Ballast Water Management Decision Support System Model Application - Global Maritime Transport and Ballast Water Management: Issues and Solutions - page 264

Table 1 Number of vessels and quantities of ballast water discharged in the Port of Koper in 2005
which could potentially be managed with BWE under the BWM Convention blanket approach
Vessels BW discharged (m 3 )

No. vessels BWE 12 SUM BWE 10,866

No. vessels no BWE 36 SUM no BWE 38,519

No. vessels Zone 3, 4 48 BW disch. Zone 3, 4 49,385

Total No. 2005 448 Total BW disch. 2005 544,133

% BWE/Zone 3, 4 25.00 % BWE/Zone 3, 4 22.00

% BWE/Total 2005 2.68 % BWE/Total 2005 2.00

After David ( 2007 )

are in different developmental stages, but more than 30 were already type approved
by responsible authorities. This makes certifi ed systems available for sales to the
shipping industry, however the uncertainty remains if the production capacities will
be able to accommodate the needs on the shipping side. Furthermore, shipyard
installation capacities may become a bottleneck to meet the demand. This is a fast
developing fi eld as the interest is triggered by a worldwide market of close to 70,000
vessels that will need to be equipped with such systems. However, in the absence of
the BWM Convention being into force, BWMS are rarely installed on vessels so
that this chapter focuses on BWE as currently the widely applicable BWM option.

Designation of a Ballast Water Exchange Area in the Adriatic

Being aware of the diffi culties in the BWM Convention implementation in the
Adriatic Sea the Ballast Water Management Sub-Commission (BWMSC) for the
Adriatic has considered to designate a BWEA in the Adriatic Sea according to
the BWM Convention (Regulation B-4.2). In the absence of IMO Guidelines how
to designate a BWEA at that time, it was proposed that the designation should be
based on common criteria/aspects including:

￿ navigational, e.g., shipping patterns among ports, ships routeing;
￿ ballast water discharge, e.g., quantity, source, frequency;
￿ hydrological, e.g., currents, water depths;
￿ biological, e.g., presence of invasive alien species (IAS) and harmful aquatic
organisms and pathogens (HAOP), plankton densities;

￿ anthropogenic, e.g., pollution;

￿ important resources and protected areas; and

￿ legal aspects. e.g., confl ict with national or international law.

There were different BWEA options considered by the BWMSC, however there
was no fi nal agreement on its adoption. The considered options for BWEA in the
Adriatic Sea are shown in Fig. 6 .