Using Microwaves To Cook Ballast Stowaways

Smivs writes "US researchers say they have developed an effective way to kill unwanted plants and animals that hitch a ride in the ballast waters of cargo vessels. Tests showed that a continuous microwave system was able to remove all marine life within the water tanks. The UN lists 'invasive species' dispersed by ballast water discharges as one of the four main threats to the world's marine ecosystems. For example European zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) have infested more than 40% of the US's inland waterways. Between 1989 and 2000, up to $1B is estimated to have been spent on controlling the spread of the alien invader."

Comments

Too little too late

[dreamchaser]

Even if this works, in many cases invasive species are already well entrenched and the damage is done. The example cited of the zebra mussels, for instance, has created a huge problem for some inland fisheries in the US. The problem has been known for years but nobody has really tried to do much about it until now.

Re:Too little too late

[mrbluze]

Reminds me of an episode of The Goodies - in the era before microwaves, that is. They were going to set fire to an oil-slick but not before throwing in a heap of chopped potatoes... mmm.. yummy fish n chips.

Re:Too little too late

[jafiwam]

They are causing lots of extra costs (and problems) with power plants in the Great Lakes too. They like the warm ejecta water, and screw up the exit pipes for the power plants.

Too bad they don't taste good.

Re:Too little too late

[Hojima]

Some environmentalist has to tell me why we don't just import its natural predator. And don't give me crap about 'well it could be an invasive species too.' If it's high up the food chain, it will be forced to live in equilibrium with its prey. Has it ever even been tried?

Re:Too little too late

[atraintocry]

I don't know about that specific case, but generally introducing predators isn't done any more because it's kind of like using water to put out a grease fire. Actually it's probably more like using more grease to put out a grease fire...

Re:Too little too late

[Dahamma]

Skinner: Well, I was wrong; the lizards are a godsend.
Lisa: But isn't that a bit short-sighted? What happens when we're overrun by lizards?
Skinner: No problem. We simply release wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the lizards.

Lisa: But aren't the snakes even worse?
Skinner: Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat.
Lisa: But then we're stuck with gorillas!
Skinner: No, that's the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.

Re:Too little too late

[Anonymous Coward]

In Australia the Cane Toad was introduced as a natural predator for the imported ("i forget") species. It turned out to be much worse than the original problem.

Re:Too little too late

[NeutronCowboy]

Yes, it has. Snakes were introduced into one of the Indonesian islands to deal with an introduced toad. Turns out that some of the indigenous animals were a lot easier for the snakes to catch. As a result, the local animal life is not only threatened by the toads, but also by the snake. If I'm off on the details, my apologies - I couldn't find the original story. This isn't the only story though. There have been a few attempts to introduce natural predators, and they've generally all turned up atrocious and unpredicted side effects. The reason this isn't done is because it's been tried before, and the end-result wasn't any better.

Re:Too little too late

[Aydsman]

Some environmentalist has to tell me why we don't just import its natural predator. And don't give me crap about 'well it could be an invasive species too.' If it's high up the food chain, it will be forced to live in equilibrium with its prey. Has it ever even been tried? Well in other cases, yes - it has been tried. Unfortunately that hasn't worked out so well.

Re:Too little too late

[ghostis]

That being said, don't starfish eat mussels? I recall seeing a sped up video of some starfish decimating a group of mussels over an afternoon. Finding a zebra mussel-eating starfish may not solve the issue, but the footage was incredible! ;)

-ghostis

Re:Too little too late

[ElizabethGreene]

They do taste good, to Gobies. And Smallmouth Bass eat the gobies*. You have to love those adaptive ecosystems. In the Great Lakes they have benefited the SCUBA divers somewhat. Because of the explosion in filter feeders, some areas that used to be pea-soup, now have visibility up to 20ft.

*except the gobies eat all manner of crap and killed off a good chunk of the bass population during an e. coli outbreak.

Re:Too little too late

[tomhudson]

The great lakes were dying from pollution before the zebra mussels.

At least the water that goes downstream is cleaner than it would be otherwise.

Hey, when life hands you a lemon ...

Re:Too little too late

[CastrTroy]

The only cases I've heard of that working in is where we "reintroduced" predators back into their natural habitat. We killed off a bunch of wolves, and then restored their population successfully. I don't think it's ever been done to bring in a foreign predator.

Re:Too little too late

[gringer]

Er, cane toad. Dealt with creepy crawlies that liked living within cane (i.e. sugar cane).

Re:Too little too late

[belmolis]

The problem is that predators usually are not restricted to a single kind of prey, so they will not only control the organism you want to get rid of but prey on indigenous species that you don't want it to. A case in point is the rabbit problem in New Zealand, which has no indigenous mammals. Introducing predators such as foxes or coyotes is not an acceptable solution because they will also eat the various species of flightless birds. Even when there is a specialized predator, it is very difficult to be sure that it will stay specialized.

Re:Too little too late

[Fifth Earth]

The problem is most high-level predator species don't eat only one thing. Whenever this is tried, invariably the predator species eats some of the invasive species, but also eats ALL of some other native species.

Even if the predators are able to effectively kill off the invader (which they often aren't), and they don't just switch to some other native species, then the predators start dying too. Eventually, the predator goes extinct due to lack of food supply, but some small portion of the original invader remains to repopulate, and the problem remains unsolved.

Honestly, nobody has ever succeeded in controlling an invasive species once it becomes established, using any method. In that light, you may as well avoid control methods that are known to have massive collateral damage.

