Fumes from FRP Product Making

Why would you want to add another chemical into the process?

Use an air scrubber.

1st question I would ask of you, is what data suggest PMM of what chemical is being discharged. From this information proper treatment of exhaust system can be engineered. Also I would ask stack heights and weather conditions in your area.

We complain here in the USA that the EPA is causing our work to be out sourced. There are some very good reasons we do what we do here in the states. Good Luck in your efforts to improve the air quality for your neighbours.

Rather than add more gear onto the process, concentrate on eliminating the leak instead. There is a containment problem to solve. Eliminate the cause, not the symptoms!

This is a common complaint about fiberglass users. The employees want the vapors out of the plant, and the neighbors don't. Lynlynch has the solution, an air scrubber. When I worked with a spray painter working inside, there was this big waterfall device in the room. The paint overspray and vapors were all caught in the falling water, which had a massive fan pulling all the shop air through it, so all the air hit all the water. Occasionally they would change the water.

Your neighbors are right to be upset. Styrene vapors, as well as MEK and other chemicals involved in the manufacture of fiberglass has been shown to cause brain tumors and other neurological problems and neural tube birth defects in people who have long term exposure.

Seal up what you can, and vent the vapors you can't seal up to a flare stack.

I guess due to what Rorshcach has said release of such vapors are regulated in the USA, and complaints like you describe have a tendency of finding their way to regulators, and/or ultimately to also a healthy population of plaintiff's and prosecuting attorneys. Actions like described at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/criminal/highlights/2007/amitech-07.pdf sometimes result (I think in that case the plant was fairly new, and one would think for that reason rather state of the art at least at the time).

Typical batch mixing processes use large vats that must be intermittently fed, mixed, discharged, cleaned and fed again. This results in excessive time where the batch vessels are open and allow fumes to escape.

Many manufacturers of fiberglass and carbon fiber resins are converting over to modern continuous processes. A continuous mixer is a closed device, and since the amount of resin handled at any time is minimal the vapors and recovery requirements are minimal.

One manufacturer of continuous mixing equipment is Readco Kurimoto.
http://www.readco.com/

I agree with the contributor regarding use of a scrubber to neutralise the styrene vapour. A flare stack could be a viable alternative if it is allowed in that area. I would suggest however, that if there are people living and working nearby that a flare stack may not be that safe. We use packed tower scrubbers with biological conversion agents with great success on biologically derived odours such as hydrogen sulphide or volatile organic compounds. Styrene vapour may need a different approach as it is a chemically derived product. Generally with these types of materials we tend to favour chemical scrubbers, perhaps utilising venturi scrubbers to improve the removal rate. If you approach any of the Odour Control companies in your vicinity, I am sure they will be able to advise you of the most economical solutions they can offer.

I know of no viable alternative - bubbling the gas through a chemical mix is fraught with huge problems and limited viability - a packed tower scrubbing system of some type with a suitable draw fan would be your best solution.

A packed tower is just another way to contact the fumes with water. A stripping tower, located on the roof if possible to minimize fan requirements should work.

Actually not an issue of biologically or non-biochemically derived. Issues would be hydrophobicity and volatility. Some vapors just don't absorb into water very well, and if they are captured, can off gas if temperature/pressure changes. Having a huge volume of strongly contaminated water that begins to offgas large volumes of stored waste might not be the best solution on a hot day.

Dear Mr N T Nair,

I am enclosing an link to the article, which in my opinion should adress your problem to a great extent.

Solvent Substitution to Reduce Air Emissions for the FRP Industry

SOLVENT SUBSTITUTION TO REDUCE AIR EMISSIONS FOR THE FRP INDUSTRY Solvent Substitution to Reduce Air Emissions for the FRP Industry

www.p2pays.org/ref/01/00904.pdf · Cached page

I am N P Singh, Chief Engr with ONGC, India

The last contributor provided a link to a paper which proposes using replacement solvents for Acetone which would be easier and cheaper to control.

Going back to the original question, the gentleman required solutions to an existing Styrene fume problem, not I believe to replacing the styrene with something else.

I still think the packed scrubber is the way to go. As someone else mentioned it is just a better water contact device. In fact it is much better than that, insofar as neutralising chemicals can be used in the recirculated water stream to interact with the gas flow to eliminate the problem odour. I would suggest that a sodium hydrochlorite scrubber which would enable chlorine oxidisation of the styrene fumes may provide the most acceptable result. Alternatively, passing the fumes through an activated carbon stack may also eliminate the styrene fumes. This would be set up similarly to a packed tower scrubber, except that activated carbon pellets are used in place of the media and water is not used at all. The fumes are drawn through the stack with a fan, thus satisfying the original component of the question also.

Use an activated carbon stack.

Let us supply you with one. (A weak joke, sorry. You're a little too far away).

I got lung cancer from working with those sorts of contaminants, and cellulose dust.

I'm with the neighbours.

Cheers,

Stu.

I haven't been involved in the industry much over the last several years, so perhaps exposure limits have changed, but styrene has the benefit and drawback that it is easily detected (by our sniffers) far below the threshhold where it is harmful. The benefit is obvious - nobody's going to "not notice" that styrene is there. The drawback is that neighbors and employees assume that they are being overexposed when in reality they're not.

I'm not sure how effective the options for removing the styrene from exhaust gases are, but I know there has been a lot of work that's been done going back into the 90's to develop low VOC resin materials and use the best possible tools - e.g. chopper gun nozzles that do not atomize the resin, or using alternative fabrication techniques which capture the emissions, such as VARTM.

The american composites manufacturer's association (formerly CFA) did a lot of work on this - try this link - they even have old technical papers on the site from conferences - enjoy!

http://www.acmanet.org/

There are various ways to control the pollution but this company has something new in the form of a thermal converter that to date has not failed to remove odors from any source tested. Check them out, at (http://mountainaircorp.com/) The water scrubber may be lowest in cost also there was an activated charcoal system I looked into when I was in FRP. One associate years ago passed the fumes from the ventilation fan through a flame in the stack with good results but I was concerned with explosion factor. Injection of the resin using male and female molds also produces much less odor but may not be suitable in your products.

Since this is a FRP part making plant, not a chemical plant, humbly suggest the following:

1) add activated carbon capture on air exhaust

2)get lower styrene content resin and gel coats

3) switch to closed molding - this contains the fumes in the mold or under the vacuum bag.

4) change to resin infusion or low pressure resin injection molding.

good luck

I am amazed by the responses from a good number of well wishers - showing a sincere concern for a problem faced by a brethren. Now we will study the suggestions and see which one is most suitable. I hope more responses will flow in the next few days. Thanks to all those who spared their time to think for us N T Nair

Styrene is heavier than air, so use a down-draft exhaust located below the rack with the molded parts.

STYRENE REMOVAL; collect and conduct to gas fired boiler as fuel, engineered for safety.