Odor abatement historically was never a top focus of discussion among industry professionals, let alone at the dinner table with family and friends. But it is quickly becoming more relevant in almost every industrial vertical as social media and heightened expectations of companies focus the spotlight on it more frequently. Addressing this issue is complicated because odors are difficult to quantify, so success or failure of a mitigation project is typically judged subjectively.
There are many machine processes that produce odors, such as in the fabrication of rubber and plastics, production of chemicals and polymers, processing of paper and pulp, and treatment of water/wastewater, to name a few. In the food industry, for example, bad odors may vary in type and strength, since they can be created during production, processing, and wastewater treatment. Regardless of the source, odors may be offensive to the public and employees.
In decades past, a concerned person or small group usually spurred odor mitigation projects. These efforts often began with a letter written to the offending agency and/or regulatory governing bodies, an interview with a local newspaper, attendance at a town hall meeting, compiling a petition and collecting signatures, or a combination of these methods. These types of actions took a great deal of time and effort to build awareness and force action.
Today, all it takes is a viral post on social media to rally a large group and push for odor mitigation. Such a message can originate from a living room couch, spread like wildfire, and gain supporters in a matter of hours, a far cry from the outreach timetables of days past.
In addition to public pressure, a second key driver of increasing odor abatement efforts is employee satisfaction, particularly important in the current labor market. Companies are now more motivated than ever to provide top-notch working conditions, including odor management in areas frequented by personnel.
Considering the history of industrialization, odor control is in its infancy. The drive for improved working conditions did not begin until the 1900s, notably with the formation of workplace safety groups, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the U.S.
But removing unpleasant odors from the air was hardly a priority until much more recently. Unpleasant odors used to be considered a nuisance, but when considering the stress they can cause and the sickness they can impose, the link to health becomes apparent, requiring a solution.
Measuring smells
Still, the difficulty of quantifying odors remains, and this begins with understanding the difference between emissions control and odor control. The former is easily quantifiable, with regulations mandating specific allowed limits of impurities, much the same as maximum allowed contaminant quantities in municipal treated water. Meeting emissions standards is a discrete condition, and an organization either passes these standards and is allowed to operate, or it fails, forcing a shutdown or slowdown until compliance is regained.
Unpleasant odors, on the other hand, are more subjective in nature, and more chemically complex to quantify. Even when offending substances are identified, they are more challenging to measure with pinpoint accuracy. The Nasal Ranger, a field olfactometer, is the go-to mainstream device for odor component measurements, operated by holding it up to a user’s nose while he or she repeatedly sniffs and spins a pinwheel until the offending odor is no longer noticeable.
This tool is now commonly used to assess the success of an odor mitigation effort by measuring the air quality at a particular location and documenting the odor constituents before odor removal—or when equipment is not running—and again following project implementation, or when equipment is running once more.
Absorbing odors
OMI Industries saw the need to improve scientific quantification of unpleasant odors, and developed a method using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) to analyze air samples collected at the source of these odors.
Upon analysis, the odor-causing pollutants can be identified, then formulations can be curated specifically to neutralize the offending components present in the sample by counteracting them at the molecular level through the disbursement of plant oil-based agents.
As the COO of OMI Industries, Bob Dunklau is responsible for growth and profitability across all three divisions of the company in both domestic and international markets.OMI Industries
The alternative to absorbing odors is this manner is masking them, which is quicker and less expensive, but not as effective or sustainable because most masking agents simply cover one unpleasant smell with another. Proper odor management instead requires neutralizing the offending components by altering the air’s molecular makeup, rather than attempting to cover them up with synthetic fragrances or harsh chemicals.
To further understand unpleasant odors and rely more upon empirical data, OMI Industries and other organizations are collaborating to develop better sensors that determine odor intensity with a quantifiable output. After quantification, skid-based systems can be optimized to produce ideal doses of odor mitigators to clear the air.
It is the custom-formulated, plant-based neutralizers that provide one of the safest and most effective odor mitigation strategies across industries. And the equipment required for vaporization is contained on a single skid to facilitate shop testing and installation at a site.
For more information, visit: omi-industries.com
