AQUENAL PTY LTD Aquatic Environmental Analysts Marine, Estuarine and Coastal Assessment

ABN 86 081 689 910

244 Summerleas Road Tel: +61 (0)3 6229 2334 Kingston, Tasmania Fax: +61 (0)3 6229 2335

AUSTRALIA 7050 www.aquenal.com.au 

### Keith Johnson Managing director Commercial Diving Services Pty Ltd PO Box 126 Dapto, New South Wales, 2530

27 th 

### February 2009

To whom it may concern,

Mr Keith Johnson of Commercial Diving Services Pty Ltd has requested my expert opinion surrounding whether his novel Hull Surface Treatmen t (HST) Technology poses a biosecurity and/or water quality risk through the introduction of biofouling pests and/or toxic biocides into the surrounding marine environment.

What qualifies me to provide this advice? I have been researching the biosecurity risks asso ciated with vessel biofouling for over 10 years. I began my interest in this area in 1996 by undertak ing a Masters Degree in Applied Science with the Australian Maritime College, Tasmania where I inve stigated the biosecurity risks associated with biofouling on merchant vessels visiting northern Tasmania. In 1999, I joined Cawthron Institute in New Zealand as a Marine Biosecurity Scientist where I provided underpinn ing research for the development of policies and procedures for managi ng marine biofouling pests. Then in 2006 I joined the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service as a Marine Pest Adviso r to assist with the development of Australia’s pro posed Biofouling Management Re quirements, incl uding raising awareness of the issue through the International Ma ritime Organisation. It was during my pursuits for new environmentally-friendly technologies for mitigating the translocation of biofouling pests that I was first exposed to Mr Johnson’s HST Technology during his visit to Canberra on 16 April 2008. I now work for Aquenal Pty Ltd in Hobart wh ere I am responsible for managing marine pest related research and consultancy projects.

Biosecurity risk - biofouling pests Removing and releasing biofouling into the marine environment through hull cleaning may facilitate the introduction of invasive marine pests. Hence, the Australian and New Zealand Environment and

Conservation Council introduced a Code of Practi ce for antifouling and in-w ater hull cleaning and maintenance to discourage the practice (ANZECC 1997). However, these con cerns largely surround the use of traditional rotational brush cleaning systems that are cap able of removing high levels of biofouling (animal growth). Such high levels of biofouling are cons idered more likely to contain invasive biofouling pests, particularly in anom aly areas of vessels (e.g. bow thruster tunnels,AQUENAL PTY LTD Aquatic Environmental Analysts Marine, Estuarine and Coastal Assessment

ABN 86 081 689 910

244 Summerleas Road Tel: +61 (0)3 6229 2334 Kingston, Tasmania Fax: +61 (0)3 6229 2335

AUSTRALIA 7050 www.aquenal.com.au 

### underneath bilge keels, inside s ea chests, and around rope guards, propellers and rudders) (Coutts 1999, Coutts and Taylor 2004; Coutts and Dodgshun 2007).

From my understanding, the HST us es thermal shock designed to treat only low levels of biofouling such as copper resistant algae that predominantly occur on the mainstream areas (i.e. flat-sides from

the waterline to the turn of th e bilge) of hulls that are re sponsible for causing significant hydrodynamic drag on vessels underway. While some vege tative stages of invasi ve marine algae can occur in these areas, they pose a lo w biosecurity risk rela tive to high levels of biofouling. However, the HST technology is capable of killing vegetative stages given the technol ogy was originally based on treating juvenile st ages of invasive marine alga (Wotten et al. 2004). More importantly, the HST does not clean or remove biofouling like rotational brush systems, but rather relies on thermal shock to kill the biofouling that remain attached to the hull until the vessel is unde rway. Therefore, in my opinion the HST is unlikely to pose a biosecurity risk because it: 1) treats low levels of biofouling that pose a relatively low biosecurity risk; 2) is cap able of killing vegetative stage of invasive marine algae if present; and 3) sterilizes the hull surface without releasing defouled organisms into the surrounding environment.