Re:Too little too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Cane toad ( Marine toad in USA ) introduced to control cane beetle. The toad can't jump more than a few centermeters while the beetle lives near the top of the cane. Also the toad doesn't like cane fields and preferes waterways

It wasn't the best laid out plan.

If you do introduce a predator you have to ensure it is specialized for the target species and can not adapt to other creatures. The only sucessful release that I know of is the cactoblastis beetle which almost wiped out the pickly pear introduced into australia. Reminant populations still remain

Re:Too little too late

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

It's this kind of naive thinking that has been the cause of many of these problems. Hopefully you're just trolling.

Re:Too little too late

[robbak]

They do, but they are much more careful about it. The days of one biologist saying "Hey, these big Hawaiian toads should clean up that beetle problem pretty good!", throwing a couple in a box and shipping them are (thankfully) gone.
But, after an awful lot of testing that no native animals will be seriously harmed, predator animals (usually insects) are regularly used.

Re:Too little too late

[robbak]

It was imported to feed on the native "cane beetles" causing issues in the sugar plantations.

As the other comments stated, it was not a success.

Re:Too little too late

[TapeCutter]

Come to Australia, we have bettles, toads, horses, donkeys, water buffalo, pigs, rabbits, foxes, mice, rats, sparrows, starlings, starfish and more wild camels than Saudi Arabia. Every single one of them plus the many species I have ommited are pests.

Re:Too little too late

[Tablizer]

The example cited of the zebra mussels, for instance, has created a huge problem

But without muscles, zebras would be all floppy and squishy. Plus, zoo revenue would go down. Who wants to watch a flat patch of stripes laying on the field?

      -1 Lame

Re:Too little too late

[shawb]

There's another BIG reason that introducing predators is a risky endeavor. The prey species that you wish to control has evolved with defense from the predator species. Native life has not. Hence, it may be far easier for the predator to prey on the natives than the organism you wish to control.

Re:Too little too late

[ColdWetDog]

Come to Australia, we have bettles, toads, horses, donkeys, water buffalo, pigs, rabbits, foxes, mice, rats, sparrows, starlings, starfish and more wild camels than Saudi Arabia. Every single one of them plus the many species I have ommited are pests.

Have you considered removing them from your flat? That might make a difference on how you look at wildlife.

Re:Too little too late

[nametaken]

Yeah, I read this story. Eventually the lion eats the people. ;)

Re:Too little too late

[sc0ob5]

Yes that has been tried. They introduced Cane Toads to eat introduced beetles that were eating sugar cane crops in Queensland Australia. Now they are a real pest. I guess at least they got rid of the beetles...

This is a good idea though, had this been around a decade or so ago maybe the Great Barrier Reef wouldn't be so effected by the Crown of Thorns starfish which is thought to have been introduced by ships.

Re:Too little too late

[Ihlosi]

Some environmentalist has to tell me why we don't just import its natural predator.

Because the overwhelming majority of predators do not rely on a single food source. They will eat what's easiest to catch, which may or may not be what you actually want them to eat.

And don't give me crap about 'well it could be an invasive species too.'

I'm not going to give you any speculative crap, I'll just bet you $10 that the predator will be an invasive species, too.

If it's high up the food chain, it will be forced to live in equilibrium with its prey.

This only works for models where you have one predator and one prey species. Predators which exclusively eat one other species are incredibly rare (figures - reliance on a single food source is a good way to get a species-wide Darwin Award as soon as anything happens to that food source).

Has it ever even been tried?

Yes. The results were usually comparable to trying to put out a burning building by pouring gasoline on it.

Re:Too little too late

[Culture20]

In Australia the Cane Toad was introduced as a natural predator for the imported ("i forget") species. Rabbits?

Re:Too little too late

[v1]

I've seen stories on IPTV at least eight years ago. It's hardly a new problem, and certainly hasn't been ignored until now. The fisheries were actually one of the featured issues in the documentary on the zebra mussel "invasion".

But this is just evolution at work. Whenever a species makes a beachhead on a new environment there's an immediate conflict with native species. Whoever is better adapted wins. Because this is so sudden, on an evolutionary timeline, there's no time to adapt - either you're ready for it or you're not.

I consider this somewhat unfortunate, because any extinction reduces the overall variety of life in the world which has taken a long time to develop. But extinction is just one of the many methods by which evolution works.

Re:Too little too late

[maxume]

Is it legal to capture the camels?

Apparently there is quite the market for plow camels in India, due in part to high energy prices.

Re:Too little too late

[Fred_A]

Yes, it has. Snakes were introduced into one of the Indonesian islands to deal with an introduced toad. Turns out that some of the indigenous animals were a lot easier for the snakes to catch. As a result, the local animal life is not only threatened by the toads, but also by the snake. If I'm off on the details, my apologies - I couldn't find the original story. A variant of this is almost always what happens. Which is why this kind of thing isn't done this way any more.

Predators are sometimes used in their native habitat as pest control, like ladybugs or predator wasps released en-masse or (not predators as such) sterilised males to help curb the number of a given insect or things of the kind.

Re:Too little too late

[DieByWire]

That being said, don't starfish eat mussels?

Zebra mussels are freshwater creatures. If you ever find a freshwater starfish and you'll be famous.

Re:Too little too late

[petermgreen]

Yes it has been tried, the trouble is the predators don't always eat what you want them to eat, sometimes they preffer the local wildlife to the species you are trying to control.

Re:Too little too late

[TapeCutter]

Apart from outright cruelty you can do whatever you like with them. I suspect there is more profit in dog food than Indian plow camels.

