The main purposes of this posting is thers must be a lot of people which have trouble with they software and need to Re-installed, but how if they forgot they own serial number of they softwares? here is several serial number that maybe can work. Forgive me if there is few that can't be work.
serial number 1 (text)
serial number 2 (text)
Senin, 11 Agustus 2008
Maintenance Management for Ships Machinary
Ship is like a small town in the middle of ocean when it operate. Like a town need power plant and Water plan suplier for its accomodation, ship needs engine room which containning all main system which is needed for accommodation all passenger, including crew, even for ship itself. But have you imagine, how to managing the maintenance for that super-complex system to makes ship operating well? here is a simple outline which perharps makes you more understand the maintenance management concept for ship machinary.
This is the outline of this topics. I found it from internet too, I hope it will be usefull.
http://www.4shared.com/file/58596698/89d721a1/ship_machinery_maintenance_lecture_281106.html
This is the outline of this topics. I found it from internet too, I hope it will be usefull.
http://www.4shared.com/file/58596698/89d721a1/ship_machinery_maintenance_lecture_281106.html
Jumat, 08 Agustus 2008
Reliability of Water Ballast Treatment of Ships.
Background
► The transport of ballast water by ships between ports has been identified as one of the main mechanisms for the introduction of alien organisms (aquatic plants, animals and pathogens) into marine environments.
► Invasions of non-indigenous species are a major threat to the marine environment and its biodiversity.
► Spreading of pathogens has the potential for a major impact on human health.
►These hazards create a need for some form of ballast water management (BWM).
►The IMO has adopted guidelines on BWM based on the voluntary use of BWE at sea,
►and the UK encourages the use of these guidelines.
►The IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) has been working on drafting a comprehensive international instrument for BWM,
►Formal safety assessment (FSA) has been adopted by IMO to help evaluate the costs and benefits of options for enhancing marine safety, including protection of life, health, the marine environment and property.
►An FSA of BWM could therefore assist the development ofinternational regulations on the issue.
►The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) therefore commissioned Det Norske Veritas (DNV) to undertake a scoping study for an FSA of ballast water management.
The question of how to manage the risk from harmful aquatic organisms contained in ships’ ballast water is one of the most challenging issues facing the maritime industry at present.
Objectives
The objectives of the scoping study, as stated by MCA, are to:
1. Establish the scope of an FSA study of ballast water management on merchant ships.
2. Indicate the project areas and associated tasks for the FSA.
3. Quantify the resources required to undertake such a study and its timescale on a UK and European basis.
General Approach
DNV’s general approach to conducting this scoping study has been:
1. To review the extensive literature on BWM and identify the major areas of knowledge uncertainty that are relevant for an FSA study (Section 2 of this report).
2. To consider what an FSA can potentially contribute to the BWM issue, using DNV’sown experience of FSA and discussion with key stakeholders (Section 3).
3. To propose the tasks and resources for the FSA, making maximum use of existing knowledge and focussing on key uncertainties (Section 4).
Glossary
ALARP as low as reasonably practicable
BATNEEC best available technology not entailing excessive costs
BWE ballast water exchange
BWM ballast water management
CBA cost-benefit analysis
CEA cost-effectiveness analysis
DNV Det Norske Veritas
EMBLA Environmental Ballast Water Management Assessment
EU European Union
FSA formal safety assessment
HAZOP hazard and operability study
IACS International Association of Classification Societies
IMO International Maritime Organization
NGO non-governmental organisations
SWIFT structured what-if checklist technique
LITERATURE REVIEW
Alien Species
They are classified into hierarchical categories called taxa. the base level in the taxonomic Hierarchy :
Animals
Plants
Algae
and bacteria
Alien species (also known as introduced, exotic, non-native or non-indigenous species)
species transferred by human activity (deliberately or unintentionally)
they do not naturally occur
10 million different species on earth.
Non-Native Marine Species
In Britain, only 51 non-native marine species
15 algae, 5 diatoms, 1 flowering plant and 30 invertebrates, 15 non-native species through ballast water.
In the USA
57 non-native species through ballast water.
Ballast Water
Ballast Water Operations
for operation in the loaded condition,to maintain draught, trim and stability in light loading or empty conditions.
to ensure adequate propeller and bow immersion, minimise hull stresses,prevent list, help minimise motions in waves, and maintain adequate stability.
There are many reasons why ships may take on and discharge ballast at different times (Carlton et al 1995), so it cannot be assumed that no ballast will be discharged in a cargo unloading port or even in a coastal area remote from any port.
