Item 9b Study
Po 0" Slear- .Ie CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY PHASE 1A Data Compilation and Initial Assessment JULY 2009 ENSR AECOM CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ ii Figures............................................................................................................................................ iii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. iv Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2 Introduction and Methodology ....................................................................................................... 7 Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry ....................................................................................................... 8 Northwest Cruise Ship Association............................................................................................. 9 Memorandum of Understanding between NWCA and State of Washington ........................... 10 Alaska Discharge Standards ......................................................................................................... 14 Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations ....................................................... 15 Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS) ................................................................ 15 Type II MSDs ............................................................................................................................ 16 Characterization of Cruise Ship Biomass ..................................................................................... 18 Disposal of Cruise Ship Biomass .............................................................................................. 18 Chemical Properties of Biomass Generated .............................................................................. 18 Biomass Management in Scandinavia .......................................................................................... 25 Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations .................................................................... 26 On board Wastewater Treatment ............................................................................................... 26 Alternatives to Open-Ocean Discharge of Cruise Ship Biomass .................................................. 26 Incineration ................................................................................................................................ 26 Shore Transfer ........................................................................................................................... 26 o Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck - This alternative involves pumping biomass from on board storage tanks directly to tanker trucks positioned on the pier. Vessel to tanker discharge occurs through flexible hoses. ................................................................................................... 27 Existing Port of Seattle Shoreside Operations .............................................................................. 27 Feasibility of Shore Transfer of Biomass ..................................................................................... 32 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Direct Discharge to Barge ......................................................................................................... 36 Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck ............................................................................................. 36 Direct Discharge to Piping on Pier ............................................................................................ 37 Cruise Industry Wastewater Management in Scandinavia ........................................................... 38 Copenhagen Malm Ports, Denmark ........................................................................................ 40 Port of Oslo, Norway ................................................................................................................ 41 Port of Helsinki, Finland ........................................................................................................... 42 Port of Stockholm, Sweden ....................................................................................................... 42 Future Alternatives for Biomass Disposal .................................................................................... 44 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 46 References ..................................................................................................................................... 47 Figures Figure 1. Growth in Port of Seattle Cruise Ship Usage from 1999 to 2009 (est.) ......................... 9 Figure 2. MOU Boundaries.......................................................................................................... 13 Figure 3. Schematic of biological-chlorination Type II MSD (Source: EPA 2007) .................... 18 Figure 4. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: All Selected Metals ............................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 5. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: Lowest Concentration Metals ...................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: Lowest Concentration Metals ...................................................................................................... 23 Figure 7. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: Mid-High Concentration Metals .................................................................................................. 24 Figure 8. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: Highest Concentration Metals...................................................................................................... 24 Figure 9. Vessel Mooring Lines (Terminal 30) ............................................................................ 28 Figure 10. Rendering of T-91 Gangways .....................................................................................28 Figure 11. Crew Gangway (Pier 66) ............................................................................................ 28 Figure 12. Baggage Loading (Pier 66) .........................................................................................29 Figure 13. Baggage Loading and Crew Gangway .......................................................................29 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Figure 14. Utility Connection (Terminal 30) ...............................................................................30 Figure 15. Shore Power Connection (Terminal 30) ..................................................................... 30 Figure 16. Typical Bunker Oil Truck ........................................................................................... 30 Figure 17. Pier Access (Pier 66) .................................................................................................. 31 Figure 18. Baltic Sea Wastewater Reception Facility Locations .................................................41 Tables Table 1. Seattle/Alaska Homeport Industry .................................................................................. 12 Table 2. Summary of Washington State Department of Ecology Information Regarding NWCA Cruise Ships, Wastewater Treatment and Biomass Management ................................................ 17 Table 3. Cruise Ship Chemical Data Summary ............................................................................ 19 Table 4. Summary of Cruise Ship and King County Biomass Concentrations ............................ 21 Table 5. Wastewater Reception Facilities at Ports in the Baltic Sea ............................................ 