Re:Too little too late

[TapeCutter]

"Have you considered removing them from your flat?"

Flats are for cute & cuddly native animals called possums, often refered to as "roof rabbits" or "dim sims".

"That might make a difference on how you look at wildlife."

Please don't presume you know how I "look at wildlife".

Re:Too little too late

[Black-Man]

Are Coyotes really effective against deer? It would seem a pack of them would be needed to successfully cull the herd... and then wouldn't they just seek out the path of least resistence... and go after wild turkey, small mammals, dogs... whatever?

Re:Too little too late

[maxume]

Probably.

Apparently there is a shortage:

http://www.nowpublic.com/tech-biz/camel-prices-hump-india

I would think that you could capture them for $100 a piece, so the shipping costs would be the real important factor, and it looks like shipping a horse costs thousands of dollars, so shipping a camel is probably going to cost thousands of dollars, so it wouldn't work.

Re:Too little too late

[dfm3]

That's not quite true. I work in the plant pathology field of study and introducing a predator species as a biological control of a pest is a fairly accepted practice. For example, a group at Virginia Tech is currently working with species of Laricobius, a beetle which is a predator of the hemlock woolly adelgid.

Of course, if you are going to be introducing a non native species, you'd better be absolutely sure you know what you're doing. There are countless regulatory obstacles that typically need to be overcome, too, and it can take years before a species is approved to be released from quarantine into the field, if it ever is.

Typically, an introduced organism becomes a pest for one of two reasons: 1) it's a generalist that is a better competitor for resources than existing species (as is the case with the zebra mussel, which is unbelievably effective at filtering particulate organic matter from the water and subsequently undergoing rapid population growth) or 2) it becomes a pest or pathogen of a particular existing species. Many introduced plant pathogens fall into this second category- they have no natural predators in the new environment, as well as a food source that has not evolved any defense mechanisms against them. The balsam woolly adelgid or the chestnut blight fungus are two examples of the latter.

Although there are probably cases where introducing a new predator species can cause more problems than it solves (remember that Simpsons episode?), with careful planning and understanding of the ecology of the organism, such issues can hopefully be avoided. Usually, we err too far on the side of caution by choosing a species that is too much of a specialist, and we don't get the results we would hope for. Remember the Laricobius beetles I mentioned earlier? One problem with them is that they are so specialized, that when the hemlock woolly adelgid starts to become scarce the beetles have no other food source and begin to decline as well. They have no other food source, and thus have essentially no effect on existing native species.

Re:Too little too late

[SatanicPuppy]

Yep. The problem is, sometimes the predator finds the the non-invasives to be tastier, so it just makes the problem worse. The best example of this is the Cane Toad...It eats anything, and reproduces quickly, so it's great for knocking out beetle plagues, and such like.

Unfortunately it will eat anything, and it reproduces rapidly, and, to make it even better, it's poisonous to eat, so the things that would normally control their population eat them and die.

Biological control of invasives works, but you have to study the impact in advance.

Re:Too little too late

[greed]

I was asking a 1000 Islands tour boat guide about the mussels a few years back. Apparently, all the boats on the St. Lawrence and eastern Lake Ontario have dealt with them in a very simple way: They don't like copper. So the boats all have copper pipes for their underwater inlets and outlets, and don't get clogged up.

Lining the concrete cooling water pipes on the Pickering plant with copper might be a bit pricey, of course.

Re:Too little too late

[EriktheGreen]

Hmm, there's a lot incorrect here.

First, there are new invasive species arriving at about 1 every 6 months in eg. the US Great lakes. So the damage is not done.

Second, the problem has been known for years and people have been trying to correct it since it's been known. It's been almost impossible to find a cheap, eco friendly system for sterilizing ballast water, although folks have been trying for several years now.

There have also been efforts to legally regulate the overboard discharge of water from any boat... in fact a law almost went into effect this year that would have required even small recreational boats to have expensive, heavy treatment systems on board.

This is an ongoing problem, and this microwave system offers some hope of control over new species arriving. If it works, it's just what we've been looking for....

Re:Too little too late

[LaoziSailor]

Better a little too late than nothing ever. [this is not intended as a troll or flamebait] If we could chip away at the world problems we might be able to save it from natural causes and ourselves yet.

Re:Too little too late

[susano_otter]

Too little, too late?

Excellent! If it's too late to do anything about the problem, then there's no need to impose additional costs on commerce, to implement pointless ballast-microwaving solutions. I take it you agree we should leave cargo ship ballast systems as they are, and invest our resources elsewhere?

Re:Too little too late

[Scrameustache]

Some environmentalist has to tell me why we don't just import its natural predator. And don't give me crap about 'well it could be an invasive species too.' If it's high up the food chain, it will be forced to live in equilibrium with its prey. Has it ever even been tried?

Why don't you ask australia?

Re:Too little too late

[Darby]

Now the coyote population is a mess. There are way too many, they're skinny and unhealthy, and they're killing neighborhood pets outside their intended habitat. The deer had natural predators here, the coyotes don't.

Hell, that's got to be the dumbest example of this sort of thing I've heard of. Just look at any US city with a large native Coyote population. San Diego, CA perfect example. Coyotes are skinny, unhealthy and eat neighborhood pets. That's how they roll. At least with some of these other species, the people moving them didn't know what a problem they were going to be.

Re:Too little too late

[MrScience]

New Zealand, which has no indigenous mammals

Minor nit: There are two species of native bats...
http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/summary.aspx?id=33095

Re:Too little too late

[HeadlessNotAHorseman]

In Fiji they introduced mongooses to eat the sugar-cane rats. Unfortunately they also ate the snakes that were the natural predators of rats. Then they started chowing down on the local native bird, frog, and lizard populations.