Ballast Water Capacities
On average, ballast capacity is approximately 25% of deadweight (Carlton et al 1995).
Ballast pump capacities are typically in the range 150-1000 m3/hour (Carlton et al 1995), roughly in proportion to deadweight capacity.
The world international seaborne trade is estimated as approximately 5000 million tonnes per year (UNCTAD 1999).
Organisms in Ballast Water
Water entering the ballast tank can contain a variety of organisms living in the water and sediment, including fish, crustaceans, molluscs, polychaete worms, arrowworms, coelenterates, sea squirts, dinoflagellates, diatoms and bacteria.
300 species in ballast water on individual trades (Andersen et al 1999)
The density of zooplankton is typically 10,000 specimens per m3 of ballast water,
the density of phytoplankton may be 10 million per m3 (Gollasch 1997).
Risks of Introduction of Alien Species
Several biological invasions have been attributed to ballast water (Andersen et al 1999,Gollasch 1997). The following are the ones with the largest documented economic impacts:
· The Northern Pacific sea star (Asterias amurensis) was introduced to Australia in the 1980s, believed to have been by ballast water containing the larvae from Japan. million (assumed to be annually) (Gollasch 1997).
· The toxic dinoflagellate Gymnodinium catenatum was introduced to Australia in the 1980s, believed to have been by ballast water from bulk carriers trading from Japan or Korea.
Hazard Identification
In this case, hazards might be particularspecies, ship types or port trades considered most likely to introduce harmful alien species.
It would be very desirable to conduct such a study for the UK. Several possible approaches might be used:
A literature-based hazard review, using information such as reviewed above.
A multi-disciplinary group-based hazard identification technique. The best known of such techniques is HAZOP (hazard and operability analysis), but a more appropriate technique for ballast water hazards would be SWIFT (structured what-if checklist technique).
A hazard screening technique such as EMBLA
Hazard assessment
The Australian approach aims to identify “high risk” voyages and vessels for prioritising sampling on arriving vessels and evaluate the need for management measures. Similarly, the EMBLA project aims to identify “unacceptable” ballast water risks on a voyage and evaluate the need for treatment.
There are two main differences between these hazard assessment techniques (EMBLA and the Australian approach) and an FSA:
The hazard assessment techniques are aimed at selecting BWM options for individual voyages by individual ships, and are therefore appropriate for managing the risks within a company or country.
The hazard assessment techniques use acceptance criteria, which are largely judgemental and specific to ballast water risks, in order to justify requiring BWM measures.
Likelihood prediction
A few attempts have been made to quantify the risk of introduction of alien species through ballast water (reviewed by Hayes 1997). The most successful of them estimated the likelihood of simple end-points such as the likelihood of introduction rather than the overall economic damage. They estimated this likelihood by considering a chain of event probabilities, evaluated for individual species and on specific routes. For any one species, the probabilities to be estimated are:
P1. Probability of the species being present in the water when ballasting occurs
P2. Probability of uptake into the ballast tank
P3. Probability of the organism surviving the ballasting process
P4. Probability of the organism surviving the voyage in the ballast tank
P5. Probability of the organism surviving the de-ballasting process
P6. Probability that the species becomes established in the recipient port
The overall probability of introduction of the species from a single vessel is then:
Pi = P1 x P2 x P3 x P4 x P5 x P6
The overall probability of introduction for a port receiving N vessels is:
P = 1- (1 - Pi)N
Risk control measures
Numerous measures have been proposed to control the environmental risks from ballast
water, under the broad heading of BWM. The methods include:
· Ballast water exchange (BWE) at sea. This involves replacing the ballast with water from
the open ocean, which is expected to contain fewer organisms. It is the most commonly used technique at present. However, ships are not designed for this, and it introduces hazards of structural strength and stability. Several different methods are available, but they may not be completely effective at replacing the ballast. Many voyages do not pass through open oceans. A study of ships that exchanged ballast in the North Sea showed that it was less effective at reducing phytoplankton than BWE in open ocean (Macdonald & Davidson 1997). Effectiveness also depends on factors such as tank geometry and water temperature.
· Mechanical treatment by filtration or cyclonic separation. This appears promising for larger organisms, but methods for handling filter residue need to be developed. It is particularly suited to ships that may draw ballast from many locations, as the ballast can be filtered when it is taken on board and the residue discharged back into the original waters. Most studies into treatment methods have suggested filtration in combination with some other treatment method.