43 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY 01 Seattle Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Section 1 Executive Summary CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Executive Summary At the request of the Port of Seattle Commission, this study was initiated to compile data and provide an initial assessment of the feasibility to transfer, via on shore infrastructure, biomass generated by cruise vessels to King County's wastewater treatment system. For the purpose of this study, biomass refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the on-board wastewater treatment process. On February 16, 2007, the Port of Seattle Commission passed a motion that included the above request. In April 2007, the King County Council passed a complementary motion directing the County's Wastewater Treatment Division to work with the Port of Seattle to study the potential for processing marine cruise industry-generated wastewater through the County's wastewater treatment system. The intent of this study is to gain an understanding of the impacts to the vessels' on-board infrastructure, pier-side operations, and facility on shore infrastructure in order to determine the feasibility of storing biomass on-board cruise vessels and off-loading it at the pier. Over the past ten years, there has been significant growth in the number of cruise vessels and number of passengers going through the Port of Seattle. In the 2008 season, the Port welcomed 210 ship port calls and an estimated 886,039 passengers. The Northwest Cruise Ship Association, which provides a variety of services for member cruise lines, entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Washington Department of Ecology in April 2004, (Amendment No. 4 signed May 19, 2008) aimed at improving the treatment of waste discharges from cruise ships operating in Washington waters. This MOU established boundaries within which discharge limitations are established. Currently, all but one of the cruise vessels operating from Port of Seattle facilities use onboard Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS) that treat sewage and greywater in a combined system. The biomass generated by this treatment is currently discharged 12 nautical miles from the shoreline coast outside of Washington State waters and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, in compliance with international law and the MOU. Alternatives to open-ocean discharge of cruise ship biomass include on-board incineration and shore transfer. While half of the cruise vessels that were surveyed incinerate residual solids, only three vessels incinerate all biomass, and an additional vessel incinerates 50-75% of its biomass. 2 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Like the Alaskan cruise industry, growth of the Scandinavian cruise industry has greatly increased over the past decade. The Baltic Sea receives between 250 and 300 cruise ships each year. Most of the wastewater is discharged into the Baltic Sea, mainly in international waters. According to the international convention (MARPOL 73/78 and Annex IV), ships may discharge black water beyond 12 nautical miles from the shore line and greywater beyond 3 nautical miles from the shore line into the Baltic Sea. The massive blooms of blue-green algae along the shorelines of the Baltic Sea are the most visible evidence of this environmental problem. Baltic cruise ship wastewater management information was collected from the Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark, the Port of Oslo, Norway, and the Port of Helsinki, Finland, and Port of Stockholm, Sweden. No distinction was made by these ports in the management of wastewater versus the management of biomass. The information provided by the Scandinavian ports will, however, help the Port of Seattle to evaluate various shore transfer approaches and learn from the experiences of the Baltic ports. Shore transfer involves transferring wastewater or biomass from on-board storage tanks to a shore facility for treatment. Methods by which this can occur include: o Direct discharge to tanker truck o Direct discharge to barge o Direct discharge to piping on pier At a minimum, it was determined that the following requirements must be met for shore transfer to be practical at the Port of Seattle: 1. Vessels must have the ability to store biomass on board. Two cruise vessels that currently home port at the Port of Seattle have the capacity to store seven days accumulation of biomass. The remaining vessels that currently homeport in Seattle carry from 3.3 to 6.6 days of accumulated biomass. A typical homeport itinerary out of Seattle is a 7-day cruise, but some are 10 to 14-day cruises. 2. The biomass must be pumpable. Biomass currently being stored on board Seattle cruise vessels ranges from 80-98% liquids and is therefore pumpable. 3. The vessels must be configured to pump ashore. Of the 10 vessels with an on- site Advanced Wastewater Treatment System (AWTS), nine report that they have at least some ability to transfer biomass ashore. More information is required to determine what specific modifications would be required to support regular and consistent shore-side transfer. 3 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle 4. The vessels must have engineering crew available to oversee the transfer operations. This study did not evaluate the feasibility of this requirement. 5. The operation must be completed within the time the vessel is in port. Vessels are in port for about 10 hours. Following Customs and Border protection regulations and various operations requirements, the available time for unloading and off loading is approximately 7 hours. Significant efforts are underway by industry to achieve more effective environmental performance in waste disposal from ships. One option currently under evaluation is a Plasma Arc Waste Destruction system as an alternative to shipboard incineration. In addition, marine gasification technology is being developed, that will result in creating usable energy as a by-product. There is currently no single viable option for managing biomass created on board Seattlebased cruise ships. Additional studies, if found to be necessary, would further evaluate the feasibility of existing and developing technology for biomass from cruise ships. Based on the data compiled for this report, the following primary conclusions have been drawn: Shipboard capacity for biomass varies. Two cruise vessels that homeport in Seattle can hold a week's worth of biomass on board, with the rest having the capacity to carry three to six days' worth of biomass. Biomass is pumpable and could be transferred on shore. On shore transfer would have significant impacts to pier-side operations. The extent of these impacts would vary by vessel, dock facility, volume of biomass discharged, and method chosen for transfer to shore facilities. The variety of activities occurring on the pier that would have an impact to shore-transfer of biomass include mooring lines, passenger and crew gangways, utility connections, bunker oil trucks on the pier, and required access for emergency vehicles. In addition, the vessel doors and apron space must be kept clear for off loading and loading of luggage and the stores loading. The option with likely the least impact to pier-side operations would be discharge to a marine barge. The challenges associated with this option, however, include the synchronization of the off-shore transfer of biomass with the six hour vessel fueling process, generally through a common break in the vessel hull; and the effort and expected cost of securing barges designed to hold the biomass (not evaluated in this study). 4 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Proceeding with a significantly changed mechanism than that currently used for managing biomass would require more study associated with the feasibility and cost of vessel retrofits as well as whether there are environmental benefits to off loading biomass at the Port of Seattle. If the Port determines that on shore transfer of biomass could become a viable alternative, additional phases of this study would include: 1. On board visits of at least three vessels to determine biomass storage capacity, pumping capacity, shore transfer capability and rate(s) etc. 2. Meetings with crew to better understand shore transfer and waste treatment operations and vessel system functions. 3. Preliminary engineering cost estimates for modifications of vessels surveyed. 4. Meetings with shore side terminal operator to discuss impacts and mitigation for on-pier impact(s). 5. Preliminary engineering cost estimates for pier-side modifications and additional infrastructure. 5 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY 01 Seattle Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Section 2 Introduction and Methodology Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry Alaska Discharge Standards Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations Characterization of Cruise Ship Biomass CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Introduction and Methodology On February 16, 2007, the Port of Seattle Commission passed a motion containing numerous environmental initiatives. The fourth item in this motion states: The Commission recognizes the significant economic benefit to the region of having cruise ships homeport in Seattle. The Commission supports the growth of the cruise ship industry in Seattle as well as efforts to enhance water quality and the marine environment. The Commission directs staff to prepare a budget and work program to evaluate the feasibility, environmental impact, cost/benefit and possible funding sources of building additional infrastructure to support the cruise ship industry in Seattle, including proposals to facilitate off loading of biosolids and hazardous waste. Work program elements will include convening a meeting or series of meetings beginning in the first half of 2007 on this topic, to include relevant Port staff, cruise ship industry officials, Department of Ecology officials, county and city public utilities and health officials, other relevant experts, and community and environmental group representatives. In April 2007, the King County Council passed a complementary motion (No. 12498) which directed the King County Wastewater Treatment Division to work cooperatively with the Port of Seattle and other affected agencies to undertake a study of the potential for processing marine cruise industry-generated wastewater through the County's wastewater treatment system. This work culminated in the August 2007 report titled "Cruise Ship Wastewater Management Report" prepared by the King County Wastewater Treatment Division. This study did not address biomass. That study provided several recommendations and the following conclusions: 1. There is no identified benefit of channeling wastewater from cruise ships to the regional conveyance and treatment system. 