11/11/2016
Protecting IAQ Through Cleaning And Maintenance
One reason for this is the fact that we spend 90 percent of our time in an indoor environment such as a school, office, factory, or home. However, most of these buildings were built to meet environmental conditions at the time of construction, conditions that are changing rapidly due to climate change.
Because of this, one of the most effective ways to protect IAQ and adjust to changing environmental conditions is "the operation and maintenance of buildings," according to the EPA.
The EPA report states that there are three broad approaches to help moderate indoor air pollution as climate changes advances. These are:
1. Source control
2. Ventilation
3. Air cleaning systems.
"There is not a lot that the professional cleaning industry can do about improving ventilation or installing air cleaning systems," says Mike Sawchuk, Chief Business Development Officer for Avmor, a leading manufacturer and marketer of professional cleaning products in North America.
"But there are many things we can do when it comes to source control and it all starts with the cleaning chemicals we select."
According to Sawchuk, green-certified cleaning chemicals introduced over the past decade have dramatically reduced the number of volatile organic compounds and other harmful chemical emissions released into the air.
However, times are changing and we cannot rest on past laurels, according to Sawchuk.
"Of the major green-certification organizations, [at this time] only Green Guard has raised the bar, taking a very focused look at the impact of cleaning chemicals on IAQ. With climate change advancing, this is something all of the major certification organizations should be doing."
Until then, he recommends using green certified products that are "dual certified" with Green Guard.
Sawchuk adds that in the past few years, the leading green certification organizations have been moving in different directions, specializing on different products and industries.
"No matter what directions they take, IAQ is an issue they must always stay focused on...and this is going to be even more important in coming years."
jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016
martes, 15 de noviembre de 2016
The best Scientist
Does Chlorine
Get a Bad Rap?
When it comes to disinfection at treatment plants, chlorine has quite the reputation. To some, it’s
known as a reliable and trusted solution. To many others, especially among the public at large,
it’s looked at with skepticism and concern – but that may be simply a matter of not knowing the
facts. Either way, it’s one of the ubiquitous aspects of water and wastewater disinfection… and for
good reason.
To separate fact from fiction and clear up exactly how chlorine should be utilized at treatment
plants, we spoke with Evoqua Water Technologies’ Daryl Weatherup, director of marketing for the
company’s Wallace & Tiernan brand. He walked us through the different forms chlorine can take, its
reputation among the industry and ratepayers, and how to determine its best use at a given plant.
How is chlorine utilized at treatment plants?
Chlorine is used in many water and wastewater applications, not only in the U.S. but around the
world. It really has been the most predominant method of disinfection for the past century.
What’s different about chlorination, though, is that it’s not just available in one format. There
are several formats that it is available in: gaseous chlorine, liquid sodium hypochlorite (bleach
being the common household name), dry or solid form tablets or pellets of calcium hypochlorite, and
then the fourth main way to apply chlorine in water and wastewater systems is actually generated
onsite through the electrochlorination of brine or saltwater solutions.
Do you think that chlorine has the reputation that it deserves?
I think there are two sides to the reputation of chlorine and chlorination. On the one hand,
chlorine has a great reputation as being a widely used disinfectant that has really transformed
the water industry and improved human health, environmental water quality, and sanitation over the
last 100 years.
But there’s also a negative side to it. When chlorine’s applied in the right amount to the
controlled process, it is a good
disinfectant. But if it is released in a spill or leak in higher doses, it can be harmful. I think
that is where some of the negative connotation comes about and the reputation it has as being
potentially unsafe.
Do you think that reputation it has as a dangerous chemical is more prevalent among ratepayers or
with the professionals who are actually disinfecting water?
Water Online • www.wateronline.com
1
&A
I think it’s a little bit of both. At the consumer ratepayer level, they get a lot of their
information through the media, and the media doesn’t always report safety incidents in the right
way. Oftentimes there are accidents that happen that are not caused by chlorine but get reported as
involving chlorine. At least in the U.S., there are a higher number of safety incidents with other
liquid chemicals and other dangerous substances in treatment plants than there are with chlorine
gas.
On the professional level, there is competition with other methods of disinfection. Some
are chemical-free but provide no residual disinfectant, which is required in municipal water
distribution. Those that offer chemical-free solutions might add to the negative reputation that
chlorine can have.
What advances in process and technology are making chlorine safer today?
There are quite a few things that have changed over the last 100 years with the way chlorination is
done today. It started out in
1913 with the first commercial chlorinator, and the technology has improved quite a bit since.
The main things that have changed are the engineering methods available, the materials of
construction available — metal alloys, engineered plastics, and so forth — that have really
allowed us to improve the quality of the actual chlorine dosing systems themselves, the
chlorinators. We’ve engineered chlorinators to be more durable, have fewer moving parts, and be
inherently safe.