Risk Control Measures
Available Options
Numerous measures have been proposed to control the environmental risks from ballast water, under the broad heading of BWM. The methods include:
- Ballast water exchange (BWE) at sea.
- Mechanical treatment by filtration or cyclonic separation.
- Physical treatment by heat, ultraviolet or ultrasound.
- Chemical treatments by various disinfectants and biocides.
- Isolation on board.
- Discharge to reception facilities.
- Supply of clean water from ashore.
Cost and Practicality
The difficulty of eliminating the wide variety of organisms from ballast water means that several BWM measures will probably need to be combined to produce an effective BWM option for an individual ship.
A difficulty in evaluating the options is that few are fully practical solutions directly available for implementation. Even for those that are practical there is hardly any documented experience in using them.
Risks
Most implicitly assume that existing class requirements are sufficient to ensure acceptable safety, and that BWE sequences should be designed to ensure that the limits are not exceeded.
Other methods, notably chemical treatment, involve risks to the ship and its crew.
Mechanical and chemical treatment methods may involve risks to the environment from discharges of hot or chemically treated ballast or filter residues.
Effectiveness
Most BWM methods reduce organisms in the ballast but cannot entirely eliminate them. This means that quantification of the effectiveness of the BWM options in reducing the number of species and specimens discharged will be an important component of the FSA.
Many species are self-replicating and can in principle invade an area from the introduction of a single specimen.
WHAT FSA CAN DELIVER?
Regulatory Approaches
In this case, the FSA is intended to assist MCA in the first place, and to contribute to ongoing debate at IMO and possibly the EU.
The range of possible regulatory approaches to BWM can be broadly categorised as follows:
Guidelines on current good practice, such as the current IMO Guidelines,
Technology standards
Performance standards Management standards
FSA cannot simply resolve these disagreements, but it can explore systematically the impacts of any of these types of regulation. It can also help focus the debate, by providing answers to basic questions such as:
What are the main ship types and voyages likely to introduce harmful alien species?
Which species are likely to have the largest ecological and economic impact?
What level of economic impact might be expected?
How cost-effective are the different BWM methods?
It might be possible to help evaluate the significance of risks from ballast water by comparing with the risks of introduction of alien species through other vectors such as hull fouling.
A theoretical assessment of ballast water risks could be duplicated for other ship vectors, but this would significantly increase the necessary work, and the resulting comparison may still fail to give a clear evaluation of the acceptability of risks from ballast water.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
The FSA approach proposes cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and associated cost-effectiveness criteria to decide on the appropriate level of resources that should be devoted to an issue. Any risk control option should be cost-effective,
Any associated increases in risks to people and property from BWM measures can be included in the same calculation.
BATNEEC and ALARP also consistent with the “precautionary principle”, since this is defined in Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development as follows:
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
In order to apply such a criterion, the damage risks from ballast water must be determined, together with the costs and benefits of possible risk control options, and all must be converted into common financial units.
► The transport of ballast water by ships between ports has been identified as one of the main mechanisms for the introduction of alien organisms (aquatic plants, animals and pathogens) into marine environments.
► Invasions of non-indigenous species are a major threat to the marine environment and its biodiversity.
► Spreading of pathogens has the potential for a major impact on human health.
►These hazards create a need for some form of ballast water management (BWM).
►The IMO has adopted guidelines on BWM based on the voluntary use of BWE at sea,
►and the UK encourages the use of these guidelines.
►The IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) has been working on drafting a comprehensive international instrument for BWM,
►Formal safety assessment (FSA) has been adopted by IMO to help evaluate the costs and benefits of options for enhancing marine safety, including protection of life, health, the marine environment and property.
►An FSA of BWM could therefore assist the development ofinternational regulations on the issue.
►The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) therefore commissioned Det Norske Veritas (DNV) to undertake a scoping study for an FSA of ballast water management.
The question of how to manage the risk from harmful aquatic organisms contained in ships’ ballast water is one of the most challenging issues facing the maritime industry at present.
Objectives
The objectives of the scoping study, as stated by MCA, are to:
1. Establish the scope of an FSA study of ballast water management on merchant ships.
2. Indicate the project areas and associated tasks for the FSA.
3. Quantify the resources required to undertake such a study and its timescale on a UK and European basis.
General Approach
DNV’s general approach to conducting this scoping study has been:
1. To review the extensive literature on BWM and identify the major areas of knowledge uncertainty that are relevant for an FSA study (Section 2 of this report).
2. To consider what an FSA can potentially contribute to the BWM issue, using DNV’sown experience of FSA and discussion with key stakeholders (Section 3).
