systems are capable of delivering other problems for human health and the environment besides living organisms. Chemicals, drugs, nuclear waste water are all reasons the states need comprehensive Federal protection, as the states obviously have been unable to protect themselves.
The Arctic is historically known as a clandestine dumping ground for governments and industry we have no idea, if as the ice melts, these non living pollutants will be induced into new shipping lanes now opening.
We need comprehensive Federal law but,
unfortunately China and South Korea are the largest ship builders in the world competing with each other and environmentalist efforts may be futile, as this administration may not act significantly on a Federal level, because they need China to keep its legacy of involvement in the Korean war caged, it appears South Korea leads in ballast water involvement, which may have created a scenario where this administration is scared and afraid to act, because of upsetting China.
NY laws are significantly important as they currently are the only way, to force these tax dodgers in the shipping industry, to spend the money required to protect all America’s water forever, equally from invasive s, human bacterial pathogens and virus.
Even though NY ballast water laws do not go into effect until 2012 (probably with a pass to delay installation if they can show they were not able) and our presidents national military delay plan not suppose to address the issue until sometime in the middle of 2011, shipping interest are already starting to put pressure on NY’s future governor to not implement the only meaningful regulations ever created that protect all the Great Lakes States equally. These regulations would prevent further destruction while also adequately protecting against human bacteria and virus. Those who hailed NY’S laws and believed, the huge expense endured by NY state as a results of this administrations failure to address ballast water with adequate regulation during these times of economic crisis may find once again just wasted tax dollars. We can only hope and pray Governor is not weak and caves in to the enormous political pressure that the lobby from the shipping industry is going to apply, as it has just started. The shipping industry has been out to kill state regulation from the beginning as was evident during their formulations when industry web articles referred to them as a “pipe dream”. They know as the military millennium report for the states international regulations will be slow coming and easily disregarded.
Unfortunately those who care about our countries environment, human health and the economic domination that foreign shipping has over our country because of globalization, will not be able to lobby with the economic clout that the foreign shipping industry has, and with our president and secretary of state being globalist, the pressure on governor Coumo will be enormous. NY laws are not just about NY or the Great Lakes, but they effect the economy of our whole country and are probably the last meaningful impediment to our presidents military plan coinciding with the global plan for ballast water. Without NY ‘S geographic position providing equal regulation, individual state laws of other Great Lakes States will not provide equal economic status between ports when dealing with foreign economic interest.
When I started mailing letters to politicians several years ago the best advice I received was from a lady at the post office, who did not know the issue I was trying to address, but realized I was trying to work for “change”, she said “remember a politician will never do anything unless it benefits themselves” It will be interesting to see if Governor Coumo cares more about his career or real long term “change” for America. Regardless of what happens, being the President ask Governor Patterson to step aside environmentalist should remember Governor Paterson despite the cost, monetarily and politically, did the right thing for all Americans on the issue of ballast water.
With 911 and The Department of Homeland Security acknowledging by their web site, their need to be involved with ballast water, Americans should have realized we need to “change” the way we do business in the world.
If we do not act to implement ballast water laws we could be waiting for an international solution forever, and lose forever a chance to create jobs, which increases government revenue and can eventually help the economic mess, that is making us dependent on China.
The best time to have enacted ballast water legislation was in 2008 when h.r.2830 passed the House 395-7 at the beginning of the global economic crisis when ship traffic, that is needed in economic globalization was curtailed. Unfortunately this administration chose to delay meaningful legislation with another study for a still purposed military plan of 20 plus years.
Knowing a report prepared for Congress in 2009 stated that legislation calling for mandatory technology installation would increase the cost of foreign manufactured products, this administration made a conscious choice to not address the issue passing up the opportunity to again place America on a level playing field in manufacturing cost. Although some forms of economic globalization are inevitable and beneficial, globalization for economic reasons, at the expense of human health and the environment of future generations is nothing more than economic greed.
In the millennium report prepared for the army in 2005-2006 detailing the military role with the environment it is made clear that international treaties are often thwarted by foreign countries and economic interest. Environmental issues are also cited as the cause of military conflicts. Sadly they also detail the governments policy will be to continue to follow the international communities lead, because of interdependency with foreign economies.
This Administration Ocean initiatives policy states that all international treaties that have been ratified and those presently being adhered to will be honored. This means in its present form the ballast water provision in the International Law of the Sea treaty will apply for the waters of the United States at the Federal level. The millennium report also states that many problems exist with coastal countries and the provisions in international treaties.
Fortunate for the environment, is pressure being applied by the individual states of our country enacting their own laws as a results of this administrations failure and the pressure of environmentalist, technology is now available to address ballast water.
Unfortunately the continued failure of this administration to act with meaningful ballast water regulation has the shipping industry procrastinating on the economic investment to retrofit with technology quickly. As more shipping companies began to retrofit slowly the effect that logistics and cost would have to again create a cost competitive America will be forever lost, as human health and our environment continue suffering while waiting for an international solution or a purposed 20 year Coast Guard plan.
Our Great Lakes are also in danger from terrorist attacks using ballast systems according to Homeland Security as stated on their own web site.
Ships used exclusively on the Great Lakes should also be required for technology as it is now know from government studies that influenza, h1n1, bird flue, and mutations occur in FRESH water lakes and glacier and moved by birds. Ballast water should not facilitate this movement
Isn’t it ironic that the Coast Guard and the EPA have fought stricter regulation of Great Lakes shipping as regards invasive species. Doesn’t that sound similar to what Minerals Management Service did for deep water oil drilling in the Gulf. What has happened, has the Mafia been drafted to run our gov’t agencies? Well maybe not the traditional Mafia, more like the BIG BUSINESS and INDUSTRY MAFIA.