Here's a fascinating article about invasive species being carried by ballast water in international freighters.
Coasts' Best Protection from Bioinvaders Falling Short: Not Enough Ships Able to Flush out Invasive Species Before They Reach Port
ScienceDaily (Nov. 6, 2011) — Invasive species have hitchhiked to the U.S. on cargo ships for centuries, but the method U.S. regulators most rely on to keep them out is not equally effective across coasts. Ecologists from the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center have found that ports on the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico are significantly less protected than ports on the West Coast.
See Also:
Invaders are frequently introduced across oceans and along coastlines through the ballast water in ship hulls, water that often includes plankton and larval stages of marine and estuarine species. Large vessels need this water for balance as they load and unload cargo. However, by dumping ballast water in their ports of entry, they accidentally bring in new species that can alter or damage the local ecosystem. In 2004 policymakers thought they had found a solution: have cargo vessels exchange their ballast water in the open ocean, at least 200 nautical miles from land. This method, called "open-ocean exchange," flushes out or kills potential invaders by exchanging coastal water for water from the deep ocean.
But some ships do not use the practice and many more cannot without veering drastically off course. In perhaps the most comprehensive study to date, Whitman Miller and a team of scientists from SERC looked at all international ships entering the contiguous U.S. over three years. Published in the journalBioScience, the study analyzed approximately 105,000 vessel reports from January 2005 to December 2007. While most ships opted not to discharge their ballast water at all, a substantial number continued to dump unexchanged or improperly exchanged water into their ports of entry.
Not all coasts are affected equally. The Gulf of Mexico and the East Coast received much larger fractions of unexchanged ballast water than the West Coast. Roughly 5 percent of the ballast water discharged on the West Coast had not undergone open-ocean exchange. By contrast 21 percent of the discharged water in the Gulf and 23 percent on the East Coast went unexchanged.
Much of the problem comes down to simple geography. Depending on a ship's transit route, it may not have the time or space to conduct open-ocean exchange. A mere 24 percent of the ballast water discharged by ships journeying to U.S. ports along coastal routes, from Central or South America, for example, underwent open-ocean exchange. In contrast 91 percent of ballast water discharge by transoceanic shipping was exchanged in the open ocean, where ships have more opportunities to manage their water properly. Because so many of their incoming ships do not pass through the open ocean, ports in the Gulf and East Coast receive more potentially harmful water.
The vast discrepancies point to the need for another solution, ecologists say. If ships could treat their ballast water on board without having to journey to the open ocean, every coast would be safer.
"The Gulf of Mexico coast receives more overseas ballast water discharge than the East or West coasts, and most of this water is either unexchanged or exchanged inside coastal waters," said Miller. "Given the geographic constraints of shipping, and the complexity of the invasion process, it is clear that we need to move to onboard ballast water treatment technologies that will allow ships to operate anywhere in the world without fear of releasing harmful invasive species."
Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:
and Google +1:
Other bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided bySmithsonian.Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.
Related Stories
Keeping Invasive Species Out Of The Great Lakes (July 17, 2008) — The United States should follow Canada's lead and adopt standards identical to those proposed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to prevent invasive species from entering the Great ... > read more
Microwave Zapping Kills Invasive Species Before The Invasion (May 12, 2008) — Scientists in Louisiana are reporting development and successful testing of a new cost-effective system to kill unwanted plants and animals that hitch a ride to the United States in the ballast water ... > read more
Blocking Ship-Borne Bioinvaders Before They Dock (Mar. 28, 2011) — The global economy depends on marine transportation. But in addition to cargo, the world's 50,000-plus commercial ships carry tiny stowaways that can cause huge problems for the environment and ... > read more
Dirty Smoke From Ships Found To Degrade Air Quality In Coastal Cities(Aug. 20, 2008) — Chemists have measured for the first time the impact that dirty smoke from ships cruising at sea and generating electricity in port can have on the air quality of coastal cities. The scientists ... > read more
Rules To Protect Great Lakes From Ship-Borne Organisms Are Inadequate: Stronger Measures Advocated (July 25, 2007) — Current rules aimed at minimizing the number of nonnative species that hitchhike into the Great Lakes on oceangoing ships are inadequate and often impractical, researchers have concluded. The authors ... > read more