Do you think there are any limitations to the biological deodorization process in practical applications?
Thread Content
The biological method utilizes the metabolic activities of microorganisms to dissolve the malodorous substances in gases as they pass through biological treatment units, allowing those substances to be degraded by the microorganisms. Its essence is to utilize the metabolic activities of microorganisms to convert odor-causing substances in the air flow into simple, odorless substances. What I would like to discuss are the processes used for controlling odors in wastewater treatment plants, including biological filter beds, biological trickling beds, and biological scrubber beds. According to the promotional materials, the biological method features good safety and no secondary pollution; it is particularly economical when dealing with low-concentration, biodegradable odors, and thus has broad application prospects. I would like to ask those who have actually installed such facilities: what are the limitations or drawbacks in their actual use? Also, are there any application examples for pulse corona method, membrane separation method, microwave catalytic oxidation, electrochemical oxidation method, etc.? What is the quality of the processes at Sinopec Fushun Research Institute? These include the activated carbon method, biological method, and catalytic combustion method. Thank you!
Any process has its advantages and disadvantages; it’s just a matter of choosing the one that suits the company’s actual situation. The advantages of biological trickling filters are, as mentioned above, no secondary pollution, good safety, and low operating costs. However, they also have many disadvantages, such as requiring a large amount of space, being unsuitable for high-concentration VOCs, and not being appropriate for treating certain toxic and hard-to-degrade organic substances. The other half of the biological deodorization processes operate in environments with a low pH level; therefore, it is necessary to consider corrosion prevention for the equipment and pipelines. Additionally, issues such as filter media clogging and the addition of nutrient solutions must also be taken into account. In areas with high levels of sand and dust, when using biological filters, it is important to address the problem of exposure to these elements, ensuring that they do not enter the filter bed. Finally, regarding the three treatment processes developed by the Fushun Research Institute, I believe this institute has considerable strength; it started working on many of these treatment processes early on and possesses extensive experience. The information above is for reference only! ! !
By the way, may I ask: do you think low-temperature plasma technology has a promising future?
Last edited by cdpulin on 2009-8-6 11:09. Biggest drawbacks: 1. High investment requirements – biological deodorization relies on microorganisms to break down and metabolize organic odor-causing substances, which requires the construction of structures such as biological towers, resulting in substantial overall investment costs； 2. It requires a large area. Since biological deodorization relies on the metabolism of microorganisms to break down organic substances, a substantial area is needed to cultivate these microorganisms, thereby increasing the surface area available for their action and enabling more effective decomposition of organic substances and thus achieving deodorization. 3. For some special odors that microorganisms are unable to break down and metabolize, biological deodorization is ineffective. 4. Management is relatively complex; during operation, it is necessary to constantly monitor changes and reproduction of microorganisms. If the population of microorganisms changes, their functions will undergo fundamental alterations.
So which method do you think has more potential? Including activated carbon, catalytic combustion, electrochemistry, photocatalysis, and so on. What are the disadvantages of sending it directly to a incinerator or flare via pipes? Is it the Environmental Protection Bureau that doesn’t allow it? Afraid of dioxins? Is low-temperature plasma promising?
1. Personally, I am in favor of biological methods, but only on the condition that no more large amounts of wastewater are generated. 2. The most effective method is not necessarily the most promising one. Amoxicillin is very useful, haha, but it’s also extremely cheap!
Thank you. Question: Where does the wastewater referred to in your biological method come from? Don’t the documents state that leaching solutions are all reused?
The spray liquid is reused, but wastewater is still generated. For example, filters are installed at the inlet of the circulation pumps; when these filters get clogged, they need to be backwashed. Additionally, sometimes it is necessary to replace the water and discharge the waste water – just my opinion! ! !
Is recycling the spray liquid a viable way to save costs?
The catalytic combustion method can make use of the large amount of waste heat in the petrochemical industry; I think it has great potential
5# Sunflowers in the green garden: Personally, I think the catalytic method is a viable approach; whether it’s catalytic combustion or catalytic oxidation, this represents the trend for future development, especially when it comes to removing odors that are difficult to break down through biological means. However, some of these technologies still require further research and development.