Engineering Failure Analysis, Vol 2, No. 1 pp.

79-84, 1995
Pergamon Copyright 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
1350-6307/95 $9.50 + 0.00

1350-6307(94)00028-X

CORROSION RISKS IN SHIPS' BALLAST TANKS AND THE

IMO PATHOGEN GUIDELINES

J. H. C L E L A N D
Cambcor Ltd., 30 Windsor Road, Cambridge CB4 3JW, U.K.
(Received 11 November 1994)

Abstract~The last few years have seen an increasing incidence of serious wastage of ships'
ballast tanks, which has been attributed to the action of sulphate-reducing bacteria (SRB).
Since SRB have been with us for many years, it is far from clear just why they should have
became such a problem. Nevertheless, the cause has been recognised and preventative
measures may be taken. Almost concurrently, the threat to aquatic environments due to the
importation of non-native unwanted pathogens in ballast water has been recognised. Con-
certed international action has prompted the publication of guidelines aimed at countering this
threat. However, the context in which these guidelines were written was very specific, and
they have potentially dangerous implications for the ballast water-SRB-ship interface. The
object of this paper is to focus attention on the implications of the guidelines on unwanted
pathogens on this interface.

1. A C A S E S T U D Y IN B A L L A S T T A N K C O R R O S I O N

The past few years have seen an increase in the number of reported instances of
acc,elerated corrosion in ships' ballast tanks, and what is described below is a typical
case study. The case concerns a ship which was fitted with wing tanks, i.e. ballast
tanks situated between the holds and the shipsides. These wing tanks contain
horizontal stringers, which run fore and aft, and vertical web frames and bulkheads
which supply transverse strength. Some 2 years after a survey it was found that the
lower parts of the web frames and bulkheads, and the upper surfaces of the stringers
in the upper sections of the wing tanks, had suffered extensive corrosion damage. All
these parts had thinned to an extent which put them out of class, and some of the
stringers had actually perished. The ship owners were particularly concerned in view
of the fact that ultrasonic measurements made during the survey had given the
thickness of the stringers as 12 mm.
Inspection of the wing tanks showed that there had been two modes of corrosion.
The first mode occurred on the drier parts of the vertical surfaces. This mode had
given rise to uniform corrosion and produced a dry, dense dark-brown rust which
adhered to vertical surfaces. Where this rust had spalled it had done so as flakes, the
thickness of which varied between 0.5 and 2 mm. If, as commonly accepted, 1 mm of
steel produces about 7 m m of rust, then the metal loss was between 0.07 and 0.3 mm,
which corresponds to a maximum corrosion rate of 0.15 m m per year. This is an
acceptable corrosion rate for steel in the hot humid conditions normally experienced
in wing tanks. The second mode was found on the wetter parts of the wing tanks; the
topsides of the stringers and the lower sections of the web frames and bulkheads
where they met the stringers. This mode was a localised form of corrosion which had
caused pitting and scabbing of the steel and, in some areas, total loss of metal
(Fig. 1). The corrosion product of this mode was a sludge of fine black rust
underneath a hard cap of red rust. If an allowance of 0.3 mm is made for metal loss
from the underside of the stringers, then perforation of a stringer corresponds to a
loss of 11.7 mm of steel in less than 2 years, i.e. the corrosion rate had been about
6 m m per year.
Samples of both types of rust were taken, sealed into airtight polythene sample
bags and sent for analysis. The results are given in Table 1. It is u n c o m m o n to

79
80 J. H. CLELAND

Fig. 1. Perforation of a stringer, corresponding to a corrosion rate of 6 mm per year, in a wing

ballast tank due to the action of sulphate-reducing bacteria. The deep sludge of rust which
covered the stringer can be seen on the left-hand side of the photograph. The condition of the
vertical surfaces shows that they have suffered comparatively little corrosion.

Table 1. Species, mg per 10 g, detected in the rust from

the two modes of corrosion (n.d. = below the limits of
detection)

Uniform Localised
Species corrosion corrosion
Chloride, CI- 120 14{)
Nitrate, NO3 n.d. n.d.
Sulphate, SO] n.d. 290
Sulphur, S n.d. 420

m e a s u r e the s u l p h u r c o n t e n t of rust. T h e r e a s o n for d o i n g so was t h a t a s t r o n g smell