Aside from that, there are additional devices that help make the overall chlorination systems
safer, such as double- check valves and seals, safety shut-off valves, or emergency vapor
scrubbers — also manufactured by Evoqua — which can scrub all of the chlorine gas out of a room
even in the event of a full-scale release. We’ve manufactured this for our systems as a secondary
safety system. There are other ancillary items, like gas detection systems and fire safety doors,
that can go towards making the overall system very, very safe.
What alternatives to chlorination are out there?
There are no other alternative methods that provide the same cost-effective benefits as
chlorination or are as widely used
as chlorination. There are other methods that are called “alternate disinfectants,,,”
including UV and ozone, as well as various other types of disinfectants that are innovative but not
as widely used.
How should a treatment plant assess the different forms of chlorine that exist and make a selection
on which one is the best for them?
This is probably the question I receive the most. The best answer that I can give is that it’s
really a local decision that needs to take
into account several factors. It is not just about capital costs or operating costs alone.
We work with the water utility and ask them what their decision-making factors and drivers
are. Are there any environmental concerns? Is the facility in a rural area or an urban area? What’s
the distance away from the nearest chemical supplier?
Beyond that, we look at their water-quality
goals and disinfection targets, along with the capacity and treated flow rate. That will determine
what the total chlorine demand is. We also take into consideration, from that, how often they might
need to order chemicals.
As a manufacturer of all four types of chlorination systems, not to mention UV, we offer expertise
on which format of
chlorine is best for the given application. I think it’s important to have a well-balanced view of
what is available and not be pushed towards one method or another. Additionally, there are
consultants we work with who also specialize in this selection process. The U.S. EPA and AWWA
both offer information about selecting disinfectants and have published resource manuals on
those as well.
If someone tells you they believe using chlorine as a disinfectant is dangerous, how do you
respond?
Anything can be dangerous when it’s mishandled, and that chlorine is by far the safest, most
widely used, and most reliable form of disinfection. One of the things that works against switching
away from chlorination to other methods is typically the cost, the reliability, and the
availability to the general public. That’s why, after a century, it’s still the most widely used
form of disinfection in the world today.
Water Online • www.wateronline.com
2
The best Scientist
Does Chlorine
Get a Bad Rap?
When it comes to disinfection at treatment plants, chlorine has quite the reputation. To some, it’s
known as a reliable and trusted solution. To many others, especially among the public at large,
it’s looked at with skepticism and concern – but that may be simply a matter of not knowing the
facts. Either way, it’s one of the ubiquitous aspects of water and wastewater disinfection… and for
good reason.
To separate fact from fiction and clear up exactly how chlorine should be utilized at treatment
plants, we spoke with Evoqua Water Technologies’ Daryl Weatherup, director of marketing for the
company’s Wallace & Tiernan brand. He walked us through the different forms chlorine can take, its
reputation among the industry and ratepayers, and how to determine its best use at a given plant.
How is chlorine utilized at treatment plants?
Chlorine is used in many water and wastewater applications, not only in the U.S. but around the
world. It really has been the most predominant method of disinfection for the past century.
What’s different about chlorination, though, is that it’s not just available in one format. There
are several formats that it is available in: gaseous chlorine, liquid sodium hypochlorite (bleach
being the common household name), dry or solid form tablets or pellets of calcium hypochlorite, and
then the fourth main way to apply chlorine in water and wastewater systems is actually generated
onsite through the electrochlorination of brine or saltwater solutions.
Do you think that chlorine has the reputation that it deserves?
I think there are two sides to the reputation of chlorine and chlorination. On the one hand,
chlorine has a great reputation as being a widely used disinfectant that has really transformed
the water industry and improved human health, environmental water quality, and sanitation over the
last 100 years.
But there’s also a negative side to it. When chlorine’s applied in the right amount to the
controlled process, it is a good
disinfectant. But if it is released in a spill or leak in higher doses, it can be harmful. I think
that is where some of the negative connotation comes about and the reputation it has as being
potentially unsafe.
Do you think that reputation it has as a dangerous chemical is more prevalent among ratepayers or
with the professionals who are actually disinfecting water?
Water Online • www.wateronline.com
1
&A
I think it’s a little bit of both. At the consumer ratepayer level, they get a lot of their
information through the media, and the media doesn’t always report safety incidents in the right
way. Oftentimes there are accidents that happen that are not caused by chlorine but get reported as
involving chlorine. At least in the U.S., there are a higher number of safety incidents with other
liquid chemicals and other dangerous substances in treatment plants than there are with chlorine
gas.