Re:Too little too late

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because there are too damn many Greenies involved that don't realize why these pests were shot on sight to begin with. It's illegal to shoot them in CA because of such lunacy. Instead of bringing in coyotes, Chicago should have brought in hunters and had them exterminate all the deer.

I think not....

[Anonymous Coward]

Microwaves confuse the molecules and these molecules of nutrition then misbehave and cause disorders such as cancer, diabetes and hair loss. This would be detrimental to anything that ate the food that was microwaved.

A better solution, I propose, is to simply put some spent nuclear fuel into the ballast tank to kill off any invasive species before dumping the ballast water.

Posing as AC b/c I work for an environmental consulting firm...and my boss would fire me if he knew I was this "green".

Re:I think not....

[pimpimpim]

you mean, like, nuclear waste?

Why it's important to RTFA

[StudMuffin]

I thought this was a method to take care of STOWAWAYS. you know, like people trying to sneak into the country.

My first thought was, "Wow, that sounds effective."

My second was, "But that is kinda harsh."

My thirs, "Cooooooool."

Re:Why it's important to RTFA

[JonTurner]

Same thought, here! I was picturing this system being adapted to zap those poor schmucks that hold onto the landing gear of jet aircraft. At least they wouldn't have to worry any more about freezing to death at high altitude.

"Excuse me, stewardess? Is something burning in the kitchen? Smells like bologna..."

Re:Why it's important to RTFA

[Chris Burke]

My first thought was, "Wow, that sounds effective."

My second was, "But that is kinda harsh."

My thirs, "Cooooooool."

Wait... are you counting your thoughts, or your Alabama Slammers?

Re:Why it's important to RTFA

[Nethemas the Great]

Oh thank God, I was afraid I was the only one that immediately pictured a bunch of Laotian refugees stowing away in the ballast tanks. I know our government isn't above doing such things, but jeez that would have been harsh...

Re:Why it's important to RTFA

[turing_m]

Stowaways? On this 'ere ship we prefer to make 'em walk the plank... that is, if they survive the keelhauling. Arrr!

Re:Why it's important to RTFA

[elrous0]

My first thought was "Hey, I know how Johnathan Hillstrand can get Phil Harris back for that truck practical joke on 'Deadliest Catch' this season!" Sure, Phil will lose a few crab, but think of the laugh the home audience will have when they offload.

The Fail Boat

[keytoe]

If you've seen pictures of the Fail Boat around the internet, you might be interested to know the story behind it (link is to printer version). In short, the whole ordeal happened as a result of the requirement that they dump ballast water before entering US waters. The story on Wired covers the accident as well as the salvage operation and is an excellent read.

It appears that this is a dangerous enough process that it was worth eliminating it. That, or they're just trying to cut down on travel time by not having to stop - but that's just the cynic in me talking.

Re:The Fail Boat

[junner518]

gotta love javascript. It automatically brings up a print dialog. Here is the more cumbersome original. Impressive pictures and a very interesting way to capsize a boat.

Re:The Fail Boat

[jcnnghm]

Sorry to nitpick, but I'd say the cause was more directly a result of failed ballast tank equipment. It would have happened eventually with or without the law.

Re:The Fail Boat

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, thanks! Just a few weeks ago I read an article in the Wall Street Journal about the cars that were on that ship and the methods that Mazda is using to dispose of them. It's interesting to read about the accident that led to that strange situation.

Re:The Fail Boat

[vought]

You seem to be arguing that mismanaged ballast dumping is an argument against all ballast dumping.

I can't see how one crew's mistake among thousands is an effective argument against dumping potentially infected ballast water well offshore. Lost Mazdas or not.

Re:The Fail Boat

[FooAtWFU]

He's simply arguing that the mistake highlights a risk (and an inconvenience) which may be avoided by the mechanism described in TFA, while still addressing the problems which necessitate the ballast dumping in the first place.

(Whether or not the proposed mechanism is, in fact, adequate, feasible, or ultimately desirable/undesirable in a global deployment is, however, beyond the scope of this particular facet of the discussion).

Re:The Fail Boat

[Panseh]

If you're using firefox, create or edit user.js in your profile folder and add this code to stop websites from launching the print dialog.

Re:The Fail Boat

[dave420]

The ship sank because they were changing the water in the tanks, not emptying or filling the tanks. They were trying to maintain a constant amount of ballast. If their pumps failed when they were taking on or emptying ballast, the problems wouldn't have been so severe as capsizing in international waters, as the buoyancy difference across the ship wouldn't be anyway near so high.

Re:The Fail Boat

[iamlucky13]

I also read it with interest. This was in the local news when it happened, because the local Coast Guard station responded, and the ship put into Portland for its initial repairs and to offload the cars.

At the time, it was thought that Mazda was going salvage title the cars, which would allow them to be sold as "totalled and rebuilt," no warranty, as-is. I'm flabbergasted by the WSJ report that they weren't simply junked, but outright destroyed. A major waste if you ask me, and I'm not typically the sort to muse over corporate waste.

It sounds like the two main factors were Mazda's concerns about brand dilution, and the insurance company playing money games and missing an opportunity to recover part of their payout. They could have cooperated in salvaging, if not the cars, at least parts that were easy to qualify as safe to resell, and the could have reasonably controlled the resale channels to address their brand image concerns. The wheels and tires alone would have grossed about $2 million. Think of all the parts that could have been salvaged very easily: hubcaps, spares, jacks, seats, catalytic converters, mufflers, shocks, CV joints, transmissions, etc. It sounds like the catalytic converters are the only parts being recovered.

