BPO Seminar Development of PRF for Sewage in the Baltic

Marco Digioia, CLIA Europe

25 April 2017, Copenhagen

How cruise lines are preparing for sewage delivery

Australia + New Zealand

China

Singapore

Italy

Belgium + Luxembourg

Netherlands

Germany

Spain

UK + Ireland

CLIA Office Locations

3

Alaska

Hawaii

Canada

US + Global

Brazil

France

The Baltic as a key market

• 3 rd market by destination in the world

• 2.1 % growth last year

• 353 MLN spending

• Unique destination

Passenger numbers have gone up by 400% 2000-2010 and continue to grow

Engagement

•Regional Dialogue in the Baltic (Copenhagen 2016), European Shipping Week, Kiel workshop…

•HELCOM (Maritime, PRF Platform)

•ESSF PRF WG

• IMO

Practices

• CLIA Member No Untreated Sewage Discharge Policy: Existing and newly built CLIA Member ships, follow CLIA’s policy of no discharge of untreated sewage.

• Fleet Adoption of Advanced Water Treatment System: ordered at least 26 new builds with AWTs. Estimated 47% of newly built capacity over the next 10 years will be using advanced wastewater treatments.

Practices

• Compliance with Wastewater Discharge Requirements: The cruise industry generally meets or exceeds international and national wastewater quality standards and overall the cruise industry’s rate of compliance is commensurate or better than the rest of the maritime industry.

• Baltic Sea Practices for Wastewater Reception Facilities: cruise ships voluntarily using port wastewater reception facilities in the Baltic Sea when available; this voluntary practice precedes implementation of new requirements.

The CLIA “Sewage Exercise” Action:

• CLIA coordinating a simulation exercise in the Baltic Sea during the 2016 season.

• To test the availability and adequacy of PRFs in the area and identify challenges and

bottlenecks.

Execution:

• Operate cruise ships in the Baltic as if the MARPOL Annex IV Special Area

provisions were already in effect.

• Ships documenting (template).

• Ports provided with a similar template.

• The report to assess the availability and adequacy of PRFs in the region, highlighting the

challenges faced and help to develop a roadmap to address the issues identified.

Timeline: May-September 2016

Report finalized, to be validated in May

Sewage Exercise – Type of Ships

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Gu

est

Cap

acit

y (m

axim

um

)

Year Built

OVERVIEW CRUISE SHIPS PARTICIPATING IN CLIA'S SEWAGE EXERCISE

Sewage Exercise – Ships and ports

Ships participating 28

Total number of reports >560

Data entries per completed form 84

Total data entries 47040

Ports visited 26

Total amount of ports providing information 29

Ports providing aggregated volumes of sewage discharged 6

92

56

270

Small (<1500) Medium (>1500, <3000) Large (>3000)

Nu

mb

er o

f en

trie

s

Size cruise ship (total number of persons on board)

Number of entries received per size of cruise ship

Sewage Exercise – Ports

Baltic ports Country Visited by cruise ship during 2016 Exercise?

Aalborg Denmark No

Aarhus Denmark Yes

Copenhagen (*) Denmark Yes

Fredericia Denmark Yes

Flensburg Germany No

Gdansk(*) Poland Yes

Gdynia(*) Poland Yes

Gothenburg(*) Sweden Yes

Helsingborg Sweden Yes

Helsingør Denmark No

Helsinki(*) Finland Yes

Heiringsdorf Germany No

Hundested Denmark Yes

Kaliningrad Russia No

Kalmar Sweden No

Kalundborg Denmark No

Karlskrona Sweden Yes

Kemi Finland No

Kiel(*) Germany

Yes

Holtenau No

Klaipeda(*) Lithuania Yes

Kotka Finland No

Lubeck Germany

No

Travemunde Yes

Lulea Sweden Yes

Mariehamn Finland Yes

Malmö Sweden Yes

Nynashamn Sweden Yes

Örnsköldsvik Sweden Yes

Pori Finland Yes

Riga(*) Latvia Yes

Rønne Denmark

Yes

Bornholm No

Rostock(*) Germany

Yes

Warnemünde Yes

Saaremaa Estonia No

St Petersburg(*) Russia Yes

Sassnitz Germany No

Skagen Denmark Yes

Stockholm(*) Sweden Yes

Stralsund Germany No

Szczecin Poland

No

Swinoujscie No

Tallinn(*) Estonia Yes

Turku Finland No

Umea Sweden Yes

Veere Estonia No

Ventspils Latvia No

Visby(*) Sweden Yes

Wismar Germany Yes

Baltic ports Country Visited by cruise ship during 2016 Exercise?