On the professional level, there is competition with other methods of disinfection. Some
are chemical-free but provide no residual disinfectant, which is required in municipal water
distribution. Those that offer chemical-free solutions might add to the negative reputation that
chlorine can have.
What advances in process and technology are making chlorine safer today?
There are quite a few things that have changed over the last 100 years with the way chlorination is
done today. It started out in
1913 with the first commercial chlorinator, and the technology has improved quite a bit since.
The main things that have changed are the engineering methods available, the materials of
construction available — metal alloys, engineered plastics, and so forth — that have really
allowed us to improve the quality of the actual chlorine dosing systems themselves, the
chlorinators. We’ve engineered chlorinators to be more durable, have fewer moving parts, and be
inherently safe.
Aside from that, there are additional devices that help make the overall chlorination systems
safer, such as double- check valves and seals, safety shut-off valves, or emergency vapor
scrubbers — also manufactured by Evoqua — which can scrub all of the chlorine gas out of a room
even in the event of a full-scale release. We’ve manufactured this for our systems as a secondary
safety system. There are other ancillary items, like gas detection systems and fire safety doors,
that can go towards making the overall system very, very safe.
What alternatives to chlorination are out there?
There are no other alternative methods that provide the same cost-effective benefits as
chlorination or are as widely used
as chlorination. There are other methods that are called “alternate disinfectants,,,”
including UV and ozone, as well as various other types of disinfectants that are innovative but not
as widely used.
How should a treatment plant assess the different forms of chlorine that exist and make a selection
on which one is the best for them?
This is probably the question I receive the most. The best answer that I can give is that it’s
really a local decision that needs to take
into account several factors. It is not just about capital costs or operating costs alone.
We work with the water utility and ask them what their decision-making factors and drivers
are. Are there any environmental concerns? Is the facility in a rural area or an urban area? What’s
the distance away from the nearest chemical supplier?
Beyond that, we look at their water-quality
goals and disinfection targets, along with the capacity and treated flow rate. That will determine
what the total chlorine demand is. We also take into consideration, from that, how often they might
need to order chemicals.
As a manufacturer of all four types of chlorination systems, not to mention UV, we offer expertise
on which format of
chlorine is best for the given application. I think it’s important to have a well-balanced view of
what is available and not be pushed towards one method or another. Additionally, there are
consultants we work with who also specialize in this selection process. The U.S. EPA and AWWA
both offer information about selecting disinfectants and have published resource manuals on
those as well.
If someone tells you they believe using chlorine as a disinfectant is dangerous, how do you
respond?
Anything can be dangerous when it’s mishandled, and that chlorine is by far the safest, most
widely used, and most reliable form of disinfection. One of the things that works against switching
away from chlorination to other methods is typically the cost, the reliability, and the
availability to the general public. That’s why, after a century, it’s still the most widely used
form of disinfection in the world today.
Water Online • www.wateronline.com
2
Dura-Grip™ SLIP RESISTANT EPOXY WITH GRIT PRODUCT DATA SHEET
_
CHARACTERISTICS
Dura-Grip is a Water Based Epoxy Ester
coating specifically designed to provide skid resistant durable textured coating for foot traffic
on steel, fiber
glass, treated aluminum, concrete and properly primed wood substrates. Dura-Grip is ideal on boats,
trailers, laundry rooms, on steps and ramps, and a variety of Light Industrial, Commercial and
Residential areas.
Color: ........................................... 12 Colors Available Coverage: .................
................. .................400 ft2/gal Recommended:
......................................... 400 ft2/gal
@ 4 mils wet .............................................. 1.5 mils dry
Drying Time @ 77°F (25°C), 50% Relative Humidity
Temperature and humidity dependent
Touch: ...................................... 30 - 40 min. Tack Free Recoat or Topcoat:
.................................. 1 – 2 hours Dry Hard:
....................................................... 72 hours Full Cure:
...................................................... 5-7 days
Flash Point:................................................... > 212° F Finish: ......... S/G
Textured (50-60 units @ 60° Gloss) Cleanup:
............................................................ Water Vehicle Type:
........................................... Epoxy Ester
VOC (less exempt solvent):160 - 180 g/L.,1.3 – 1.55 lb/gal
Volume Solids: ................................................. 36.7%
Weight Solids: .................................................. 46.1%
Weight/Gallon: ............................................ 8.5 – 10.1
Measured Static Friction of Coating Surfaces: ASTM C 4518-91 Steel-0.158 Rubber –0.742
A.I.M. category: Non-flat Interior/Exterior Coatings
Mildew - Remove from exposed wood or other surfac before painting by washing with a solution of
1-part liq household bleach and 3 parts of water. Apply the solut and scrub the mildewed area.