2. The South Treatment Plant could receive and incorporate biomass into the existing treatment process without any expansion or modification of the South Treatment Plant. King County recycles all of its biosolids. For the purpose of this study "biomass" refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the on board wastewater treatment process. Partial treatment on board ships involves separating the solids from the liquid fraction. The work provided herein represents on-going efforts by the Port of Seattle to address issues identified in the February 16, 2007 Commission motion. Through discussions with Port staff and in recognition of the public attention to this issue, a decision was made to assemble and provide information as it is obtained, rather than wait until all potential studies are complete. As such, the work included herein is intended to be the initial part of a potentially larger study that may be required to fully assess the impacts and benefits of alternative means to managing biomass on cruise vessels calling at Port facilities. 7 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle If authorized by the Port of Seattle Commission, future phases of this study might include the following additional phases; the scope of each subsequent phase would be evaluated and authorized individually. Phase 1B Engineering Evaluation of On board Systems and Viable Alternatives Phase 2 Environmental Impacts/Benefits and Cost/Benefit of Potential Implementation and financial impacts of implementing viable solutions identified in Phase 1 In general, this Phase 1A Report has been assembled through review of existing reports and compilation of existing data. Existing reports reviewed included Department of Ecology reports documenting prior sampling accomplished on Puget Sound cruise vessels as well as available US EPA reports on cruise vessel on board treatment systems. Treatment vendors and cruise ship operators were consulted to gain an understanding of how waste is being treated and handled by the vessels. A survey was sent to the cruise ships to gather specific information about types of treatment systems employed, disposal practices, and vessel specifics including storage capacity. The vessel operators were also asked if their vessels were equipped with a means of transferring biomass ashore, and if not, whether a retrofit was feasible. A copy of the survey sent to the Cruise Lines is included in the Appendix. Initial assessment of the impacts to on board and dock-side infrastructure of alternative biomass off loading methods is generally based on the professional experience of the Port and Consultant team (KPFF Consulting Engineers, ENSR/AECOM, and the Glosten Associates) and their collective knowledge of Pier 91, Pier 66 and vessel infrastructure. Further detailed engineering analysis would be conducted as part of Phase 1B for those alternatives considered viable. Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry The Port of Seattle (POS) has experienced significant growth both in the number of vessels taking call at the port as well as the number of passengers embarking from the POS. 8 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle 900,000 250 800,000 200 700,000 600,000 150 Number of Passengers 500,000 400,000 Passengers Vessels Vessels 100 300,000 200,000 50 100,000 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Year Figure 1. Growth in Port of Seattle Cruise Ship Usage from 1999 to 2009 (est.) In the 2008 season, the Port of Seattle welcomed an estimated 210 cruise ship port calls and over 886,000 passengers (Port of Seattle, 2008). This industry has been steadily expanding since its inception in 1999, when only 6 cruise ships and 6,615 passengers left Seattle bound for Alaska. The POS operates as a "homeport" and more specifically, what is commonly called in the cruise industry a "turnaround port." Seattle-Alaska cruises originate from the POS where they disembark and embark passengers as well as provisioning (food, fuel, etc.) for their voyages. Table 1 summarizes the Seattle-Alaska cruise industry for 2008 as well as what is planned for 2009. In general, ten ships originate their cruises to Alaska from Seattle, three each on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday and one every other Thursday from two POS dock locations. In 2008, those dock locations were Terminal 30 and Pier 66. In 2009, Terminal 91 replaced Terminal 30 dock for cruises vessels. Northwest Cruise Ship Association The Northwest Cruise Ship Association (NWCA) is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1986 to provide security services to member lines (Northwest Cruise Ship Association, 2008). Its role has since been expanded to include government relations on legal and regulatory issues. The Association often works with local organizations to mitigate concerns regarding the cruise industry. In addition, it funds economic and environmental studies and works with government 9 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle agencies on cruise-related issues. Member lines of the NWCA that embark from Seattle include Celebrity, Holland America, Norwegian, Princess, and Royal Caribbean cruise lines. Memorandum of Understanding between NWCA and State of Washington In April 2004, the NWCA, the Port of Seattle, and the Washington Department of Ecology entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to formally acknowledge and implement common environmental goals, policies, and waste management practices within the boundaries of the MOU. The current boundaries of the MOU include Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca south of the international boundary with Canada, and three miles from shore on the west side of the state (see Figure 2). The original MOU has been amended several times since 2004. The most recent amendment (No. 4) was signed on May 19, 2008. (http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/wastewater/cruise_mou/FINALamendment4MOU051908.pdf). The MOU established the following definitions used in this report: "blackwater" means waste from toilets, urinals, medical sinks and other similar facilities. "greywater" includes drainage from dishwasher, shower, laundry, bath, galley drains and washbasin drains. "residual solids" include grit or screenings, ash generated during the incineration of sewage sludge, and sewage sludge, which is solid, semi-solid, or liquid residual generated during the treatment of domestic sewage in the treatment works. Sewage sludge includes, but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or solids removed in primary, secondary or advanced wastewater treatment processes; and material derived from sewage sludge. Blackwater and greywater are subject to MOU defined waters which includes Puget Sound up to the Canadian border and coastal waters up to three miles off the shoreline coast of Washington. For "residual solids," the MOU boundaries are extended to 12 nautical miles from shoreline coast and from the entire Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. The MOU does not specifically define the terms "biomass" or "biosolids". In this report, "biomass" refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the wastewater treatment process. The partial treatment on vessels involves separating the solids from the liquid fraction. Ship biomass typically contains more liquid than shore-side produced "biosolids". Cruise ship generated biomass is considered a subset of the "residual solids" term defined in the MOU. The MOU cites the cruise industry as recognizing Washington's fragile marine environment and commits to help protect the environment by establishing specific requirements for wastewater and hazardous waste management for the industry. The MOU also authorizes the 10 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Department of Ecology to inspect one vessel per season to verify compliance with the provisions of the MOU. The MOU prohibits discharge of untreated blackwater, untreated greywater, or solid waste within waters subject to the MOU and prohibits discharge of oily bilge water if not in compliance with applicable federal and state laws. Discharges of effluent from on board treatment of blackwater and greywater are allowed within the boundaries of the MOU if certain reporting, recordkeeping, and monitoring requirements are met. However, as stated earlier, the discharge of residual solids is prohibited in waters subject to this MOU, within 12 nautical miles from shore and within the entire boundaries of the Olympic Coast Marine Sanctuary. This results in no discharge of residual solids to Washington State waters. 