Re:The Fail Boat

[darkwhite]

Sorry to nitpick, but I'd say the cause was more directly negligence on part of the crew, who didn't notice the ballast tanks were out of balance until it was too late. (Not to mention the ship engineers' mistake who didn't put in enough failsafes to prevent capsizing if a pump fails and results in an unbalanced condition.)

That said, it would be interesting to compare the environmental impact of scrapping all those thousands of Mazdas (which were by the way ordered destroyed by Mazda's insurer because they spent a long time tilted nearly on their side and even though most worked fine, they were afraid of lawsuits) to the cumulative impact of all the biosphere disruption caused by ballast dumping had this rule not been in effect.

Here's a better idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of microwaves, use the waste heat generated by the ship's engines.

Re:Here's a better idea...

[compro01]

going by FTA, this way works faster.

Re:Here's a better idea...

[danlock4]

Indeed. TFA says this, which may help explain why it's a better system:

. The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediment requires all vessels over 400 tonnes to eventually fit systems to treat ballast water. [...]
      "It will probably work very well for it to be installed on very large ships themselves, but when you are talking about smaller vessels it may be more cost effective to have some sort of barge system based in the ports.
      "It can just pull up to the ship, take and treat the ballast water while the ships are waiting to berth at the dock." .
.
How it works, also from TFA:

. "The basic idea is that you take the ballast water and pump it through a microwave cavity."
      He added that the system would follow the same principle as a household microwave oven.
      "The power level is much higher and a different frequency, but it creates a very high intensity electric field in the centre of the cavity that oscillates rapidly.
      "The water molecules are going to start spinning around very fast and they are going to create a lot of friction that generates heat," Dr Boldor explained.
      "But it generates heat in the whole volume at the same time, unlike if you try to use another heating mechanism where you have to take the heat from somewhere else and conduct it through the liquid."
      This means that the researchers have a high degree of confidence that the system is treating all of the water to remove the unwanted organisms.
      "It is extremely fast and very efficient at transferring the energy from the microwaves into heat," he told BBC News.

Re:Here's a better idea...

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

And you're sure that would be as practical? I'm sure the engineers think about these things, too.

Might as well get used to it

[DesScorp]

With modern transportation, and international trade flourishing across the globe, "invasive species" are the cost of doing business. There's simply no way we'll be able to stop many of these migrations in the long run. Life will simply have to adapt.

Re:Might as well get used to it

[atraintocry]

The problem is that while the benefits are mostly localized, the "costs" affect all of us. I'm not going to lay the blame on the shipping companies, but if people are trying to come up with a solution then let's go with that instead of trying to "adapt" the consequences of our own stupidity.

Re:Might as well get used to it

[maxume]

Zebra mussels have had a real, negative economic impact on the Great Lakes. Drastically reducing the probability of reintroduction means that you become willing to spend more on eradication.

Re:Might as well get used to it

[dave420]

You're making one hell of an assumption. They're not the cost of doing business, but the cost of not caring enough to ensure they don't get transported along with your cargo. That's it. They're not unavoidable.

Invasive species?

[onpermvaca]

Why is success being punished?

Re:Invasive species?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there are intelligent design proponents making policy.

Re:Invasive species?

[FooAtWFU]

Because the zebra mussel's success leads to failures in other things, which people typically like and care about. Niceties like biodiversity, and conveniences like the ability to have (say) some sort of intake pipe, or boat anchor, or boat hull, underwater that doesn't get absolutely encrusted with creatures.

Re:Invasive species?

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Does it still count as success if you eat your food source to extinction then die of starvation?

Re:Invasive species?

[Jesus_666]

It reduces biodiversity (ideological argument when taken on its own), which sometimes can lead to certain areas developing unwanted characteristics, such as lack of fish (economical argument) - and with science finding unexpected uses for species, each species we drive to extinction is one species we can't use in that way (another economical one).

The zebra mussel thing would be an example for argument 2 - as I understand, it causes problems for the US inland fishing business.

Mussels?!

[bluefoxlucid]

Can we eat them? Problem solved.

Re:Mussels?!

[FooAtWFU]

Can we eat them? Problem solved. No, not really. They filter tons of water and end up collecting all sorts of contaminants, for one thing. They're a royal pain to remove from any surface, for another, very small, and very sharp.

Re:Mussels?!

[ivan256]

Also, unlike some other mussels, they don't taste very good. They have stinky greenish yellow insides.

Re:Mussels?!

[saskboy]

We had some engineers that thought of that already. Didn't work. Nice try though.

Re:Mussels?!

[nametaken]

Done.

Next prob?

What about the railroads?

[93 Escort Wagon]

Could Burlington Northern, for example, use this to solve their hobo problem?

I'm just asking.

Re:What about the railroads?

[CastrTroy]

Just as long as they don't use it on The Littlest Hobo.

Re:What about the railroads?

[BForrester]

Probably. Except that hobos tend to be comprised of very "gamey", tough meat.

Therefore, it is necessary to microwave on HIGH for a few additional minutes. Marinating helps too.

Re:What about the railroads?

[MiniMike]

Just call it Hobolent Green, they'll eat it...

Was the previous method

[Zantetsuken]

Was the previous method shooting up through your own cities at the aliens?

I know, its a different type of "alien" but it seemed funny...

No, no, no

[mcgoohan]

It's supposed to be The Cold Equations!