Allow the solution to remain on the surface for 10 minutes. Rinse thoroughl with water and allow
the surface to dry before painting Wear protective eyewear, waterproof gloves and protective
clothing. Quickly wash off any of the mixtur that comes in contact with your skin or eyes. Do not a
detergents or ammonia to the bleach/water solution. APPLICATON
Mix Dura-Grip thoroughly before and during each application! Apply with brush, roller or squeegee.
Avoi painting late in the day when dew or condensation is likely to form or when rain is
threatening. Apply when the temperature is 50° F (10° C) min., 90° F (32°C) m (air, surface and
material), at least 5° F above dew poi The relative humidity should be 85% maximum. Do no apply to
porous substrates new wood, plywood, exteri drywall, etc. if the substrates have a moisture content
greater than 15%. In most cases, use at mixed consistency. Do not expose subject surfaces to foot
traffic in less than 72 hrs. More time may be necessar depending upon atmospheric conditions.
Brush - No reduction is necessary. Use a nylon/polyester brush.
Roller - No reduction is necessary. Use a 3/8” woven nap with a phenolic core.
Squeegee - Flat Rubber
GENERAL SURFACE PREP
Surfaces must be clean, dry and free from contaminants such as, oil, waxes, grease, dirt, mildew or
other foreign contaminants. Shiny surfaces should be de-glossed by lightly sanding or using a
chemical de-glosser before using Dura-Grip. For wood surfaces, one coat of exterior oil base primer
recommended over clean dry
wood substrates. For concrete, clean with tri-sodium phosphate (TSP) and a firm bristle brush.
Rinse area thoroughly with water. New and smooth dense concrete will require an acid etch before
any application of Firm Foot. Aluminum and other non-ferrous metals should be treated with an
aluminum acid etch preparation available at most paint / hardware stores. Over ferrous metals a
solvent based primer, will provide additional rust prevention. Fiberglass should be lightly sanded
or wiped with acetone before application.
Supersedes previous data sheets for this product.
es
uid ion
y
.
e
dd
d ax.
nt. t
or
y
Note: Epoxies and Epoxy Esters may need to be recoated every 1-2 yr. on Exterior exposures due to
the damaging affects of UV degradation.
CLEANUP INFORMATION
Clean hands and tools immediately with soap and warm water.
CAUTIONS
Protect from freezing. This product contains solvents and/or other chemical ingredients. Adequate
health and safety precautions should be observed during storage, handling, use and drying periods.
READ MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS BEFORE USING THIS PRODUCT
LIMITATIONS
The technical data and suggestions for use in this product data sheet are currently correct to the
best of our knowledge, but are subject to change without notice. Because application and conditions
vary, and are beyond our control, we are not responsible for results obtained in using this
product, even when used as suggested. The user should conduct tests to determine the suitability of
the product for the intended use (including liability for breach of warranty, strict liability in
tort, negligence or otherwise) is limited exclusively to replacement of the product or refund of
its price. Under no circumstance are
we liable for incidental and consequential damages.
Advanced Technologies for Guaranteed Performance
Industrial and municipal wastewater treatment generates odors that can be strong, persistent, and a
nuisance to employees, residents, businesses, and industries located near the
wastewater treatment plant.
SPECIAL BLEND MISTER CT‐417 AND MISTING ASSEMBLY TM‐0010 OFFER A GREAT SOLUTION
Example: An atomized “dome” of Odor Neutralizing products that can be used to control odors rising
from a primary equalization tank at a municipal
wastewater facility.
Odors are generated in varying degrees throughout the wastewater treatment
process with the main odor‐generating areas being pump stations, head works, clarifiers, digesters,
aeration basins, lagoons and sludge handling areas, sludge drying beds, manholes areas amongst
others.
Odors that are generally associated with this process include hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, sulfur
dioxide, aromatic hydrocarbons, mercaptans, amines and indoles.
Hydrogen sulfide is a serious problem in wastewater treatment plants. Fogging systems installed at
the bar screens and digesters, can solve the problem. In some cases the odor control products can
also be diluted with plant water for a combined action, synergistic operation.
Septage haulers need to take their loads somewhere and that is usually the local wastewater plant.
Raw septage is especially odorous and can present odor problems to plants that otherwise have their
industrial emissions under control. Simple fan or nozzle atomization systems positioned near the
unloading point and vented or open downstream locations will provide simple and effective temporary
odor control as needed.
CHEMTRON
3901 S.W. 47TH AVE. #400, DAVIE, FLORIDA 33314
Phone: (954)584-4530, Fax: (954)584-4531
email: sales@ChemTron.com
www.chemtron.com
Suscribirse a
Entradas
Comentarios