11 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port=~ DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY of Seattle Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Table 1. Seattle/Alaska Homeport Industry 2009 (Planned) Day Cruise Line Vessel Terminal ETA ETD Pax Count LOA Itinerary Arriving From Next Port Thursday Princess Pacific Princess T91 0600 1600 670 594 14 Day Victoria Ketchikan Friday HAL Zaandam T91 0700 1700 1432 778 7 Day Victoria Juneau Friday Royal Caribbean Rhapsody of the Seas T91 0700 1600 1998 916 7 Day Victoria Juneau Friday Celebrity Infinity P66 0600 1600 2050 965 7 Day Victoria Juneau Saturday HAL Amsterdam T91 0700 1700 1380 781 7 Day Victoria Juneau Saturday NCL Norwegian Star P66 0600 1600 2240 965 7 Day Prince Rupert Ketchikan Saturday Princess Golden Princess T91 0600 1600 2600 950 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday HAL Westerdam T91 0700 1600 1916 936 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday NCL Norwegian Pearl P66 0600 1600 2380 965 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday Princess Star Princess T91 0600 1600 2600 950 7 Day Victoria Ketchikan 2008 Day Cruise Line Vessel Terminal ETA ETD Pax Count LOA Itinerary Arriving From Next Port Friday HAL Amsterdam T30 0600 1600 1380 781 7 Day Victoria Juneau Friday Royal Caribbean Rhapsody of the Seas 130 0600 1600 1998 916 7 Day Prince Rupert Juneau Friday Celebrity Infinity P66 0600 1600 2050 965 7 Day Victoria Juneau Saturday HAL Oosterdam 130 0600 1600 1848 936 7 Day Victoria Juneau Saturday NCL Norwegian Star P66 0600 1600 2240 965 7 Day Prince Rupert Ketchikan Saturday Princess Golden Princess 130 0600 1600 2600 950 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday HAL Westerdam 130 0600 1600 1916 936 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday NCL Norwegian Pearl P66 0600 1600 2380 965 7 Day Victoria Juneau Sunday Princess Star Princess 130 0600 1600 2600 950 7 Day Victoria Ketchikan Notes: ETA - Estimated Time of Arrival ETD - Estimated Time of Departure Pax Count - Passenger Count LOA - Length Overall 12 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Draft Phase 1A Study, December 30, 2008 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port0" PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Seattle Figure 2. MOU BoundariesFigure 2. MOU Boundaries 13 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Alaska Discharge Standards Cruise ships that travel in Alaska waters, including all Seattle-based cruise vessels, are subject to rigorous state and federal regulations regarding discharge of wastewater. Specific to Federal rules, "Title XIVCertain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations" applies to large commercial passenger vessels only, which are defined as those vessels having more than 500 passengers. Effluent standards are set for blackwater only and allow continuous discharge if secondary treatment standards are met and compliance is demonstrated through semi-monthly sampling. Until Federal law closed former "donut holes," areas greater than three nautical miles from shore but within Alexander Archipelago provided an unregulated location for ships to discharge raw sewage. The U.S. EPA has begun the process of evaluating cruise ship wastewater discharge requirements in Alaska. Beginning in 2008, vessels carrying 250 or more passengers have been required to obtain a permit to discharge in Alaskan waters (Alaska DEC, 2008). This new permit includes increased reporting to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and more stringent effluent limitations for several water quality parameters, in particular, copper. All large vessels under the federal program (500+ passengers) must pay a third party sampler and laboratory to take and analyze at least two samples of effluent per season. The U.S. Coast Guard, which enforces the federal standards, requires large cruise ships that have been certified for continuous discharge to sample twice per month. Crew members of small vessels are permitted to sample only after proving to the DEC that their crew members have appropriate background and training to perform wastewater sampling. DEC approves the protocol and procedures used by industry samplers and laboratories and also conducts audits. In addition, the DEC (or its contractor) takes its own wastewater samples in Southeast and South Central Alaska. Due to the overlap of the state and Federal law, large cruise ships have one of three options for their wastewater discharge: 1. Vessels may hold their wastewater and only discharge it once they are outside of Alaska waters (roughly 3 nautical miles from shore but excluding former "donut holes"). The wastewater from these vessels is not subject to the state-required sampling regime and effluent standards. 2. Vessels may discharge their wastewater when they are at least 1 nautical mile from shore and traveling at a speed of at least 6 knots. The grey and blackwater must meet the strict state effluent limits. 14 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle 3. Vessels may treat their wastewater with advanced on board wastewater treatment systems that meet the stringent requirements that enable them to be certified by the U.S. Coast Guard for continuous discharge. Most large cruise ships operate under Option 1 or 3. Vessels typically only operate under Option 2 while they are seeking certification from the U.S. Coast Guard for continuous discharge (Option 3). For a list of large cruise ships that have been allowed to continuously discharge as well as those that hold wastewater, see http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/cruise_ships/index.htm. Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations There are primarily two types of wastewater treatment systems on board cruise ships: Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTSs) and Type II Marine Sanitation Devices (MSDs). A brief synopsis of the major operational features of each treatment system follows. Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS) AWTSs generally treat sewage and greywater in a combined system. EPA's Draft Cruise Ship Discharge Analysis states, "These systems generally provide improved screening, biological treatment, solids separation (using filtration or flotation), disinfection (using ultraviolet light), and sludge processing as compared to traditional Type II MSDs." According to the EPA, 23 of 28 large cruise ships traveling in Alaskan waters were equipped with AWTSs as of 2006 (EPA, 2007). While these systems produce relatively clean effluent, they produce large amounts of biomass. Respondents to the survey conducted for this study reported generating 15-40 metric tons of biomass per day. A 2007 study conducted by King County estimated that cruise ships in Puget Sound waters generate 35 tons (including water content) of biomass daily. Modern AWTSs for cruise ships have several stages. First the black and greywater is combined; next a screening process removes large solids and non-biodegradable material; and then water enters a biological reactor where it is broken down by bacteria. Following the bacterial breakdown it is necessary to clarify (remove solids) the water. The two main methods applied on cruise ships are ultrafiltration (UF) or dissolved air floatation (DAF). Ultrafiltration involves pumping water through a semi-permeable membrane under high pressure. The DAF method involves dissolving air into the wastewater under pressure then allowing the air to come out of solution at a lower or ambient pressure. When the air comes out of solution it forms tiny bubbles that adhere to the suspended solids and carry them to the surface where they can be skimmed. The last step of treating the clarified water is to sterilize it, typically with ultraviolet light, before discharging it. All but one of the cruise vessels that currently homeport at the Port of Seattle use AWTSs. 15 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Table 2 shows the different systems utilized on cruise ships that have called at Port of Seattle terminals since 2004 based on inspection reports prepared by the Department of Ecology. Type II MSDs Type II MSDs only treat blackwater. Currently, only one cruise vessel calling at Port of Seattle facilities utilizes a Type II MSD. Most Type II MSDs use biological treatment and chlorination for the treatment of sewage. Some cruise ships with Type II MSDs use only maceration (breaking up of solids into small pieces) and chlorination when treating their sewage and do not utilize biological treatment (EPA 2007). A screen is sometimes included for removal of grit and other debris. Vessels utilizing Type II MSDs must hold their untreated greywater on board until they are within an area where discharge is permitted. Type II MSDs using biological-chlorination treatment work similarly to municipal wastewater treatment systems. Figure 3 shows a simplified schematic of a biological-chlorination Type II MSD. 16 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 0.