Recovery equipment, selection

Thermal and catalytic incinerators, condensers, and adsorbers are the most common methods of abatement used, due to their ability to deal with a wide variety of emissions of organic compounds. The selection between destruction and recovery equipment is normally based on the feasibility of recovery, which relates directly to the cost and the concentration of organic compounds in the gas stream. The selection of a suitable technology depends on environmental and economical aspects, energy demand, and ease of installation as well as considerations of operating and maintenance. 7 he selection criteria may vary with companies or with individual process units however, the fundamental approach is the same. 

In the selection of control equipment, the most important waste-gas characteristics are volumetric flow rate, concentration and composition of organic compounds in the waste-gas, waste-gas temperature and humidity, and rbe content of particulate matter, chlorinated hydrocarbons, and toxic pollutants. Other factors influencing the equipment selection are the required removal efficiency, recovery requirements, investment and operating costs, ease of installation, and considerations of operation and maintenance. The selection of a suitable control method is based on the fundamental selection criteria presented as well as the special characteristics of the project. 

The selection of the recovery equipment should be based on functionality, capital cost, operational cost, and ease of movement between individual locations. A well-managed recovery system will include routing relocation of equipment in response to recovery needs. Flexibility of usage is important because the capital cost of the recovery equipment presents a significant percentage of the project cost. 

Selection of a suitable method for silver removal depends on many factors what processes the company uses, what volume of wastes the company produces, what kind of training and technical knowledge the company s personnel has, whether the company wants to reuse the company s fixer or bleach-fix, how much the company wants to spend for recovery equipment, and what the environmental concerns are, such as how strict the effluent discharge limits are. Just considering these factors makes choosing a silver recovery method very much an individual decision for each company. 

By use of selective membranes, water can be removed by filtration from the juice in order to effect its concentration. Depending upon the molecular size of the compounds and the cut-off value of the membrane used, there is likely to be some loss of flavour components. These may be recovered from the permeate by distillation and returned to the juice concentrate. Concentration by these methods is less effective in terms of folding than other methods but can provide advantages in specific cases for example, capital costs associated with hyperfiltration are around 10-30% less than for evaporative systems with aroma recovery equipment. 

In general, low-loaded boilers do not justify the use of heat recovery equipment. In other applications, it may very well be worthwhile. The need for heat recovery equipment is sometimes difficult for a designer to determine, since he is often insufficiently familiar with the factors influencing an evaluation. In such instances, responsible selection of an economizer or air preheater is not possible. It should be remarked that adding heat recovery equipment means adding something that may influence availability. Fuel, excess air, flue gas temperature, air temperature or feed water temperature play a role here. 

Equipment and procedure for the collection, filtration, and subsequent extraction of 20 L of water and suspended-solid samples to be analyzed for organic chemicals using readily available, inexpensive and sturdy apparatus has been described [9]. Water collection, filtration, and extraction of both phases can be accomplished in less than 1 h. Recoveries of selected representative OC contaminants spiked into "organic-free" water and Lake Ontario water at environmentally realistic levels are presented (Table 1.4). These data show good total recoveries from the lake water and suspended sediments for all except a few compounds for which poor recoveries from the solids may be a factor, since their recoveries from organic-free water were relatively efficient. 

Acrylic Acid Recovery. The process flow sheet (Fig. 3) shows equipment and conditions for the separations step. The acryUc acid is extracted from the absorber effluent with a solvent, such as butyl acetate, xylene, diisobutyl ketone, or mixtures, chosen for high selectivity for acryUc acid and low solubihty for water and by-products. The extraction is performed using 5—10 theoretical stages in a tower or centrifiigal extractor (46,61—65). 

Selection of the high pressure steam conditions is an economic optimisation based on energy savings and equipment costs. Heat recovery iato the high pressure system is usually available from the process ia the secondary reformer and ammonia converter effluents, and the flue gas ia the reformer convection section. Recovery is ia the form of latent, superheat, or high pressure boiler feedwater sensible heat. Low level heat recovery is limited by the operating conditions of the deaerator. 

Brown, Royce N., Selection and Specification of Process Compressors, in ASME 36th Petroleum Division Conference Publication, Enhanced Recovery and Rotating Equipment—A Workbook for Petroleum Engineers, New York American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1980, pp. 57-64,... 

Of all the requirements that have to be fulfilled by a manufacturer, starting with responsibilities and reporting relationships, warehousing practices, service contract policies, airhandUng equipment, etc., only a few of those will be touched upon here that directly relate to the analytical laboratory. Key phrases are underlined or are in italics Acceptance Criteria, Accuracy, Baseline, Calibration, Concentration range. Control samples. Data Clean-Up, Deviation, Error propagation. Error recovery. Interference, Linearity, Noise, Numerical artifact. Precision, Recovery, Reliability, Repeatability, Reproducibility, Ruggedness, Selectivity, Specifications, System Suitability, Validation. 

It is clear that neither NMEA nor NDPA is appropriate for an internal standard in NDMA determination if criteria are interpreted strictly, but both compounds have been used for this purpose. Addition of a nitrosamine, not normally present in the sample, is helpful in detecting any gross errors in the procedure, but the addition should not be considered to be internal standardization. Utilization of NMEA or NDPA to indicate recovery of NDMA can lead to significant errors. In most reports of the application of these "internal standards", recovery of all nitrosamines was close to 100%. Under these conditions, any added compound would appear to be a good internal standard, but none is necessary. NDMA is a particularly difficult compound for use of internal standardization because of its anomalous distribution behavior. I mass j ectrometry is employed for quantitative determination, H- or N-labeled NDMA could be added as internal standard. Because the labeled material would coelute from GC columns with the unlabeled NDMA, this approach is unworkable when GC-TEA is employed or when high resolution MS selected ion monitoring is used with the equipment described above. 

In some cases the decision whether storage vessels will be equipped with a vapor recovery system has been determined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In 1973 it set the standards4,5 for all petroleum liquids that are stored in vessels of mcae than 65,000 gal (245 m3). It states that if the vapor pressure is greater than 11.1 psia (570 mm Hg) a vapor recovery system or its equivalent must be installed on any new tanks. If the vapor pressure is between 1.52 psia (78 mm Hg) and 11.1 psia (570 mm Hg), a floating head tank may be used or a vapor recovery system may be installed. Since the former is cheaper it will usually be selected. Below 1.52 psia (78 mm Hg) only a conservation vent or its equivalent is required. 

Bergstrom et al. [63] used HPLC for determination of penicillamine in body fluids. Proteins were precipitated from plasma and hemolyzed blood with trichloroacetic acid and metaphosphoric acid, respectively, and, after centrifugation, the supernatant solution was injected into the HPLC system via a 20-pL loop valve. Urine samples were directly injected after dilution with 0.4 M citric acid. Two columns (5 cm x 0.41 cm and 30 cm x 0.41 cm) packed with Zipax SCX (30 pm) were used as the guard and analytical columns, respectively. The mobile phase (2.5 mL/min) was deoxygenated 0.03 M citric acid-0.01 M Na2HP04 buffer, and use was made of an electrochemical detector equipped with a three-electrode thin-layer cell. The method was selective and sensitive for mercapto-compounds. Recoveries of penicillamine averaged 101% from plasma and 107% from urine, with coefficients of variation equal to 3.68 and 4.25%, respectively. The limits of detection for penicillamine were 0.5 pm and 3 pm in plasma and in urine, respectively. This method is selective and sensitive for sulfhydryl compounds. 

---