What can happen using low tech

[rwa2]

To anyone concerned about frying the microbes, Wired had a very readable story on what can happen sometimes when the ballast is handled the conventional way:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-03/ff_seacowboys?currentPage=all

*spoiler* essentially current cargo ships headed to the U.S. have to flush their ballast in international waters and refill with local seawater. The Cougar Ace somehow managed to screw up this step and went askew (see pic). There were many quite grave consequences.

Granted, it's not standard operating protocol to end up with losses like this just too keep out invasive species, but it does illustrate some of the challenges and extent of trouble people go to to comply with this kind of ecological directive. Plus it was a damn well-written story I enjoyed reading.

What could possibly go wrong?

[ndansmith]

This sounds like the premise to a really bad sci-fi movie:

Microwaves "cook ballast aliens"

US researchers say they have developed an effective way to kill unwanted plants and animals that hitch a ride in the ballast waters of cargo tankers.

Tests showed that a continuous microwave system was able to remove all marine life within the water tanks. Cut to: Hordes of radioactive sea life terrorizing humanity.

Re:What could possibly go wrong?

[jdschulteis]

Gamera is really neat.
Gamera is filled with meat.
We've been eating Gamera!

Mmmmmmmm..... Microwaves!

[jpellino]

Cause the only thing more noxiously aromatic than a ballast tank would be a steaming hot ballast tank!

Somebody call Mike Rowe...

Chinese Mitten Crab Comes To Hudson River

[chromozone]

People started finding Chinese Mitten crabs in the Hudson River and Chesapeake Bay and balast discharge was mentioned:

  http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/35888.html

I read articles that make them sound like "rats of the sea" but they do eat them in China so maybe they are good eating (trying to be hopeful).

"The fact they will climb over dams, go on shore into people's swimming pools, burrow into banks, we sure as hell don't need them here," Gabrielson said. "I really believe there's not a damn thing in the world we can do about it."

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070615/NEWS/706150327

Re:Chinese Mitten Crab Comes To Hudson River

[jamesh]

I read articles that make them sound like "rats of the sea" but they do eat them in China so maybe they are good eating (trying to be hopeful).

I don't know much about the Hudson river or Chesapeake Bay, but if their anything like other waterways in built up areas, eating any animal that manages to survive in them would not be a good idea, unless you have some sort of heavy metal deficiency.

Re:Chinese Mitten Crab Comes To Hudson River

[ArsenneLupin]

I read articles that make them sound like "rats of the sea" but they do eat them in China so maybe they are good eating (trying to be hopeful). hihi... in China they do eat rats too, so it's kind of fitting...

Great! But...

[Nautical Insanity]

it doesn't deal with the most destructive invasive species known, a resilient and adaptive primate known as Homo Sapiens.

Re:Great! But...

[illegalcortex]

Not true. They can also be microwaved.

And in answer to the followup question - delicious!

Re:Great! But...

[HeadlessNotAHorseman]

Microwaving people has already been tried.

Well that does it

[LukeWebber]

Thanks a lot. Bang goes my next holiday.

Re:Iran BOMB Europe

[megaditto]

you are funny!

Another way - Use nitrogen.

[robbak]

Another way that has been suggested is to bubble pure nitrogen through the ballast water.

It purges the water of oxygen, killing any marine life. It also has the benefit of stopping corrosion.

It does have the downside of making the ships hull an instant death (asphyxiation) hazard.

Re:Another way - Use nitrogen.

[robbak]

Yes, they are as large as the ship is, and are filled to within a meter or two of the waterline.

I don't know exactly how much nitrogen gas is used, but it can't be too much, because this method is being used.

And there is nothing toxic about nitrogen - it doesn't matter if even a considerable amount leaks into the living quarters - air is 70% of the stuff after all. The danger is if you stepped into a room that is 100% nitrogen (0% oxygen) you do not notice anything is wrong until you collapse unconscious. If you are lucky, you notice that you can't see very well a second or so before that.
But standard cabin ventilation will take care of that.

Your opinion is not sustainable!!

[gd23ka]

Uuuuuhhh uuuuuh how can you saaaay that!! Uuuuh! You're antienvironment!! I hate you! uuuuh uuuuh baaah!

Yeah but seriously... your opinion is not sustainable buddy. Humans don't have any right whatsoever to change _anything_
in the environment. Period. It's like this buddy: if a bear shits in the woods then _YOU_ have to walk around
his turd.

Welcome in the club of people seeing through that environ-mentalist hype. Kudos.

No soup for you!

[TheMiddleRoad]

The ballast tanks will become gigantic soup kitchens for sharks. You'll see a train of fins following every large ship.

Periodic Flushing

[Toonol]

What if ships were outfitted to continuously, or at least at frequent intervals, flush their ballast? If Ships flushed at port, ten miles offshore, a hundred miles offshore, and then again as they close on their destination, wouldn't potential infection become unlikely?

Re:Periodic Flushing

[Jesus_666]

Has been tried. The end result was that Mazda had to blow up ca. 4700 new cars. (In short, something went wrong during the dumping process and the ship laid motionless, listing at sixty degrees, for weeks. Mazda had no idea what that would do to their cars so they destroyed them all to be safe.)

Other uses...

