Line 02 · Odor & Gas Control
It becomes a matter of the community, the environmental authority, and your license to operate. We bring it back to the ground where it can be solved: measure the stream, understand where it really comes from, and choose the right technology using the numbers from your operation.
Independent comparison
Removal efficiency, CAPEX, and OPEX for each alternative.
The problem
An odor from hydrogen sulfide is not treated the same way as one from ammonia or from organic compounds. When the technology is bought before the stream is characterized, the equipment ends up installed, running, and the complaint still unresolved — and the budget is gone. The sequence matters more than the catalog.
What we solve
From the point where the odor starts to the verification that the system delivered. You can contract one stretch or the whole chain.
Identifying the real source, characterizing the odorant compounds, modeling how far the odor travels, and designing the solution. With the evidence a proceeding before the environmental authority requires.
Before you can treat it, you have to capture it. Design of hoods, enclosures, and ductwork to collect the stream at the source, before it dilutes across the whole plant and multiplies the airflow you have to treat.
Design, supply, and commissioning of treatment systems for loaded streams. It includes verifying that the system delivers the efficiency the design promised.
Capture and control of particulate matter at transfer points, milling, drying, and dispatch. Where dust is at once an environmental problem, a safety problem, and lost product.
How we do it
That order is what separates an investment that solves the problem from one that only gets installed.
Where the odor actually comes from. Almost never where it is assumed to.
How the stream is collected before it dilutes across the whole plant.
Which compounds are present and at what concentration. Line 01 comes in here.
How far it travels and who it reaches, with dispersion modeled.
The viable alternatives, with the efficiency, CAPEX, and OPEX of each one.
Design, supply, and installation with domestic and international partners.
We measure again with the system running and hand you the evidence.
The alternatives
None is better than the others in the abstract. The one that works depends on your airflow, your load, its variability, the space you have, and what your team can operate.
Biological degradation of the pollutant in a filter medium. Low operating cost, but it needs floor area and a relatively steady load.
High airflows · biodegradable compoundsAdsorption onto the medium. Very effective and quick to start up; the cost lives in replacing the carbon periodically.
Low loads · final polishing stageAbsorption of the pollutant into a reactive solution. It handles high and variable loads, in exchange for managing reagents and their waste.
H₂S and ammonia at high concentrationDestruction of the compound by chemical or thermal means. It handles what the biological route cannot reach, at a higher energy cost.
Compounds that are hard to degradePuts microbial activity to work on steady streams. Simple to operate and low in cost when conditions hold.
Steady, biodegradable streamsMasks or neutralizes the perceived odor. It works as spot mitigation while the underlying problem is solved, not as a permanent fix.
Temporary mitigation · never the sourceResolution 1541 of 2013 sets the permissible air quality levels for nuisance odor and the procedure for evaluating the activities that generate it, including a plan to reduce the impact. What that procedure demands is not intentions: it is measured concentrations and a verifiable plan.
How we work
We hand over the full comparison —efficiencies, mass balances, capital cost, and operating cost per alternative— so the choice rests on your own analysis and is not delegated to the equipment vendor.
A case
Identify the critical odorant compounds in the process and define a technically and economically viable solution, with variable composition and airflow, space constraints, and environmental regulatory requirements as the limits.
An assessment with sampling at strategic points, quantification of the key compounds, a comparative analysis of the applicable technologies with their removal efficiency and operating requirements, flow diagrams and mass balances per alternative, and a technical and economic evaluation with CAPEX and OPEX estimates.
The client chose knowing what each alternative costs in capital and in operation, and which one meets the regulation. The decision rested on their own analysis.
CAPEX
and OPEX
Estimated per alternative
Mass
balances
For every scenario evaluated
Regulation
Compliance verified in the design
No
bias
The client makes the decision
Contact
If you already have a complaint, a regulatory request, or a measurement on your desk, that is the best place to start. The first conversation costs nothing and ends with a read on the problem and a possible path forward.