o f h y d r o g e n s u l p h i d e was n o t e d d u r i n g the d i g e s t i o n o f the rust in M/10 s o d i u m
c a r b o n a t e s o l u t i o n p r i o r to the analyses.
T h e pitting o b s e r v e d u n d e r the c o r r o s i o n p r o d u c t of the s e c o n d m o d e o f c o r r o s i o n
was c o n s i s t e n t with the p r e s e n c e of s u l p h a t e - r e d u c i n g b a c t e r i a , a n d this, t o g e t h e r with
the p r e s e n c e of s u l p h a t e in the rust and the h y d r o g e n s u l p h i d e , p r o m p t e d a
m i c r o b i o l o g i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n of the two t y p e s o f rust. It was f o u n d that t h e r e was no
m i c r o b i o l o g i c a l activity in the rust f r o m the first m o d e of c o r r o s i o n b u t t h a t in the
rust f r o m the s e c o n d m o d e of c o r r o s i o n , the l o c a l i s e d m o d e , t h e r e was h e a v y
b a c t e r i a l c o n t a m i n a t i o n with t h r e e t y p e s of a e r o b i c b a c t e r i a p r e s e n t at p o p u l a t i o n s in
excess of 100,000 p e r g, t o g e t h e r with a n a e r o b i c s u l p h a t e - r e d u c i n g b a c t e r i a with a
p o p u l a t i o n o f 2500 p e r g. M o u l d s were also p r e s e n t with a p o p u l a t i o n of 30,000 p e r g.

2. S U L P H A T E - R E D U C I N G BACTERIA

S u l p h a t e - r e d u c i n g b a c t e r i a , S R B , have b e e n k n o w n for m a n y y e a r s [1] a n d m u c h

has b e e n w r i t t e n a b o u t t h e m , e.g. [2-5]. T h e y a n d t h e i r c h e m i s t r y are e x t r e m e l y
 Corrosion risks in ships' ballast tanks 81
complex, but (and with a cavalier disregard for detail), within fairly wide limits of pH
and temperature, SRB produce sulphide from sulphate (which is present in most
waters) under anaerobic conditions. This metabolic growth process utilises the natural
organic nutrient present in sea-water and clean ballast water. Moreover, as and when
hydrocarbon degradation takes place by aerobic hydrocarbon-decomposing bacteria,
the by-products are utilised by the SRB as an additional nutrient source. Thus, their
metabolic process is accelerated and the corrosivity of the environment in the ballast
tanks increased. Such aerobic bacteria can not only supply nutrient to the SRB but
they also strip out the oxygen under a "skin", or biofilm, and assist in making the
environment under the biofilm sufficiently anaerobic for SRB proliferation.
In notionally clean ballast tanks these conditions would usually be expected close to
the bottom of the tanks but, because of the participation of aerobic bacteria, suitable
environments can be formed under deposits of slime and rust higher up in the tanks
under conditions which would be classed as aerobic. Indeed, SRB can continue to
proliferate in the damp conditions under adherent patches of red rust and under slime
deposits above the normal level of the ballast water.
The mechanisms of SRB-induced corrosion remain the subject of active research
and it is reasonable to expect that precise mechanisms will be specific to exposure
conditions. However, in general terms both hydrogen sulphide and iron sulphide play
a part in the mechanism of corrosion. The hydrogen sulphide accepts the electrons
produced by the rusting (oxidation) of the steel and thus permits the rusting to
continue. As corrosion continues, different forms of iron sulphides, which with time
contain progressively more iron, are formed on the surface of the steel. The iron-rich
sulphides are conductive and are cathodic to steel; thus, a galvanic cell may also be
set up between the steel and the iron-rich sulphides. This explains why corrosion rates
associated with SRB accelerate with time. These iron-rich sulphides, once formed,
remain, even if the SRB do not, and the galvanic corrosion can only be stopped if
these sulphide films are physically removed. "Normal" uniform corrosion rates for
ballast tanks of between 0.1 and 0.25 mm per year can be accelerated into double-
figure rates, and the range 8-13 mm per year is sometimes quoted as a conservative
estimate of the effect of SRB.
Implicit among much of what has been written on SRB by writers outside the
discipline of corrosion is the belief that if the water is kept oxygenated all will be
well, leastways as far as SRB are concerned. If positive measures have been taken to
restrict SRB proliferation in tanks and bilges then this belief is probably correct.
However, if there has been SRB activity then there is a risk that oxygenation could
lead to an even more dangerous situation; the production under the now aerobic
conditions of elemental sulphur from the corrosion products of SRB attack with the
consequence that corrosion rates will be further accelerated. Ultimately, the most
dangerous situation is one of anaerobic and aerobic cycles. Together with local
pockets of SRB under slime and rust deposits this may be the reason why accelerated
corrosion is sometimes experienced in ballast tanks, and other items of equipment
on both land and sea, "in places where SRB cannot possibly be active". Given that
SRB have been with us for a considerable time, why are they now the current
villains?
It is known that SRB are present everywhere but that they only become a problem
when they proliferate [4], and, although it is impossible to be definitive, the answer
must be that the conditions for proliferation are more common than before. It may
be: (i) that the restrictions on deballasting and bilge pumping inshore have made the
conditions in ballast tanks and bilges, through their becoming more stagnant and
anaerobic, ideal for SRB proliferation [3]; (ii) that shallow waters, in which ballast is
commonly taken on, are more polluted and that the risk of taking on SRB is greater;
(iii) that hosing-down and cleaning of ballast tanks is done less frequently than
previously; (iv) that unsuitable coatings have been applied to the surfaces of ballast
tanks; (v) that imperfect coatings, e.g. with pinholes, have been applied on improp-
erly prepared surfaces; and (vi) that some of these factors are acting in combination.
82 J. H. CLELAND
3. DISCUSSION AND C O N C L U S I O N ON T H E CASE S T U D Y