[fahrbot-bot]

With apologies to Monty Python's "The Undertakers" sketch:
[For you youngsters: s/ballast/mother/g;]

• ...
• Fred: I'll get the oven on!
• Man: Um, er...excuse me, um, are you... are you suggesting we should eat my ballast?
• Undertaker: Yeah. Not raw, not raw. We cook 'em. They'll be delicious with a few french fries, a bit of stuffing. Delicious! (smacks his lips)
• Man: What! (he stammers)
• Man: Actually, I do feel a bit peckish - No! NO, I can't!
• Undertaker: Look, we'll eat your ballast. Then, if you feel a bit guilty about it afterwards, we can dig a pit and you can throw up into it.
• Man: All right.

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[Jurily]

How is talking about the same waters the summary mentions off-topic?

swish and spit...

[pointbeing]

I live in Michigan and this problem's been aired on local NPR for the last few days - introducing foreign marine life into the Great Lakes has been a problem for years.

Starting this year cargo vessels are required to "swish and spit" - flush their ballast tanks 200 miles before entering the St. Lawrence seaway.

This probably doesn't do much good for saltwater invasive marine life but is a good solution for the freshwater nasties.

Re:swish and spit...

[Joe the Lesser]

I don't really think saltwater is a big problem. Ocean creatures can already get to any other part of the ocean.

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[tomhudson]

Talk to anyone who does wreck diving in the Great Lakes. The water used to be really crappy - in fact, in areas it was about as opaque as a glass of lemonade. Or mud. Now it's a LOT clearer.

What we SHOULD be doing is laying removable mesh "beds" for zebra mussels to breed on outside every sewer discharge. Once a good colony is going, remove a portion of the bed each week and grind the mussels up for fertilizer or glue or fish food or whatever.

Henry Ford had the right idea - let people dump anything they want in the river, provided their water intake is downstream of it. After all, if you expect people downstream from you to drink it, you should be prepared to as well ... the zebra mussels are doing a lot of the work that we should be doing, but aren't.

Nice but

[ajs318]

Could the same principles be applied to Eurostar trains?

flightless birds?

[pointbeing]

As God is my witness I thought turkeys could fly.

Re:flightless birds?

[Cytotoxic]

Heh, next to the "phone cops" episodes, that was the funniest thing ever. Thanks for activating that brain cell. I probably haven't thought of that in 20 years.

Man, we're old. Remember when those old guys used to tell you how great Jackie Gleason was? Yeah, Les Nesman is older than that was. Dang.

"Oooh, I'm obtuse. 'An angle greater than 90 degrees. Rounded at the free end....'" - Les Nesman

Zebra Mussels Have Also Cleaned the Great Lakes

[curmudgeon99]

Despite their admittedly menacing effect on water intakes and on ship navigation, the invasive Zebra Mussels have also famously cleaned all the water in the Great Lakes. The water clarity that is found there would not have been so without the zebs.

Re:Why not just use "LASER" beams?

[ConanG]

It wouldn't have to be done during the deballasting procedure, it could be done during transit. Ships don't ballast and deballast very often, usually only when taking on or dropping off cargo and/or fuel.

In regards to your power query, ships generally have decent power generating reserves. The ship I just left (as an electrical engineer) had six 10 MW generators. Only four were online at a time (while underway - only two online in port) while maintenance was performed on the other two. Even then, the four online never came close to max capacity.

They need to have four asses

[JudgeFurious]

Sounds like a job for that insane genetic scientist on the hill. I want a freshwater starfish with four asses that eats zebra mussels at an incredible pace and I want it by noon tomorrow!

Re:They need to have four asses

[aqk]

And I want it to have FRICKIN' LASERS too!

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[d3ac0n]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that, not only had the Zebra Mussels cleaned up the Great Lakes, but that several of the native species of fish (Lake Trout, Largemouth Bass, Northern Pike, I can't remember which exactly) had started to feed on the mussels and were experiencing a population explosion due to the extra food source.

However, I'm not 100% certain on that one. I might be remembering it wrong. I do hope it's true though. More fish = better fishing.

Soup?

[RandomUsername99]

And when you get to the other side, you have delicious seafood stew.

Why not gamma rays?

[Shinmizu]

I'd just use gamma radiation instead of microwaves, then we can just gather up and use the stowaways as potent weapons of war. Just don't make them angry before you get them to the battle site. You won't like them when they're angry.

This is a much better alternative.

[RoninOtter]

Having worked as an educator at a public aquarium, this was a topic which was talked about quite a bit.

Invasive species are always a potential problem, and even though there are countless species that have already entrenched themselves in foreign ecosystems, this measure is a very good idea to prevent the problem from spreading further.

Previously, the only method to offset this was to introduce chlorine into the ballast tanks to kill off "hitchhikers." But that has its own negative ecological impact, so microwaving would be a much better alternative.

Why not filter them at the source....

[foniksonik]

Why not use this or some other method directly at the ballast intakes?

Rather than microwaving the entire ballast tank continuously... just put in place a bottleneck area where the water is "treated". First with a forced water filter through a mesh to grab the majority of the unwanted critters (which could be ejected back into the ocean) then with the microwaves to kill off any microbes or other very small critters, including eggs, etc. that could develop into critters on the passage itself.

Seems to me that it would much cheaper and much more humane to do this one time per fill up.

Even better.... why not have a treatment plant onshore that cleans water and makes it available for the ships at the same time they are taking on cargo and fuel?

Re:Why not filter them at the source....

[icegreentea]

Don't the two work out exactly the same way? It's the same amount of water, and the idea isn't to microwave the entire ballast, but rather it'll pull water out of the tanks, microwave it, and then pump them out, or back into another empty/clean tank.

WHERE IS YOUR AL GORE NOW!?!?!

[RogueWarrior65]

Occams Razor, people. Global Warming is baloney.