( Seattle Table 2. Summary of Washington State Department of Ecology Information Regarding NWCA Cruise Ships, Wastewater Treatment and Biomass Management HlIm .Total !~.SldU21 ! Cruise Line ,Ship IPersons WWTrea.tment system Solids 20041.005 2007 200G IDisposal Technique ton Board: I2008 I I Ecologv I Inspected I ,Blackw.atar Gra atef CarnivalCruiuune l -L- ,-- TSolids are I senile eN and- IGWhOldin9.tankanddischarged>12 nm (2005 SolIds are I I,epan)removed.S1rainedand I : !2005 2006 2779 :BioDuratRochem MIlC9d wrth B'N I:~~i~~~ated (2006 & 2007 12 22 2007 ' CelebntyCrulses 26 IS 11 i 3409 Hamannllazarus None t 2 I 1 2800 ,Zenon Mixed wllh fJN I 21 2034 Unknown Unknown I 4 Cryslal Cruises INONE HollandAmeficaune 2027 IUnknO'Wn 2' 20 I 20 19 2007 ! I I~GOI;dsincineraled;&N !~tidsdlschargedat"12 I Noordirn 2718 IRochem8iofiUwion Rochem LPRO Inm. 21 I IG"'ISOlidSinCinerated.fNV ,sohdsdischa,gedat:>12 I i~~i'd;~ ~~~~a~es~a~~ls~~l looeSlerdam 26'8 IRochemBio-fll1ration 'Rochem lPRO l~nl1o inCineration 21 21 21 21 ilaandam 2107 Zenon Milll!dwllhfN./1 I 1 22 1 'Zulderdam 26'8 RochemBio-fillF.ltJon Rochem LPRO 1 2079 Zenon MllaJdwllh fMI !GWsolidslncineraled; eN ! ! jsolids discharged at >12 ! ! iWeslerdam 2648 :Rochem 8iofillration Rochem LPRO rnm 21 i~ :;roS B. dam Zenon I , '''''' '654 Zenon I !Veendam -L 1854 Zenon Zenon 2 ! 2 2006 i jsludge senllo sludge lank I I !anddischarged>12nmor No.wegian C.uise Une 'Norwe ian Pea,1 42lJ :Scanshl MixedwlIhe-N lisdliedandincinerated. 20 22 2007 I i~~fn~~t~~: ~~led and I I I :Norwe lanSlar 'Mixed with fMI i~~~~:I:: and 70%, 17 2O! 21 22 I 21 1 2005 ; 2006 , Iscreened solids and sludge iheld in sludge lank (14S) !Norwe ian Sun I ! 2952 Scanshi MiX2d with fNI land dischar ed >12 nm. 20 o ' I ii, , jsludge senlto2 holding i ! Ilanksanddlscharged:>12 j Norwe ian Dream 2.446 IScanshio ,MlxedwllhfNI/ lnm 12 i 2005 lsludge senllo Gludgelank I ! , I I~nd discharged >12 nmor I_Norwe9i!!l..plrit 3600 I~ MixedwitilfNI/ lisdriedandincinerated. 20 18 2005 Norwl!9ian Win!!.-Ll~Scanshp Mixed with EMI-l- I I " ISUdge from Hamworlhy I~Slem MBR's is discharged I lal;>12 nm.while screened ! I Princess Cruises 36IiJ ,HamwonhvBloreaclor MlxedwrthfNI/ !so~dsa'e Incineraled. 21 21 2007 19udge from Hamwor1hy !syslemM8R's is discharged 'Sun Princess 2820 ,Hamwol111 Bioreaclor Mixed with FNV I::~; ;~in:h~l:ra~::.en8d 21 ISlarP,incess 31nl :Unknown Unknown 21 , j ISudge from Hamworthy !system M8R's is discharged 1 :HalThYonhYBIOr~aclor :MI~dwrthB'N I::~;~~:n~~~l.l~::ened 2850 1 j 20 2006 i 3,.., 'Sa hire Princess I 3,.., Re enl Seven Seas CflJises 'Seven Seas Mariner 1200 :H amwol1h Bioreaclor Mixed with fJN Royal Caribbean Inlernalianal iRadlance of the Seas 3360 :UnknO'Wn Unknown ! iSerenade of lhe Seas 2950 :Scanshi MIX$dwdh f1.N I 19udge lseither incinerated lor landed ashole in Vidooa I~~pl~~::~~~~a~l~dge Ifrom fN.Isystem is either lincinel~o ~i: > m 11 11 11 C Z 1\ 1"1 ::n fil ~N[ - N~.-PlmNG == MUUllllUill [)I S lJ ..c CRUISE lERMfNAL BUILDING (B'UILDING~.f1 x !Nllm ilOC"t~ IILlS' W I tll'.11G' +i l o ,...0- un ~I') J I GO [,... I ,,0) ""u Jo ~r1, Q/ ..J In [)I [ o ~ L U I l on IIII l~[ - ~ -+ '!RKI~ >,./ o A ~~I!ld ON - lIIlllIJ [ U n ...,l l0 VI 1) F:.: 0.0 ,... ~ 10,Q '::Ol I ~ ~:P01[NIIAllOCATION roR ~: IlWU rRAm ~~ ~ o~ 1o( oJ 2 3u NOr[: SHIP ACmS PORr LOCArlONS BIOMASS OFF LOADING r=d~1 ~""-I--I rl ,... AR( ID[NTlmD IN rm rROM sourH US:V~SS~l 8UNKrR OIL [J:~~;I~~:YCY [GR(SS ~ND Or PIER AS PRIVIDW BY CRUIS[ )ccle feel l~rt~1eaIIl OJ- ~~ : ~ mMINAlS Or mRICA. I :Dru~R( I ; BAGGAG[ DELIVERY l:IJ : O[lIVmY TRUCK nO,... Z/ IIIJ FIGURE 31 PIER 91 SHIP LAYOUr ~ ~ : lUGGAGE/SIOR[S 11 _ Itt ; roRK lIri "0ruU LOADING cms CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY ,'(II "'" I CcmJ:trg EilgiriOOls o~, 11111/2~~8 0::2 34 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study '-----------------------------------------------------"--------------- Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 '"'"-'=X W +-' o'"-- C"J 0- wo 0:: n ~I 00 c;::- I . CO +-'0 :::J ONO i;'/ -.J rn 0' c o .~ '"-- '"-- '-- 00 >/ o >-. <:-0 o en:::J BAGGAGE DELIVERY = VESSEL BUNKER OIL rn E;g = FLOWER VAN 0-0 "'OJ- rn n 0 = FORK LIFT ~rn = LUGGAGE/STORES 0) rn LOADING CAGES OJ '2 CJu CJ C'--J ......-; r-- co (,-J ""iJ Port of Seattle >r::::: 0 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment PHASE 1A STUDY NOTE: PHOTO TAKEN FOLLOWING NOTE: POTENTIAL LOCATION FOR 35 0 Z/ COMPLETION OF LOAD/UN-LOAD BIOMASS OFF LOADING IS NOT FIGURE 32 PIER 66 SHIP LAYOUT -0 8 OPERATIONS SHORTLY BEFORE APPARENT. CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY 0)0 +-' N VESSEL DEPARTURE. C;/ Consulting( Engineers NOT TO SCALE 11/1812008 0:::: ~I I CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Direct Discharge to Barge This alternative would include use of marine barges to remove the biomass using similar methodology to fueling cruise vessels. A marine barge would be positioned by tug alongside the cruise vessel, a floating boom would deployed around the tug and barge to contain the off load operations, and biomass would be transferred to the barge using on board pumps. This scenario has the benefit of not impacting pier-side operations. It would, however, require the purchase or lease of barges specifically designed and constructed for this unique use. An analysis of the availability and cost of these barges was not included in this study. An additional complexity of this scenario is that on most cruise vessels the location for biomass transfer and vessel fueling occur at the same "break" or access door in the vessel hull. Due to the size of the barges involved as well as the hazards and complexities of marine fueling operations, current vessel configurations do not allow for simultaneously fueling the vessel from a barge while also removing biomass to a second barge located in close proximity. Fueling takes approximately six hours for each ship call, so it is not possible to stagger fueling and biomass transfer onto barges. In order to accomplish a simultaneous transfer of fuel (on board) and biomass (off load), modifications to on board piping systems including potentially creating a new access break served by biomass piping would be required. Evaluation of the cost and effort to create a new access break was not conducted as a part of this study. It is unknown if regulatory agencies with oversight capacity of marine fueling operations would have any concerns about the simultaneous fueling and biomass off loading. Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck Discharging various types of waste from ships to tanker trucks is a common practice in the marine industry, such as in Scandinavia, as described in Section 2. However, due to pier-side congestion during existing turnaround operations, specific challenges to the feasibility of this practice at the Port of Seattle exist and are discussed below. It is anticipated that this alternative for biomass transfer would have the largest impact on existing pier-side operations. Emerald Services of Seattle has serviced the marine industry with vacuum trucks for a number of years. They are currently located on East Marginal Way where they transfer waste via pipeline directly to the South King County treatment facility. Emerald Services has a fleet of 11 'large' vacuum trucks and 12 'small' vacuum trucks. There are approximately four trucks with a 6,500 gallon capacity, seven trucks with a 5,000 gallon capacity and 12 trucks with a 3,000 gallon capacity. All trucks are equipped with vacuum pumps. The large trucks are 50-60 feet long. The total biomass loads based on all vessels surveyed varied from 15,000 gallons per week to 74,000 gallons per week. The vessels with the two largest weekly generation quantities were 74,000 gallons each. If these are considered outliers and the remaining vessels are averaged, the biomass off load volume is approximately 35,000 gallons. 