|
|
|
Odor Control TechnologiesSeveral technologies exist to reduce odors. Click on the technology below to learn more:Biofilter, Carbon Scrubber, Wet Scrubber, Thermal Oxidizer, Ozone
Biofilter
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | uses non-hazardous compounds for odor control |
| destroys VOCs (up to 90% destruction) |
| simple concept |
| low yearly maintenance |
Disadvantages of a biofilter:
| large footprint required (up to 2,500 sq ft. for 30,000-CFM @-20 PPM H2S |
| large footprints require significant capital cost |
| need large blower fans to push air through media (up to 40-Hp) |
| requires special misting system to keep media moist |
| large ducting is needed to deliver air to the biofilter |
| upgrading is difficult if flows increase due to process expansion |
| biofilters are good at removing H2S but other odorous gases can pass through |
| settling of biofilter media causes channelling reducing performance over time |
| organic
media needs to be replaced after 3-5 years |
Advantages:
|
up to 99.5% H2S removal |
|
small footprint |
Disadvantages:
|
can only handle small flow rates (typically less than 20,000-CFM) |
|
desiccant requires frequent replacement (once every three months) |
|
significant capital cost |
|
upgrading is difficult if flows increase due to process expansion |
|
need large blower fans to push air through media (up to 40-Hp) |
|
large ducting is needed to deliver air to the scrubber |
|
must be sized based on flowrate and H2S emission |
|
can
let other odorous compounds pass through
|
Advantages:
|
can also remove particles in air stream |
|
will remove absorbable odors |
|
can handle high temperature gas streams - significant temperature reduction |
Disadvantages:
|
nozzles can plug leading to channelling |
|
requires water treatment pH control system |
|
significant capital cost |
|
large ducting is needed to deliver air to the scrubber |
|
need blower fans to push air through media (up to 20-Hp) |
|
chemicals require special handling |
|
performance is
highly dependent on maintaining the correct pH |
Advantages:
| very effective (99.9% odor and VOC destruction) |
| acidic fumes are also destroyed |
| CO2 and H2O are the most common by-products |
| small footprint |
Disadvantages:
|
EXPENSIVE (even small installations require a large investment) |
|
open flame |
|
intricate control system - potential for malfunction |
|
higher air flowrates require significantly more fuel |
|
fuel costs can be very high |
|
large
ducting is needed to deliver air to the scrubber |
Advantages:
|
effective (up to 95% odor and VOC destruction) |
|
capital costs are less than other technologies |
|
minimal maintenance |
|
small footprint |
|
no chemical or desiccant replacement |
|
destroys odors inside the facility eliminating the need for a mixing chamber |
|
no expensive or bulky ducting required reducing installation cost |
|
minimal maintenance costs (less than 2% of capital cost) |
|
utilize PLCs to increase or decrease ozone setting to maximize odor destruction |
| no large energy-consuming fan or blowers required |
| will not negatively affect the aesthetics of existing processes |
| only sized for H2S concentration and not flowrate - no blowers or large ducting required |
| ozone is delivered to the odorous facility vs. bringing the odors to the treatment process - results in significant savings |
| ozone can be delivered to multiple emission points with one ozone generator |
Disadvantages:
|
new technology - no significant track record of performance |
|
electrical costs can be 50% greater than biofilters or carbon scrubbers |
|
difficult to obtain 99% odor destruction |
|
The largest selection of ozone
equipment on the web. See our New Site www.ozonesolutions.com |
