¿UV o EC? Reducción de los costes de inversión en el tratamiento del agua de lastre
Las decisiones sobre la gestión del agua de lastre no deben tomarse por defecto, especialmente en lo que respecta a la elección de la tecnología: rayos UV o electrocloración (EC). Si se plantean las preguntas adecuadas, se pueden reducir considerablemente tanto los costes y los riesgos como las limitaciones operativas. Descubra por qué el tratamiento con rayos UV de Alfa Laval PureBallast 3 es la opción más inteligente para la gestión del agua de lastre, incluso en buques en los que la electrocloración es la norma actual.
- Reducir al mínimo el espacio que ocupa el sistema y las modificaciones en los buques
- Reducir el tiempo de estancia en el astillero y los costes de inversión
- Evita los productos químicos caros, peligrosos y nocivos
- Maximizar la flexibilidad y la eficiencia operativas
Ahorra en gastos de capital leyendo entre líneas
Con una solución UV como PureBallast 3, el sistema de tratamiento del agua de lastre queda perfectamente contenido, al igual que sus costes. La electrocloración (EC) implica una extensa red de tuberías, además de la probable reconversión de su tanque de popa (APT) para que sirva como fuente de agua salada. Esos metros y conexiones adicionales aumentan tanto los costes como el espacio ocupado.
Sistema UV (PureBallast 3)
- Totalmente integrado en el flujo de agua de lastre existente
- No se utiliza el APT: la embarcación puede mantener la asimetría
Sistema EC (flujo completo)
- Integrado en gran medida en el flujo de agua de lastre existente
- Sistema APT y tuberías para el control de la salinidad
- Tuberías de acero inoxidable (SUS) para sistemas de tratamiento de aguas residuales y de neutralización
EC system (side-stream/slip-stream)
- Polyethene piping for corrosive hypochlorite flow
- APT and piping for salinity control
- Stainless steel (SUS) piping for heating, TRO and neutralization systems
- Piping to deck to vent hazardous gases
Choose UV treatment to avoid EC’s hidden costs
UV ballast water treatment is a straightforward physical process, without any additives or detours. The ballast water is filtered and exposed directly to UV light, which neutralizes the organisms it contains.EC, on the other hand, is a chemical process– even if the chlorine is produced on board. The chlorine must be added to the ballast water, and any residuals or hazardous gases created have to be removed. Since generating chlorine requires warm saline water, salt and heat may also be needed. In total, there’s a lot of piping and expense that isn’t usually reflected in the system offer.
Read on to see the hidden costs of an EC system.
Costly and longer piping
Unlike UV systems, where the ballast water simply flows through reactors that dose it with UV light, EC ballast water treatment systems require hundreds or thousands of metres of pipes. The complicated piping leads chemicals and water in and out of the ballast water treatment process, but it’s also required for chemical neutralization and sometimes as a safety measure for venting hazardous gases. The pipes extend through large sections of the vessel, especially when the aft peak tank (APT) is used to adjust salinity – which is nearly always the case.
Costly exclusive materials
The length and complexity of the piping in EC ballast water treatment systems is just the first issue. All those metres are multiplied by the material cost. Since the pipes have to withstand seawater and chemicals, many of them have to be lined with polyethene or constructed from stainless steel (SUS). Such materials can take longer for shipyards to acquire and are often far more expensive than standard materials.
More costly valves
Wherever there are pipes for multiple processes, valves are needed to steer the different flows. In an EC ballast water treatment system, there are flows for moving chemicals, heating the water, adding salinity and neutralizing total residual oxidants (TRO) – to name a few. The valves required are costly in themselves, but they’re also additional points of complexity that need maintenance and could potentially fail.
More costly support components
Due to the piping, valves and extensive layout, an EC ballast water treatment system can be much more complicated to engineer than a UV system, which is compact and localized. Additional structures must be built to support the different parts of an EC system, which may also comprise heaters, gas detectors and other components not reflected in the supplier’s scope.
Installation time and costs
The more complicated a ballast water treatment system is, the more work it is for a shipyard to install it. When installing an EC system, you pay for the added complexity in two ways: the labour cost from the shipyard and the time out of service for your vessel. By choosing a UV system rather than an EC system, you can save many days of shipyard work.
Want a deeper understanding?
To learn more about the issues above and why they matter for your choice of ballast water treatment technology, be sure to download our short guide.
Comparing UV and EC investment cost
Get a quick and clear understanding of how your choice of ballast water treatment technology impacts your system investment. Our short guide explains the hidden complexities of electrochlorination (EC) systems and shows why UV solutions like PureBallast 3 are simpler and more cost-efficient when it comes to procurement and installation.
Shipowner insights into installation cost
Millenia Maritime Inc. has chosen UV ballast water treatment with PureBallast 3 for its fleet of MR tankers, rather than electrochlorination (EC). The choice has saved both time and money at the shipyard.
“We got very good installation results on all of our vessels, but we also secured a competitive time to market,” says General Manager Francesco Ricciardi. “In the cost-benefit analysis for the project, spending less time at the shipyard has high value. Every day the vessel is in the water is a day that it can be making money.”
Contact us to discuss the choice of UV or EC
Your choice of technology may be the most important one you make in ballast water management. We’d be happy to discuss it with you, in brief or in depth.