3. To propose the tasks and resources for the FSA, making maximum use of existing knowledge and focussing on key uncertainties (Section 4).
Glossary
ALARP as low as reasonably practicable
BATNEEC best available technology not entailing excessive costs
BWE ballast water exchange
BWM ballast water management
CBA cost-benefit analysis
CEA cost-effectiveness analysis
DNV Det Norske Veritas
EMBLA Environmental Ballast Water Management Assessment
EU European Union
FSA formal safety assessment
HAZOP hazard and operability study
IACS International Association of Classification Societies
IMO International Maritime Organization
NGO non-governmental organisations
SWIFT structured what-if checklist technique
LITERATURE REVIEW
Alien Species
They are classified into hierarchical categories called taxa. the base level in the taxonomic Hierarchy :
Animals
Plants
Algae
and bacteria
Alien species (also known as introduced, exotic, non-native or non-indigenous species)
species transferred by human activity (deliberately or unintentionally)
they do not naturally occur
10 million different species on earth.
Non-Native Marine Species
In Britain, only 51 non-native marine species
15 algae, 5 diatoms, 1 flowering plant and 30 invertebrates, 15 non-native species through ballast water.
In the USA
57 non-native species through ballast water.
Ballast Water
Ballast Water Operations
for operation in the loaded condition,to maintain draught, trim and stability in light loading or empty conditions.
to ensure adequate propeller and bow immersion, minimise hull stresses,prevent list, help minimise motions in waves, and maintain adequate stability.
There are many reasons why ships may take on and discharge ballast at different times (Carlton et al 1995), so it cannot be assumed that no ballast will be discharged in a cargo unloading port or even in a coastal area remote from any port.
Ballast Water Capacities
On average, ballast capacity is approximately 25% of deadweight (Carlton et al 1995).
Ballast pump capacities are typically in the range 150-1000 m3/hour (Carlton et al 1995), roughly in proportion to deadweight capacity.
The world international seaborne trade is estimated as approximately 5000 million tonnes per year (UNCTAD 1999).
Organisms in Ballast Water
Water entering the ballast tank can contain a variety of organisms living in the water and sediment, including fish, crustaceans, molluscs, polychaete worms, arrowworms, coelenterates, sea squirts, dinoflagellates, diatoms and bacteria.
300 species in ballast water on individual trades (Andersen et al 1999)
The density of zooplankton is typically 10,000 specimens per m3 of ballast water,
the density of phytoplankton may be 10 million per m3 (Gollasch 1997).
Risks of Introduction of Alien Species
Several biological invasions have been attributed to ballast water (Andersen et al 1999,Gollasch 1997). The following are the ones with the largest documented economic impacts:
· The Northern Pacific sea star (Asterias amurensis) was introduced to Australia in the 1980s, believed to have been by ballast water containing the larvae from Japan. million (assumed to be annually) (Gollasch 1997).
· The toxic dinoflagellate Gymnodinium catenatum was introduced to Australia in the 1980s, believed to have been by ballast water from bulk carriers trading from Japan or Korea.
Hazard Identification
In this case, hazards might be particularspecies, ship types or port trades considered most likely to introduce harmful alien species.
It would be very desirable to conduct such a study for the UK. Several possible approaches might be used:
A literature-based hazard review, using information such as reviewed above.
A multi-disciplinary group-based hazard identification technique. The best known of such techniques is HAZOP (hazard and operability analysis), but a more appropriate technique for ballast water hazards would be SWIFT (structured what-if checklist technique).
A hazard screening technique such as EMBLA
Hazard assessment
The Australian approach aims to identify “high risk” voyages and vessels for prioritising sampling on arriving vessels and evaluate the need for management measures. Similarly, the EMBLA project aims to identify “unacceptable” ballast water risks on a voyage and evaluate the need for treatment.
There are two main differences between these hazard assessment techniques (EMBLA and the Australian approach) and an FSA:
The hazard assessment techniques are aimed at selecting BWM options for individual voyages by individual ships, and are therefore appropriate for managing the risks within a company or country.
The hazard assessment techniques use acceptance criteria, which are largely judgemental and specific to ballast water risks, in order to justify requiring BWM measures.
