I need help figuring out how to deal with this type of waste gas

With so much combustible material, it could be considered sending it to the boiler to be burned.

It depends on what emission standards the building owner aims to meet, and what the main pollutants are. The flow rate of this gas is low; if possible, it is most economical to mix it into a gas boiler to recover its calorific value before releasing it together with other gases. If it is not possible, and the pressure and concentration of the gas supply are relatively stable, a small combustion furnace can be installed; then, depending on the emission standards, an exhaust gas desulfurization facility may be added.

Reply to 2# stony_wanghc: I don’t have a boiler here, and it’s not permitted to install one. Additionally, this is an acidic gas.

Reply to 4# *ongrenjun: With such a small volume of gas, can it be ignited? Moreover, desulfurization is definitely necessary; using such a small amount of gas is very uneconomical.

This post was last edited by *ongrenjun on 2011-2-19 17:57. There is a pressure of 3 kg, and hydrogen sulfide together with n-ethane account for 85% of the composition; ignition should not be a problem. Let’s see if the OP can, from a process standpoint, treat this gas in some way and return it to the production system; this could also help reduce product consumption. Mainly, the gas volume is too small. There’s no problem with the desulfurization technology; it’s just not cost-effective at all.

I have a suggestion, though I’m not sure if it’s valid. Perhaps your production process is kept confidential, but these waste gases might be products of a final mixing process; it might be possible to separate them or reuse them at the source. It’s a considerable amount; it would be a shame to burn it.

This post was last edited by Just a passerby on 2011-2-21 11:35. A rough estimate suggests that the molar mass of this waste gas is around 40, rather than 30.6. It has a very high calorific value, and it should fall within the category of flammable and explosive exhaust gases. It is recommended that you check the lower explosion limits of various flammable components to confirm this. A direct-fired burner, an emergency cooling tower, and acid and alkali scrubbers can be used: the burner removes H2 and organic components; the emergency cooling tower lowers the temperature (of course, heat exchangers or boilers etc. could potentially be used for waste heat recovery, but this cannot be determined at present as no detailed calculations have been done); the acid scrubber removes NH3, while the alkali scrubber removes H2S. Due to the high calorific value, a large amount of fresh air is required to provide oxygen and regulate temperature. As a result, the volume of gas entering the incinerator furnace may increase by 2 to 3 times, or even more. Nevertheless, the capacity is not high, a little over 1 thousand cubic liters per hour. Since it is flammable exhaust gas, more complex explosion-proof and backflow prevention measures are required. Just for this exhaust gas alone, the cost of treatment is relatively high. Due to the very small volume of gas and high prices, you might be reluctant to do it. If the price is too low, it’s very likely that no reliable exhaust gas treatment companies will be willing to take on the job. This is only a rough consideration; omissions are inevitable. It is provided for reference and discussion.

Reply to 9# Passerby: Is the expert above specialized in waste gas treatment?

Not a master, but I do specialize in exhaust gas treatment :)

My opinion: First remove hydrogen sulfide (by alkaline washing), then condense to remove most of the organic substances. Finally, by using high-altitude emission, can the emission standards be met? If that doesn’t work, a biological filter can be used