36 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Using the information gathered from speaking with Emerald Services an analysis was done to determine how a series filling operation would work, and what the likely fill times would be to transfer a week's worth of biomass from the surveyed vessels. It is possible to unload biomass from a vessel in 7 hours or less with a total of three large trucks using series loading. The three truck series loading scenario allows time for hooking up, loading, unhooking, paperwork processing, transit to the unloading location, unloading, transit back to the pier, and waiting in a queuing area to fill again. Using the data provided by the vendor, it is estimated that one large truck can be filled continuously every 70 minutes. One truck would be on the pier at all times, and one truck in-waiting at a designated queuing area. A third truck would be in transit or unloading. The advantage of this scenario is that only one truck would be on the pier for the entire 70 minute loading. The second truck, staged at a queuing area, would be moved into position adjacent to the first truck (prior to the first trucks departure) for the period of time required to connect hoses in order that the 70-minute cycle time be realized. One option for further exploration is loading biomass onto two trucks in parallel on the pier. This scenario would double the total number of large trucks in the entire operation from three to six and require two large trucks to be on the dock at all times, two trucks in the queuing area, and two trucks off loading or in-transit. The loading rate would be twice what would be required for single truck loading. According to Emerald Services, the vessels and the trucks are configured with 3" quick disconnect fittings. Two large trucks loaded in one hour would mean an average loading rate of 13,000 gallons per hour or 217 gallons per minute. This is not an unreasonable flow rate for a 3" fitting, resulting in velocities of fewer than 10 feet per second. However, loading two trucks in parallel would require modification to existing on board systems as the vessels are not currently outfitted to support this type of dual pumping operation. In addition, for this proposed operation to occur, it would be necessary to ensure that the ships' pumps and piping are adequate for this pumping rate. Direct Discharge to Piping on Pier The location of biomass transfer varies by vessel due to the variable access port locations where on board piping systems can deliver biomass to the shore. In order to accommodate this variability of off load location, it would be most efficient if the shore-side pumps, required to support off loading and transfer of biomass product to the remote storage facility, were mounted on a chassis or similar device to allow efficient positioning at any of the unique off load location required by each vessel. However, the need to service the variable discharge locations on the vessels requires a similar ability to connect to the under-pier piping at several, perhaps many, discrete locations through access points ("manholes") in the pier. 37 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Creation of these access points through the pier deck would require structural analysis of the pier to ensure all existing and proposed load conditions meet applicable codes. Over-water construction work with a need to access areas under the pier increases the cost of such efforts. To implement this method of biomass off loading, piping to transfer the biomass to an upland facility would be placed under approximately 1,200 to 1,500 lineal feet of pier at both Pier 66 and Terminal 91. At both facilities, it is not anticipated that piping could be placed in upland soils adjacent to the piers, as they are located below existing building structures or contain the utility infrastructure necessary to support the current operations. At Terminal 91, for example, the approximately 8 feet of soil area exists between the new cruise facility and the pier carries several utilities including storm water, as well as potable and fire water supply to the building, leaving little room for additional pipes. Under-pier piping requires thoughtful placement and protection to minimize damage from floating debris, which can damage piping on a rising tide or in wave conditions. Potential environmental issues associated with placement of biomass pipes under the pier, where they could be damaged are unknown and would need to be evaluated. The Terminal 91 project did not include any modifications to the pier. All construction was performed above the pier, consequently under-pier piping was not considered for the project. Due to the significant weight of storage tanks, it is not practical to store the biomass on the pier structure itself. Accordingly, it would be necessary to develop storage areas for the biomass in the upland areas adjacent to the cruise piers at either Pier 66 or Terminal 91. The specific location for a storage facility would have to be determined. It is anticipated that such a facility would require an area of sufficient size for storage tanks, discharge piping, and tanker truck access. Due to the relatively small and constrained nature of Pier 66, this is an impractical option. The benefit of a direct discharge type of installation would be the smaller pier foot print area required to support the biomass off loading which would likely have a similar lesser impact (than tanker truck off loading) on current pier-side operations. The disadvantages of this type of installation include the cost to purchase the pumping infrastructure, install the pipes under the piers, and construct the storage facility. In addition, and as noted above, the exposed location of the pipes under the pier increases the risk of potential spills due to damage caused by floating debris. Cruise Industry Wastewater Management in Scandinavia Much like the Alaskan cruise industry, growth of the Scandinavian cruise industry has greatly increased over the past decade. The Baltic Sea receives between 250 and 300 cruise ships each year. The wastewater produced in these vessels is currently estimated to contain 113 tons of 38 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle nitrogen and 38 tons of phosphorus, substances that contribute to eutrophication in the Sea. Most of the wastewater is still discharged into the Baltic Sea, mainly in international waters. According to the international convention (MARPOL 73/78 and Annex IV), ships may discharge black water beyond 12 nautical miles from the shore line and greywater beyond three nautical miles from the shore line. The massive blooms of blue-green algae along the shorelines of the Baltic Sea are the most visible evidence of this environmental problem. A report on the estimated nutrient load originating from ships' wastewater into the Baltic Sea found that approximately 0.05% of the total nitrogen and 0.5% of the total phosphorus load in the Baltic Sea is attributable to wastewater from cruise ships (Hanna-Kaisa Huhta et al, 2007). The eutrophication in the Baltic Sea has created a sense of urgency on the part of the Scandinavian countries to provide on shore transfer of wastewater to municipal treatment systems. While there are environmental differences between the shallow Baltic Sea and the Puget Sound region, the information provided by Scandinavian ports is expected to help the Port of Seattle to evaluate biomass management approaches and learn from the experiences of the Baltic ports. The Baltic Sea is a relatively shallow, enclosed body of water with minimal tidal exchange surrounded by dense population. The Baltic Sea Area has been designated a Special Area under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1973, as amended by a protocol in 1978 MARPOL 73/78). Such status is given to sea areas which, because of their special oceanographic or ecological characteristics, are regarded as particularly sensitive to environmental disturbances. As a result, regulations governing discharges of ship-generated wastes have been enacted in the Baltic Sea area. All of the Baltic countries have agreed to the establishment of a "no special fee" system under which ports charge reception and treatment costs to all ships calling as part of their harbor fee, irrespective of whether a ship delivers any waste or not and irrespective of the type or amount of waste discharged. The Baltic countries also agreed to a mandatory discharge of all wastes to port reception facilities before leaving port. Due to the no special fee system, the Baltic seaports have invested in numerous waste reception facilities (see Figure 9 and Table 5). Unfortunately, only some of the shipping companies utilize these facilities. Those ships that utilize shore-side wastewater hook-ups have placed the ships wastewater treatment systems on "stand-by." Thus, separate biomass waste streams are not being generated while at berth or out on the Baltic and all wastewaters are landed ashore. Additional information on management of wastewater was collected as part of this study via email correspondence with the Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark; the Port of Oslo, Norway; the Port of Helsinki, Finland; and Port of Stockholm, Sweden, as described below. In all instances, no distinction was made in the management of wastewater versus the management of biomass. As stated earlier, ships that plan to discharge wastewater on shore typically do not operate their wastewater treatment systems and thus no biomass is produced. 