Likelihood prediction
A few attempts have been made to quantify the risk of introduction of alien species through ballast water (reviewed by Hayes 1997). The most successful of them estimated the likelihood of simple end-points such as the likelihood of introduction rather than the overall economic damage. They estimated this likelihood by considering a chain of event probabilities, evaluated for individual species and on specific routes. For any one species, the probabilities to be estimated are:
P1. Probability of the species being present in the water when ballasting occurs
P2. Probability of uptake into the ballast tank
P3. Probability of the organism surviving the ballasting process
P4. Probability of the organism surviving the voyage in the ballast tank
P5. Probability of the organism surviving the de-ballasting process
P6. Probability that the species becomes established in the recipient port
The overall probability of introduction of the species from a single vessel is then:
Pi = P1 x P2 x P3 x P4 x P5 x P6
The overall probability of introduction for a port receiving N vessels is:
P = 1- (1 - Pi)N
Risk control measures
Numerous measures have been proposed to control the environmental risks from ballast
water, under the broad heading of BWM. The methods include:
· Ballast water exchange (BWE) at sea. This involves replacing the ballast with water from
the open ocean, which is expected to contain fewer organisms. It is the most commonly used technique at present. However, ships are not designed for this, and it introduces hazards of structural strength and stability. Several different methods are available, but they may not be completely effective at replacing the ballast. Many voyages do not pass through open oceans. A study of ships that exchanged ballast in the North Sea showed that it was less effective at reducing phytoplankton than BWE in open ocean (Macdonald & Davidson 1997). Effectiveness also depends on factors such as tank geometry and water temperature.
· Mechanical treatment by filtration or cyclonic separation. This appears promising for larger organisms, but methods for handling filter residue need to be developed. It is particularly suited to ships that may draw ballast from many locations, as the ballast can be filtered when it is taken on board and the residue discharged back into the original waters. Most studies into treatment methods have suggested filtration in combination with some other treatment method.
Risk Control Measures
Available Options
Numerous measures have been proposed to control the environmental risks from ballast water, under the broad heading of BWM. The methods include:
- Ballast water exchange (BWE) at sea.
- Mechanical treatment by filtration or cyclonic separation.
- Physical treatment by heat, ultraviolet or ultrasound.
- Chemical treatments by various disinfectants and biocides.
- Isolation on board.
- Discharge to reception facilities.
- Supply of clean water from ashore.
Cost and Practicality
The difficulty of eliminating the wide variety of organisms from ballast water means that several BWM measures will probably need to be combined to produce an effective BWM option for an individual ship.
A difficulty in evaluating the options is that few are fully practical solutions directly available for implementation. Even for those that are practical there is hardly any documented experience in using them.
Risks
Most implicitly assume that existing class requirements are sufficient to ensure acceptable safety, and that BWE sequences should be designed to ensure that the limits are not exceeded.
Other methods, notably chemical treatment, involve risks to the ship and its crew.
Mechanical and chemical treatment methods may involve risks to the environment from discharges of hot or chemically treated ballast or filter residues.
Effectiveness
Most BWM methods reduce organisms in the ballast but cannot entirely eliminate them. This means that quantification of the effectiveness of the BWM options in reducing the number of species and specimens discharged will be an important component of the FSA.
Many species are self-replicating and can in principle invade an area from the introduction of a single specimen.
WHAT FSA CAN DELIVER?
Regulatory Approaches
In this case, the FSA is intended to assist MCA in the first place, and to contribute to ongoing debate at IMO and possibly the EU.
The range of possible regulatory approaches to BWM can be broadly categorised as follows:
Guidelines on current good practice, such as the current IMO Guidelines,
Technology standards
Performance standards Management standards
FSA cannot simply resolve these disagreements, but it can explore systematically the impacts of any of these types of regulation. It can also help focus the debate, by providing answers to basic questions such as:
What are the main ship types and voyages likely to introduce harmful alien species?
Which species are likely to have the largest ecological and economic impact?
What level of economic impact might be expected?
How cost-effective are the different BWM methods?
It might be possible to help evaluate the significance of risks from ballast water by comparing with the risks of introduction of alien species through other vectors such as hull fouling.
A theoretical assessment of ballast water risks could be duplicated for other ship vectors, but this would significantly increase the necessary work, and the resulting comparison may still fail to give a clear evaluation of the acceptability of risks from ballast water.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
The FSA approach proposes cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and associated cost-effectiveness criteria to decide on the appropriate level of resources that should be devoted to an issue. Any risk control option should be cost-effective,
Any associated increases in risks to people and property from BWM measures can be included in the same calculation.
BATNEEC and ALARP also consistent with the “precautionary principle”, since this is defined in Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development as follows:
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
In order to apply such a criterion, the damage risks from ballast water must be determined, together with the costs and benefits of possible risk control options, and all must be converted into common financial units.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)