Water quality – releas e of toxic biocides Prior to the implementation of the ANZECC Code of Practice in 1997, it was common practice to remove unwanted biofouling while in situ using brushes. One study for example, demonstrated that approximately 95% of the total mass of copper bioc ides emitted into the marine environment over a four week period originated from the passive leach ing, while only 5% originated from in-water hull cleaning (Schiff et al. 2004). However, in-water cleaning of antifouling coatings is known to significantly increase the release rate of toxic biocides beyond their normal leaching rates (e.g. Valkirs et al. 2003; Warnken et al. 2004). Conversely, the HST is unlikely to exacerbate the

immediate release of biocides upon treatment because it does not clean, but sterilizes the hull surface. Furthermore, it is unlikely th e biocides are able to be releas ed from the treated surface until the dead algae is removed when the vessel is underway.

Overall, I sincerely believe the HST is a much needed environmentally-frie ndly solution for reducing the hydrodynamic drag on vessel hulls and greenhouse gas emissions , thus supporting Australia’s commitments to the Kyoto Protocol.

Regards

Ashley Coutts - Senior Resear ch Scientist - Marine PestsAQUENAL PTY LTD Aquatic Environmental Analysts Marine, Estuarine and Coastal Assessment

ABN 86 081 689 910

244 Summerleas Road Tel: +61 (0)3 6229 2334 Kingston, Tasmania Fax: +61 (0)3 6229 2335

AUSTRALIA 7050 www.aquenal.com.au 

### References

Australian and New Zealand Environment Cons ervation Council (ANZECC) , 1997. Code of practice for antifouling and in-water hull cleaning and maintenance. 12 p.

Coutts, A. D. M., 1999. Hull fouling as a modern vector for marine biological invasions: investigation of merchant ve ssels visiting northern Tasman ia. Unpublished MSc. thesis, Australian Maritime College, Launceston, Australia. 283 pp.

Coutts, A. D. M., Taylor, M. D., 2004. A preliminar y investigation of biosecu rity risks associated with biofouling on merchant vessels in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater, 38: 215-229.

Coutts, A. D. M, Dodgshun, T. J., 2007. The nature and extent of fouling in vessel sea-chests: a protected mechanism for marine bioinvasions. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54: 876-886.

Schiff, K., Diehl, D., Valkris, A., 2004. Copper emissions from antifouling paint on recreational

vessels. Marine Pollution Bulletin , 49: 833-843.

Valkirs, A.O., Seligman, P.F., Haslbeck, E., Caso, J.S., 2003. Measurement of copper release rates from antifouling paint under laboratory and in-situ conditions: implications for loading

estimation to marine water bodies. Marine Pollution Bulletin , 46: 763–779.

Warnken, J., Dunn, R. J. K., Teasdale, P. R., 2004. I nvestigation of recreationa l boats as a source of copper at anchorage sites using time-integrated di ffusive gradients in thin film and sediment

measurements. Marine Pollution Bulletin , 48: 371-377.

Wotton, D. M., O’Brien, C., Stuart, M. D., Fergus , D. J., 2004. Eradication success down under: heat

treatment of a sunken trawler to kill the invasive seaweed Undaria pinnatifida

. Marine Pollution

Bulletin 49: 844–849.Ecowise Environmental (Victoria) Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 060 320 Effect of HST Treatment on surrounding harbour water

Brett Thompson Ecowise NSW Laboratory Supervisor

Abstract Ecowise Port Kembla supplied a sampling and analytical service to Commercial Diving Services (CDS) as an independent laboratory in relation to HST hull treatment procedures. The Port Kembla laboratory analysed samples taken by CDS and an Ecowise sampler in order to compare baseline concentrations of several stress indicators in Sydney Harbour with the concentrations found in water post HST treatment. It was found that the analysis was comparable and application of the HST treatment procedure did not have any observable affects on surrounding harbour water.