Aalborg Denmark No

Aarhus Denmark Yes

Copenhagen (*) Denmark Yes

Fredericia Denmark Yes

Flensburg Germany No

Gdansk(*) Poland Yes

Gdynia(*) Poland Yes

Gothenburg(*) Sweden Yes

Helsingborg Sweden Yes

Helsingør Denmark No

Helsinki(*) Finland Yes

Heiringsdorf Germany No

Hundested Denmark Yes

Kaliningrad Russia No

Kalmar Sweden No

Kalundborg Denmark No

Karlskrona Sweden Yes

Kemi Finland No

Kiel(*) Germany

Yes

Holtenau No

Klaipeda(*) Lithuania Yes

Kotka Finland No

Lubeck Germany

No

Travemunde Yes

Lulea Sweden Yes

Mariehamn Finland Yes

Malmö Sweden Yes

Nynashamn Sweden Yes

Örnsköldsvik Sweden Yes

Pori Finland Yes

Riga(*) Latvia Yes

Rønne Denmark

Yes

Bornholm No

Rostock(*) Germany

Yes

Warnemünde Yes

Saaremaa Estonia No

St Petersburg(*) Russia Yes

Sassnitz Germany No

Skagen Denmark Yes

Stockholm(*) Sweden Yes

Stralsund Germany No

Szczecin Poland

No

Swinoujscie No

Tallinn(*) Estonia Yes

Turku Finland No

Umea Sweden Yes

Veere Estonia No

Ventspils Latvia No

Visby(*) Sweden Yes

Wismar Germany Yes

Ships reporting datasheet 1 Name of Ship

2 Baltic Port Name

3 Berth/pier/terminal Code or at anchor

4 In case the Baltic Sea was entered between the previous port and the current port, when was the Baltic Sea entered? (Date)

5 In case the Baltic Sea was entered between the previous port and the current port, when was the Baltic Sea entered? (Time)

6 When was the vessel assigned to a specific berth?

7 Is the current berth equal to the one assigned at first instance?

8 ETA Estimated Time of Arrival at berth

9 ATA Actual Time of Arrival at berth

10 ETD Estimated Time of Departure from berth

11 Number of passengers on board when arriving

12 Number of crew on board when arriving

13 Implemented MEPC.1/Circ.644 - ANF (Advanced Notification Form)

14 Implemented MEPC.1/Circ.645 - WDR (Waste Delivery Receipt)

15 When was the ANF submitted to the current port?

16 If submitted, did you receive confirmation that the PRF would be available on arrival?

17 Estimate amount of sewage to be generated between notification and the current port

18 Estimation of sewage to be delivered

19 Maximum dedicated sewage storage capacity (notational total maximum capacity)

20 Maximum dedicated sewage storage capacity (current trim-adjusted maximum capacity)

21 Volume of Sewage (only greywater) on board when leaving previous port

22 Volume of Sewage (only black water) on board when leaving previous port

23 Volume of Sewage (mixed black and greywater) on board when leaving previous port

24 Total volume of sewage on board when leaving previous port

25 Volume of sewage discharged at sea after leaving previous port (black and grey water)

26 During discharge, what was the position of the vessel?

27 Was the sewage treated before discharge?

28 Why was this sewage discharged?

29 Was the sewage discharged because of the safety of the ship?

30 Did this volume of sewage discharged at sea consist of a mixture of black and greywater?

31 Volume of Sewage (only greywater) on board when arriving at current port

32 Volume of Sewage (only black water) on board when arriving at current port

33 Volume of Sewage (mixed black and greywater) on board when arriving at current port

34 Total volume of sewage on board when arriving at current port

35 How many PRF providers can the ship choose from?

36 Name of company operating/providing the applied reception facility

37 According to that company or the treatment facility provider, where is the sewage taken/treated?

Ships reporting datasheet (1/2) 1 Name of Ship

2 Baltic Port Name

3 Berth/pier/terminal Code or at anchor

4 In case the Baltic Sea was entered between the previous port and the current port, when was the Baltic Sea entered? (Date)