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. Just Wow. That is a horrible idea. The zebra mussels don't just suck up toxins they consume nearly all the available oxygen and other food in the area. This makes any zone heavily populated with zebra mussels a no go area for most other species. Second, you can't control where fertilized zebra mussel embryos set down. I know you will come back with a sterilization argument but that is because you have never tried to engineer and breed a large population of 100% non-fertile anything. Third, you can't reuse the mussels for anything. They are so chuck full of toxins that they are poisonous. You sure can't grind them up, that only magnifies the waste problem.

International Ballast Water

[penguin_zoo]

The water taken up internationally rather than shore ballast water is done as international water tends to be deep water where none nutrient rich species populate, compared to local shore based species which are nutrient rich. By taking up deep sea water you are ensuring that shore based species are not taken from the perfect habitat to another. The deeper sea species are not adapted to survive shore side and hence do not populate and thrive. It is much better to be doing this than nuking/microwaving the water.

Re:International Ballast Water

[HeadlessNotAHorseman]

This is just asking for another ecological disaster. If we remove water from the deep parts of the ocean, and put it in the shallow parts, the deep parts will wind up shallow, and the water near the shorelines will become really deep. We are just not equipped yet to predict what the outcome of swapping the deep ocean habitats with the shallow habitats will be.

Will never be deployed

[wealthychef]

I don't see any incentive for a ship owner to put this on their craft.

No.. not really

[Theoboley]

You're supposed to Boil/Steam Zebra Mussels... not microwave them. It makes them all rubbery if you do.

Re:One way street

[Theoboley]

You sound like you belong up in the northwoods of wisconsin at northland college... hippy

Re:Here's a better idea... More alternatives:

[davidsyes]

To steer the topic back to technical rather than emotional content, here More related links:

Probably one of the more interesting ideas:

Ballast-Free Ship to Combat Aquatic Life
http://michigantoday.umich.edu/2008/apr/ballast.php

And others:

http://massbay.mit.edu/resources/pdf/NABSdatasheet.pdf

Using pier-side bottles to collect ship ballast water
http://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/newsevents/stories/Ballast_water_battles.html

UV Disinfection Method
http://www.triangularwave.com/a3b.htm

Is Microwave cheaper than UV?

[tompaulco]

As a saltwater reef tank enthusiast, I know that UV generators are available to kill off tiny organisms that pass through the filter. I personally never used one, because I had clams, mussels and other filter feeders that enjoyed eating the tiny organisms present in my tank. Is UV more expensive than microwaving? Or perhaps less lethal to larger organisms?

Re:Gee.

[MrScience]

Yup. They made a movie about it. :)
http://www.feoamante.com/Movies/ABC/Batman_Begins.html

Re:Why not just use "LASER" beams?

[afxgrin]

Terribly inefficient use of electricity for the task. Magnetrons have better wall plug efficiency than most lasers. Plus laser are much more difficult to maintain. The microwave idea sounds pretty damn good, especially if they can find frequencies that are not absorbed by water, but by the critters they're cooking.

The other AnonCoward is right, UV is a better idea, but most likely isn't practical for zebra mussels, and is more suited towards bacteria and viruses.

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[tomhudson]

If they're full of toxins, then they're removing them from the water. That's a good thing, since otherwise the toxins end up elsewhere in the food chain. So the choice is now either toxin-laden fish (and the amphibians, birds, and people that feed on them), or toxin-laden mussels.

Some of those toxins are probably heavy metals. It might be interesting to do a bit of gene tweaking (maybe something simple as selective breeding will do it, since they breed fast enough) to get mussels that preferentially accumulate heavy metals. Then they could be "mined". Some things are only toxins because they're in the wrong place - the food supply.

Maybe the shells can be used as filler in concrete ... they're already being used for no-growth boat bottom paint.

Maybe we should be putting mussels into the holding pens at sewage treatment plants.

Re:Life, lemons and unexpected outcomes

[tomhudson]

You're looking for the EPA study ... http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/glwqa/usreport/part5.html

Zebra mussels continue to profoundly affect the Great Lakes ecosystem. This prolific mollusk filters microscopic algae from the water column, diverting nutrients from open water to lake bottom systems, thus favoring bottom-feeding fish (and their predators) over those such as alewife and smelt (and their predators) which feed in the open water. Aquatic rooted plants (macrophytes) and their communities (e.g. large mouth bass) thrive in water cleared by zebra mussel, while habitat is reduced for species adapted for turbid waters (e.g. walleye).

In other words, some fish benefited, others didn't.

In general, community abundances tended to increase at zebra mussel sites, but the diversity within those communities decreased.

In other words, more zebra mussels == more fish. The lessened diversity could easily be explained by the fact that it takes time for these things to shake themselves out.

Studies on the population dynamics of burrowing mayflies conducted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), the Biological Resources Division of the USGS, Heidelberg College, the Ohio State University, and Penn State University have indicated that the mayfly populations in western Lake Erie and the Presque Isle Bay AoC are presently experiencing exponential growth. Based on population models, the mayfly population is predicted to attain full recovery by the year 2002. Mayflies were virtually eliminated from the western basin of Lake Erie by 1960, but recolonization began during the 1990s and spread throughout most of the lake by 1996. The recovery of the mayfly augers well for the yellow perch population which is expected to grow as the density of mayfly nymphs continues to rise in western Lake Erie. The re-emergence of the mayfly is seen as a prime indicator of improved water and sediment quality in Lake Erie.

Maybe those nasty zebra mussels can be given some credit for making the water clean ... it's not like people were going to pay to set up a massive filtering system ...