As described in Section 2, the most dangerous situation for SRB-induced corrosion

is that of anaerobic and aerobic cycles. As the height of ballast water in a wing tank
varies according to cargo weight, the environment in the upper sections of a wing
tank becomes precisely one of anaerobic and aerobic cycles. Moreover, apart from
varying ballast water levels, there is also the aeration of ballast water by the sloshing
of ballast water which is imparted by the motion of the ship. The analyses showed
that the rust from the second mode of corrosion contained both sulphate and sulphur.
The presence of the latter is clear proof that aerobic conditions had led to the
production of elemental sulphur from the sulphides produced under anaerobic
conditions by SRB.
As far as the particulars are concerned, the aerobic bacteria will have stripped the
oxygen from the black rust slime under the hard caps of red rust to form an anaerobic
environment which would be suitable for SRB proliferation. Indeed, the presence of
black rust under the hard caps of red rust showed that corrosion was continuing under
conditions of oxygen depletion. The black rust slime would also have been able to
support electrochemical reactions since it would have been conductive due to the
chloride which was present. Thus, the acceleration of corrosion rate seen in the
second mode of corrosion, from 0.15 to 6 r a m per year, and the consequent
perforation of the stringers was ascribed to the conjoint action of SRB and alternate
aerobic and anaerobic cycles.

4. AN U N U S U A L F A C T O R

Normally, once the cause of corrosion has been established, a solution is sought by
either changing the material to a more resistant grade of steel or altering the
environment. In the case of ships, it is unlikely that there will be a change in steel, at
least as far as corrosion resistance is concerned, and, as far as altering the
environment is concerned, Hill and Hill [3] have outlined possible preventative
measures. However, as far as ballast tanks are concerned an unusual factor may have
to be taken into consideration. This is the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)
"Guidelines for preventing the introduction of unwanted aquatic organisms and
pathogens from ships' ballast water and sediment discharges".

5. IMO P A T H O G E N G U I D E L I N E S

In an article published at the beginning of 1994 [6], an "invisible menace" was

described--the transfer of pathogens and aquatic organisms from one part of the
world to another by polluted ballast water. Among the examples cited were: (i) the
discovery in November 1991 of a strain of cholera in the ballast water of three ships
at ports on the east coast of the United States, (ii) an outbreak of toxic algae which
poisoned shellfish stocks in southern Australia and Tasmania, and (iii) an infestation
of zebra mussels in the Great Lakes brought by European cargo ships. These
examples demonstrate the potential impact on the human population and the actual
impact on the environment of this invisible menace, and it is clear that measures
should be introduced to counter the menace.
The IMO has responded to the problem and on 4 November 1993 adopted
Resolution A.774(18) "Guidelines for preventing the introduction of unwanted
aquatic organisms and pathogens from ships' ballast water and sediment discharges".
These guidelines were described as short-term non-mandatory guidelines. However,
the request was made in them that the Marine Environment Protection Committee
and the Maritime Safety Committee, "keep the ballast water issue and the application
of the above Guidelines under review with a view to further developing the
 Corrosion risks in ships' ballast tanks 83
Guidelines as a basis for a new Annex to MARPOL 73/38". This suggests that the
Guidelines may become mandatory.
Four approaches to the problem are described in paragraph 7.1.2 of the Guidelines:
"(i) the non-release of ballast water;
(ii) ballast water exchange and sediment removal at sea or in areas designated as
acceptable for the purpose by the Port State Authority;
(iii) ballast water management practices aimed at preventing or minimising the
uptake of contaminated water or sediment in ballasting and deballasting
operations; and
(iv) discharge of ballast water into shore-based facilities for treatment or controlled
disposal".
Although the wording of the Guidelines is such that these four approaches may not
be taken as a definitive list of approaches, no information is given in the Guidelines
as to how the list may be extended. However, Curtis [6], quoting the IMO
spokesman, wrote, "For the longer term, it proposes measures such as chemical
treatment, oxygen deprivation and ultra violet light disinfection. Changes to ship
design to reduce the volume of ballast required or improve the way it is taken aboard
are also under consideration."

6. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMO GUIDELINES FOR SRB ATTACK

Let us consider the implications of the IMO Guidelines for untreated ballast water.
Potentially the most incompatible measure is that of non-release of ballast water. As
described in Section 2, it takes time for: (i) the balance between the aerobic and
anaerobic bacteria to be established, and (ii) for the iron-rich sulphides to be formed
with the consequent increase in corrosion rate. Some authorities [3] ascribe the
increase in SRB activity to ballast tanks and bilges becoming more stagnant and
anaerobic, and therefore any measure which further restricts deballasting will have a
detrimental effect on the integrity of a vessel.
The exchange of ballast water and sediment removal at sea or in areas designated as
acceptable for the purpose by the Port State Authority would appear to be a
reasonably risk-free option as far as SRB are concerned. However, it is virtually
impossible to avoid oxygenation of ballast water during exchange, and the risk here is
that, unless positive measures are taken at the time (e.g. cleaning and sterilisation) or
have always been taken to restrict SRB in the ballast tanks, elemental sulphur will be
formed at locations where SRB were formerly active, and the result will be local
acceleration of corrosion rates with the consequent risk of perforation and loss of
integrity. Sediment removal is a step in the proper direction since it will reduce the
number of sites suitable for SRB proliferation but, since proliferation can occur under
rust tubercles, some active colonies will inevitably be left untouched unless the ballast
tanks are given a good clean prior to and during the process of sediment removal.
Proper segregation and regulation of areas for sediment removal and ballast water
exchange would have to be implemented, and practical difficulties are foreseen in
situations where ballast is taken on to maintain trim during off-loading.
The approach of ballast water management practices aimed at preventing or
minimising the uptake of contaminated water or sediment in ballasting and deballasting
operations is very much a broad-brush approach but problems similar to those
mentioned above would be faced. The discharge of ballast water into shore-based
facilities for treatment or controlled disposal would be suitable for the containment of
the unwanted pathogens and aquatic organisms and would also be suitable for the
containment of SRB if applied in reverse and assuming that the SRB had always been
contained in the ballast tanks. Otherwise, the problems of elemental sulphur and
active colonies are as above.
Oxygen deprivation of ballast water was mentioned as one of the measures which
84 J.H. CLELAND
may be proposed in the longer term. If this could be fully achieved then it might
appear that it represents a way of denying nutrients to the SRB through suffocating
the aerobic bacteria necessary for the degradation of the hydrocarbons. However, it is
improbable that oxygen deprivation could ever be fully achieved since, apart from the
practicalities of such an operation, it would be impossible to prevent aeration of
ballast water by sloshing, and there would, thus, always be sufficient oxygen available
to support the aerobic bacteria. Moreover, if there was either partial or total oxygen
deprivation in the bulk of the ballast water, less oxygen stripping by the aerobic
bacteria would be required to set up the balance necessary for SRB proliferation. The
probable effect of this measure would be to increase the depth over which SRB could
become active.
As far as ultraviolet light disinfection is concerned, prior experience shows that it
has its attractions. It has been successfully used under amenable conditions, but it
suffers from the great drawbacks that: (i) its effect is local to the irradiation chamber,
and (ii) it does not in any way improve an environment in which SRB could
proliferate. Reinfestation will occur if there are pre-existing pockets of SRB down-
stream of the chamber.

7. C O N C L U S I O N S

A case of an unacceptably high corrosion rate in wing tanks has been shown to be
due to the action of SRB under alternating aerobic and anaerobic cycles. Experience
shows that there is an implicit risk of accelerated corrosion and consequent loss of
integrity of ballast tanks through SRB activity in both the Guidelines adopted on 4
N o v e m b e r 1993 by the I M O and in the proposed longer-term measures. This risk
must be taken into account before any moves are made to m a k e the Guidelines
mandatory. What is clear is that guidelines such as the I M O guidelines are necessary;
what is equally clear is that guidelines which have been written by one "interested
party" in the absence of proper consultation with other parties, can be dangerous
guidelines. As far as the practising engineer is concerned, this example of the
potential impact of guidelines, however well-intentioned, on the integrity of a
structure is a clear demonstration that the engineering profession must recognise that
engineering has a role to play in what at first sight might appear to be extra-disciplin-
ary decisions, and that the engineering voice must be strong enough to be heard.

Acknowledgement--The author acknowledges invaluable discussions with Professor A. K. Tiller.

REFERENCES

1. D. Ellis, Iron Bacteria, Methuen, London (1918).

2. S. A. Campbell, R. A. Scannell and F. C. Walsh, Ind. Corrosion 8(1), (1990).
3. E. C. Hill and G. C. Hill, The Institute of Marine Engineers, London (18 May 1993).
4. J. F. D. Stott, Metals & Materials, p. 224 (April 1988).
5. A. K. Tiller, in Corrosion Processes (edited by R. N. Parkins), Applied Science Publishers, London
(1982).
6. J. Curtis, The Independent (3 January 1994).