39 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle An additional information request for total off load time, logistical shore-side considerations (i.e., number of tanker trucks on the dock, etc.), and odor mitigation and system reliability has been made. Only limited information from the Port of Stockholm had been received at the time of this publication and is provided below. Copenhagen Malm Ports, Denmark Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark utilize tanker trucks to collect wastewater from cruise ships. After collection, the wastewater is pumped to the local municipal wastewater treatment facility (e-mail correspondence with Leif Kurdahl, Copenhagen Malm Ports). Ships can transfer waste to the tankers with no special fee if they meet the following conditions: 1. The ship can deliver the sewage at the shipside at a pump capacity of 50 m3 per hour. 2. Tankers can obtain unhindered access to and from the place of collection without delay. 3. The ship is fitted with a standard flange. Copenhagen Malm Ports charge a fee for disproportionately large amounts of waste (i.e. more than 130 liters per person per day since the last port of call). 40 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port::? PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 0" Seattle ~NorwaY '> Sweden I Estonia Latvia Lithuania Germany Legend o -National Capital Poland - City with Reception Facility for Ship Waste Figure 18. Baltic Sea Wastewater Reception Facility Locations Port of Oslo, Norway In Norway, the general rule is to discharge wastewater no less than 300 meters away from shore (Correspondence with Lisbeth Petterson, Port of Oslo). However, there are several protected areas in Norwegian waters that have more restrictive dumping rules (usually 12 nautical miles from shore). Despite less restrictive dumping rules, the Port of Oslo does offer means of on shore disposal of cruise ship wastewater. The wastewater is collected via tanker truck and then delivered to a local municipal treatment facility, but the exact method by which 41 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle the waste is collected is unclear. The Port of Oslo finances this service by charging all vessels a waste fee, regardless of whether or not waste is disposed of on shore. This waste fee also covers collection and disposal of garbage, recyclables, varnish waste, and bilge water (as long as the amount of waste generated is considered reasonable given a ship's size and time at sea). Port of Helsinki, Finland The Port of Helsinki, Finland, has facilities for cruise ships to pump their wastewater to municipal treatment systems (e-mail correspondence with Vuorivirta Kaarina, Port of Helsinki). The Port of Helsinki recently extended its program for cruise ship wastewater management in June 2008 (Voss, 2008). In order to make on shore discharge possible, the Port of Helsinki built sewers and receiving bays at all cruise terminals and ferry docks that connect to the city's sewer system and have a receiving capacity of approximately 100m/hr through port-provided wastewater hoses. Prior to 2008, the City of Helsinki enacted a separate charge for wastewater discharged into the city sewer system. However, the Port recently formed a five-year agreement with Helsinki Water (Helsingin Vesi) to establish a fixed fee regardless of the amount of water discharged, enabling them to lower their prices and encourage cruise companies to use the system. The long-term plan is to charge a standard fee for cruise vessels to discharge wastewater on shore, and to reward the ship or company with the biggest increase in wastewater pumped into the system at the end of the season with a discount on their discharge fees (Voss, 2008). Port of Stockholm, Sweden Like all ports in the Baltic Sea, the Port of Stockholm, Sweden, is regulated by maritime EU rules and regulations that include a general port fee. The port has chosen to include waste disposal service in the general port fee to encourage proper handling of wastewater (e-mail correspondence with Melissa Feldtmann, Port of Stockholm). It should be noted that ships in the Baltic do maintain the right to discharge their wastewater and biomass in international waters (>12 nautical miles from shore). The Port of Stockholm does not use trucks to off load the ships but has a sewage system in place with a number of connection points to transfer the wastewater to municipal treatment facilities. While the Port of Stockholm reports a high level of reliability with their wastewater reception facilities, they have had continuous problems with hydrogenated sulfur compounds in the wastewater forming into sulfuric acid. This mist above the water surface at the Port eats away and corrodes the upper parts of the sewage pipes requiring a lot of maintenance. The Port is working with the ships to identify solutions to minimize the production of hydrogenated sulfur in the ships' wastewater tanks. The Port also must maintain numerous different fittings to be able to connect to the ships as there is not currently a standard fitting requirement. The Port of Stockholm has also had odor complaints around wastewater off loading operations, although the specific frequency of odor complaints was not reported. 42 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Table 5. Wastewater Reception Facilities at Ports in the Baltic Sea Finland Reception facility Hanko ROPAX ships pump sewage straight into the sewer network. Ro-Ro ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Helsinki Etelsatama: 17 waste water reception points. Lnsisatama: 9 waste water reception points. Srnisten satama: 1 waste water reception point. Other harbor parts: totally 24 waste water reception points. The waste water reception points are for passenger ships. The port of Helsinki arranges waste water reception for cargo ships using the tank truck if needed. Inkoo Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Shipping Kaskinen Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Naantali Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck; there are waste stations for solid waste. Oulu Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Pori Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck; Ekokem Oy Ab collects oily waste. Rauma Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Skldvik Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck. Turku Silja and Viking Line ships pump the sewage straight into the sewer network. Other domestic traffic has a possibility to use a tank truck by Hans Langh Oy. Uusikaupunki There are waste wells near the pier where ships can pump sewage. Ships can also pump sewage to a tank truck. Vaasa In the passenger port there is a reception pipeline at ro-ro piers1&2. Ships can also pump sewage to a tank truck. Denmark Copenhagen Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks and is then discharged into the municipal waste water plant (biological and chemical waste water treatment). Frederikshavn Black water is pumped to the tank trucks and grey water is discharged into the Frederikshavn's sewer network. Rnne Black water and grey water are pumped to the tank trucks. Part of the grey water is discharged into the sewer network. rhus Private company collects sewage from ships. Germany Sassnitz No reception facilities for waste water. Sewage is pumped to the tank truck from a local waste disposal company. Latvia Ventspils Sewage is transported to JSC Ventbunkers for treatment. Riga Sewage is transported to Riga Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant. Poland Gdansk Sewage is discharged into the sewer network from the tank trucks (WUKO) and after that there are several treatment plants: mechanical-biological sewage treatment plant in Port Pnocny, sewage treatment plant KOS 2x3 in Basen Grniczy, sewage treatment plant Bioclere at Przemysowe Berth. 