5 In case the Baltic Sea was entered between the previous port and the current port, when was the Baltic Sea entered? (Time)

6 When was the vessel assigned to a specific berth?

7 Is the current berth equal to the one assigned at first instance?

8 ETA Estimated Time of Arrival at berth

9 ATA Actual Time of Arrival at berth

10 ETD Estimated Time of Departure from berth

11 Number of passengers on board when arriving

12 Number of crew on board when arriving

13 Implemented MEPC.1/Circ.644 - ANF (Advanced Notification Form)

14 Implemented MEPC.1/Circ.645 - WDR (Waste Delivery Receipt)

15 When was the ANF submitted to the current port?

16 If submitted, did you receive confirmation that the PRF would be available on arrival?

17 Estimate amount of sewage to be generated between notification and the current port

18 Estimation of sewage to be delivered

19 Maximum dedicated sewage storage capacity (notational total maximum capacity)

20 Maximum dedicated sewage storage capacity (current trim-adjusted maximum capacity)

21 Volume of Sewage (only greywater) on board when leaving previous port

22 Volume of Sewage (only black water) on board when leaving previous port

23 Volume of Sewage (mixed black and greywater) on board when leaving previous port

24 Total volume of sewage on board when leaving previous port

25 Volume of sewage discharged at sea after leaving previous port (black and grey water)

26 During discharge, what was the position of the vessel?

27 Was the sewage treated before discharge?

28 Why was this sewage discharged?

29 Was the sewage discharged because of the safety of the ship?

30 Did this volume of sewage discharged at sea consist of a mixture of black and greywater?

31 Volume of Sewage (only greywater) on board when arriving at current port

32 Volume of Sewage (only black water) on board when arriving at current port

33 Volume of Sewage (mixed black and greywater) on board when arriving at current port

34 Total volume of sewage on board when arriving at current port

35 How many PRF providers can the ship choose from?

36 Name of company operating/providing the applied reception facility

37 According to that company or the treatment facility provider, where is the sewage taken/treated?

Ship reporting datasheet

A In your opinion, what PRF system worked best?

B In which Baltic port was this PRF system applied?

C In your opinion, what Cost Recovery (Fee) System worked

best?

D In which Baltic port was this Cost Recovery system

applied?

E What were the main challenges that you experienced?

F Were there any moments in which the tanks were nearly

filled, with no prospect of being able to discharge onshore

in the short term? Where?

G and when?

H Other comments / impressions

Add: Ports Visited during specific Itinerary

Ports reporting datasheet

Please provide an overview of the availability of PRF:

Berth #

Pumping

capacity

(m3/hr)

MARPOL standard

connections fitted

(Yes/No)

Type of PRF

(Barge/Truck/Fixed

connection)

Connection to local

storage/municipal waste

treatment/other (please

specify)

What would be Plan

B if (e.g. due to a

technical problem)

the planned PRF is

not available?

Berth 1

Etc.

Port specific characteristics

Question

What are your expectations on future demand for PRF in your port?

and how are you planning to cope with this demand?

Please eleborate on the future investments in PRFs in the port and other

relevant developments

Please describe the cost fee structure and the fees, as described in EU

Directive 2000/59

How many independent PRF providers are present in the port?

Does the port allow for a profit by the PRF provider?

Please elaborate on the foregoing answer

Overall impressions

Question

What were the main challenges that you

experienced during this simulation

exercise?

Other comments / impressions

Issues explored

• Availability

• Undue delay

• Use of facilities technically possible or not

• Convenient location

• Charges

• Next port of call vs next port of delivery

To discuss together

Planning for reception facilities on a scale which recognises multiple

cruise ship calls on any one day ?

To what extent are the operating parameters of the cruise

industry understood in the planning ?

Is there a single reception facility strategy applying to Baltic

States that acknowledges the port sequence of typical cruise itineraries

and plans reception facilities accordingly ?