Was it a good idea to ban TBT from anti-fouling?
Lallemand, A.; Penen, G. (2017). Was it a good idea to ban TBT from anti-fouling?, in: International Symposium on Corrosion and Fouling. Two natural curses for a ship's hull. Antwerp Maritime Academy 3 April 2017. pp. 21
In: (2017). International Symposium on Corrosion and Fouling. Two natural curses for a ship's hull. Antwerp Maritime Academy 3 April 2017. Antwerp Maritime Academy: Antwerpen. 30 pp., meer
|  |
| Beschikbaar in | Auteurs |
|
Documenttype: Samenvatting
|
| Trefwoorden |
Fouling
Tributyltin
Marien/Kust |
| Abstract |
TBT was one of the most effective anti-foulants that ever came in use, but at the same time the most troublesome substance ever deliberately introduced in the marine environment. By the 1980s some negative side-effects of TBT on the marine environment were recorded and in 1998 the use of organotins -like TBT- was banned. After this ban on TBT the shipping industry needed new alternatives that were as effective as TBT in keeping the hulls free from biofouling. But are these alternatives better for the marine environment and was it a good idea to ban TBT?Booster biocides became the most commonly used alternative, albeit that some negative side-effects on non-target organisms became evident. These booster biocides have an even larger broad-spectrum impact on marine ecosystems than TBT. Concern arose because photosynthesis is affected by booster biocides, which has an impact on the entire base of the food chain. In comparison with these boosters, the ban on TBT is not a good idea because its alternative is an even greater threat to the environment.Non-toxic anti-fouling strategies are also being developed. This is a positive trend since no harmful toxins are released into the marine environment and thus negative side-effects are rarely seen. A good example is the natural anti-fouling surface design. |
|