43 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Gdynia Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks. Sweden Halmstad Reception facilities only for oil sludge and bilge water. Helsingborg The passenger ships discharge sewage into the sewer network; other ships pump sewage to the tank truck. Kalmar Local waste management company collects the sludge from ships. It is transported by trucks to a terminal situated in the harbor. Landskrona Waste water is pumped into the sewer network. Oskarshamn No reception facilities. Oxelsund The type of reception facility is not described. Slvesborg Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks. Ume No reception facilities. Waste water reception facilities in the ports in the year 2005 based on the inquiry results (Huhta et al., 2007). Future Alternatives for Biomass Disposal A significant effort is underway by the cruise industry to develop innovative ways to achieve better environmental performance in the disposal of waste from ships. The company PyroGenesis, with support from the U.S. Navy and in cooperation with Carnival Cruise Lines, has developed the Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System ( PAWDS ) as an alternative to sh pboard incineration. According to website information, the system is scalablei and has the option for energy recovery with system capacities ranging from 0.1 to 15m3/day. The final product is an inert sand-like ash which can either be off loaded in-port or disposed of at sea. The sys em has been in operation on Carnival Cruise Lines M/S Fantasy since 200t 3 and is now operated solely by the vessel crew. The system handles 5m3/day of waste. PAWDS is currently being marketed as Plasma King Waste Destruction System by Deerberg-Systems. Scanship Environmental makes waste treatment and handling systems for a significant portion of the cruise ship market, recently entered into an agreement with ITI Energy Limited to promote, install, and support ITI's marine gasification technology. This technology allows the transformation of difficult to-process feedstocks such as municipal solid waste and sewage sludge into a gas clean enough to fuel an internal combustion engine. According to Scanship the system will be on the market soon and will be suitable for new-build and retrofit markets. While this may hold promise for future applications, more data from demonstration projects will be needed to determine the viability of the technology. 44 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY 01 Seattle Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Section 4 Conclusion References Appendix 45 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle Conclusion Based on the data compiled for this report, the following primary conclusions have been drawn: There is currently no single viable option for managing biomass created on board Seattle-based cruise ships. Biomass capacity on board cruise vessels ranges from three days to one week, with two ships having a full-week's capacity. While biomass is pumpable and could be transferred on shore, there are significant shore-side challenges that would have to be overcome to accomplish this. On shore transfer would have significant impacts to pier-side operations. The extent of these impacts would vary by vessel, dock facility, volume of biomass to discharge, and method chosen to transfer to shore facilities. An alternative on shore transfer option would be to discharge to a marine barge. The most significant challenge with this option would be synchronization of the off-shore transfer of biomass with vessel fueling, which is also done from marine barges, generally through a common break in the vessel hull. Prior to making the significant investment anticipated for a changed mechanism for managing biomass, the Port of Seattle would have to first invest in additional study associated with the feasibility and cost of vessel retrofits as well as whether there are environmental benefits to off loading biomass at the Port of Seattle. 46 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle References Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). "Division of Water, Cruise Ship Program." Accessed September 28, 2008. http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/cruise_ships/index.htm Hamworthy. "Membrane BioReactor Grey and Blackwater Treatment." Accessed September 28, 2008 http://www.hamworthy.com/docGallery/415.PDF Huhta, Hanna-Kaisa, Jorma Rytkonen & Jukka Sassi. "Estimating nutrient load from waste waters originating from ships in the Baltic Sea Area" Espoo 2007. VTT Tiedotteita Research Notes 2370. 58 p. + app. 13 p. Hydroxyl. "Hydroxyl Sea Clean." Accessed September 28, 2008 http://www.hydroxyl.com/products_cleansea.php King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division, 2008. 2007 Biosolids Quality Summary. Seattle, WA. MEPC (Marine Environment Protection Committee), adopted 13 October 2006. Annex 26 Resolution MEPC.159(55), Revised Guidelines on Implementation of Effluent Standards and Performance Tests for Sewage Treatment Plants. International Maritime Organization. Northwest CruiseShip Association. "NWCruiseShip.org." Accessed September 28, 2008 www.alaska.nwcruiseship.org/ Port of Seattle. "Cruise Seattle." Accessed September 28, 2008 http://www.portseattle.org/seaport/cruise/ ROCHEM (n.d.). "Clearly Superior in Waste Water Treatment," Accessed September 28, 2008. http://www.rochem.com/Home/home.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006a. Holland America Veendam Sampling Episode Report. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/veendam.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006b. Norwegian Star Sampling Episode Report. Washington, DC http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/finalstar.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006c. Princess Cruise Lines Island Princess Sampling Episode Report. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/island.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006d. Sampling Episode Report Holland America Oosterdam Sampling Episode 6506. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/oosterdam.html 47 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 01 Seattle U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Draft Cruise Ship Discharge Assessment Report. Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 40cfr133.102. Washington, DC. Voss, Kelly. "The Port of Helsinki Current Environmental Projects. September 3, 2008" Prepared for the Port of Seattle. 48 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY Port PHASE 1A STUDY 01 Seattle Data Compilation and Initial Assessment Appendix Blank Survey As Sent to Cruise Lines 1 Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009 Port P.O. Box 1209 01 Seattle Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY The Port of Seattle is in the process of studying the feasibility of alternatives to open-ocean discharge of cruise vessel biomass. The first step of this process is to gather information on cruise vessels currently calling at the port. In support of this study, the Port of Seattle is requesting that you please answer the following questions regarding the current methods for handling biomass produced within the vessel. Please return the completed survey to Marie Fritz (fritz.m@portseattle.org) no later than noon on July 16, 2008. For the purposes of this study, "Biomass" refers to the partially-treated solids residuals from the wastewater treatment process. 1. Cruise line and name of the vessel: 2. Type (make/model) of advanced wastewater treatment system(s) or marine sanitation device (please include schematic of treatment system if available): 3. Identify on board waste water types that generate flow which enter the AWTS for treatment (greywater, black water, etc.): 4. For each system identified above, provide the approximate quantity of blackwater and greywater generated daily: 5. Identify the storage capacity of untreated wastewater within the vessel: 6. Identify the storage capacity of treated wastewater within the vessel: 7. Identify the daily treatment (process) capacity of the AWTS system (example gallons or cubic meters per day): Port P.O. Box 1209 01 Seattle Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 8. Identify the daily volume of biomass generated and the volume of biomass generated on a normal cruise evolution (7-days): 9. Estimated consistency of biomass (%liquid, % solid): 10. Identify the capacity of biomass that can be held on board and the method of storage (dry, wet, in tanks, in containers, etc.). 11. What is the current method of biomass disposal? 12. In a normal cruise evolution (7-day voyage), how often is biomass discharged? 13. Is the point where biomass is discharged determined based on capacity or by vessel location? 14. If the vessel conducts shorter cruises (3-4 days), how often and where is biomass discharged? 15. Has the vessel's biomass ever been sampled for conventional pollutants or any other parameters? Port P.O. Box 1209 01 Seattle Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 16. Is this vessel currently fitted to store and discharge biomass to a shoreside facility? 17. If "No" to question 16: a) What would it take to modify the existing on board systems to allow discharge to a shoreside facility? b) Is the consistency of the biomass material conducive to pumping to a shoreside facility? 18. If "Yes" to question 16: a) How is the biomass transferred shoreside (pumped, water-added then pumped, vacuumed, etc.)? b) Identify company that receives the biomass shoreside and (if possible) the location where the biomass is ultimately disposed: c) How long does it currently take to transfer biomass to the shoreside facilities? 19. If all or portions of the biomass is incinerated: a) Describe what portion of the biomass is incinerated (screened solids, etc.): b) How is this biomass transferred to the incinerator: c) How much time does it take to transfer and incinerate the biomass? d) How much fuel is consumed in the incineration of the biomass? e) How is the remnant ash (left over following incineration) typically disposed?
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.