Introduction A sampling and analysis scheme was undertaken to identify any changes to the surrounding harbour water as a direct result of HST treatment. The main environmental concerns identified by CDS and Ecowise were thermal shock; an increase in total suspended solids (TSS); eutrophication (excess nutrients e.g. nitrogen and phosphorus); and the leaching of biocides from the exterior antifouling paint of the hull.

The active biocide ingredients c ontained in the antifouling paint of the ship involved in the sampling scheme were cuprous oxide and zinc pyri thione. Copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) were analysed in pre treatment and during treatment samp les as representatives of the presence of the active ingredients. A signifi cant increase in either metal would indicate leaching of the respective biocides.

Sampling location Sampling location was kept consistent by samp ling pre HST treatment harbour water and all HST treatments during sampling on the hull directly beneath lifeboat number 5 on the starboard deck of the “Pacific Dawn” at Dar ling Harbour in the Port of Sydney.

An Ecowise sampler accompanied the CDS team onto the harbour to collect independent samples. Samples were taken before HST treatm ent in order to establish a set of analysis representative of the surrounding harbour water. Duplicate samples were taken at the hull of the ship and approximately 30 meters perpendicu lar from the treatment site towards the middle of Darling Harbour.

Using an YSI multi-probe, temperature and pH were also recorded for the two sites, as well as at distances of approximately 20 meters, 15 me ters, 10 meters and 5 meters from the hull.

Water directly influenced by the HST treatment was sampled by collecting duplicate samples of water directly above the device during opera tion. Although the path of the water would be influenced by harbour currents and harbour traffi c, it was assumed t hat taking samples as close as possible to the device would give a wors t case scenario for the affect of the treatment on surrounding harbour water. 73 Military Road Port Kembla NSW 2505 Australia Telephone +61 2 4274 0433 Facsimile +61 2 4274 0434 Email wollongong@ecowise.com.au Brisbane ▪ Canberra ▪ Melbourne ▪ Sydney ▪ Regional officesEcowise Environmental (Victoria) Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 060 320 Results and Discussion

Table 1 Analysis of Cu, Zn, TSS, TN and TP in harbour water before and during HST

treatment.

The results in table 1 show t hat concentrations of Cu, Zn, TSS, TN and TP were comparable for both the surrounding harbour water and the water sampled during HST treatment.

Table 2 Analysis of Temperature and pH in harbour water before and during HST

treatment.

The results in table 2 show that temperatures and pH values were comparable between the surrounding harbour water and the water sampled during HST treatment.

Conclusion This study was conducted by Ecowise to i ndependently investigate the affects of HST treatment on chemical and physica l properties of harbour water. Environmental issues such as thermal shock; an increase in total suspended solids (TSS); eutrophication; and the leaching of herbicides from the exterior pai nt of the hull were of main concern.

The results of field and laborator y analysis showed that concentrations and le vels of the tested parameters in harbour water directly adj acent to HST treatment were not outside concentrations and levels of param eters expected in Darling Harbou r water, within the Port of Sydney. Therefore no adverse effects of HST were identified by this study.

Brett Thompson Chemistry Team Leader Sample site Cu (mg/L) Zn (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) TN (mg/L) TP (mg/L)

Blank @ Hull 1 <0.01 <0.01 8 0.4 0.05 Blank @ Hull 2 <0.01 0.01 16 0.3 0.06 Blank @ 30m 1 <0.01 <0.01 31 0.2 0.05 Blank @ 30m 2 <0.01 <0.01 15 0.3 0.07

Process Water 1 <0.01 0.01 13 0.3 0.06 Process Water 2 <0.01 <0.01 15 0.3 0.07

Sample site Temperature (°C) pH Baseline @ 0.5m 23.4 7.7

Baseline @ 5m 23.1 7.9 Baseline @ 10m 23.1 7.9 Baseline @ 15m 23.2 7.9 Baseline @ 20m 23.1 7.9 Baseline @ 30m 23.2 7.9 Process water 1 23.5 7.9 Process water 2 23.4 7.9