Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing Using Fluidized Bed Technology

Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing using
fluidized Bed Technology

KIM NIKOLAISEN*1, ANDRS MAHECHA-BOTERO
NORAM Engineering and Constructors Ltd
Vancouver, Canada
DAVID MISSIONS
Osprey Corporation
Kent, UK
HOWARD DAVIS
Fluid Technologies (Environmental) Ltd
Surrey, UK
Many sulphuric acid plants around the world are facing increased pressure from
environmental agencies and stakeholders to reduce emissions in the form of SO2 and sometimes
H2SO4. It is the standard to measure and report these emissions during continuous operation, but
many producers are also experiencing increasingly stringent emission targets for the duration of
plant start-up. During plant start-up many plants experience spikes in SO2 concentrations, and
the blue smoke or stack opacity from SO3 slippage can be another concern.
Tail gas scrubbing processes are a proven way of reducing SO2 emissions during both
continuous and start-up operations. However, most scrubbing technologies will only remove SO2
and may have to rely on additional downstream technologies such as high-efficiency Brownian
diffusion mist eliminators or wet electro static precipitators (WESPs) to remove fine acid mist
aerosols i.e. blue smoke. The TurboScrubber fluidized bed technology, licensed by NORAM,
1
Corresponding author. email: knikolaisen@noram-eng.com
- 147 -
K. Nikolaisen, D. Missions, H. Davis, A. Mahecha-Botero
has been successfully applied to a wide range of SO2 scrubbing applications, and can potentially
be used with great effect in the sulphuric acid industry. Significantly, NORAMs TurboScrubber
system provides a means of removing both SO2 and acid mist efficiently in one single process
unit. The aerosol removal capability is achieved through an extremely energetic mixing of tail gas
and scrubbing liquid.
NORAMs TurboScrubber technology has inherently higher mass and heat transfer rates for
a given gas-side pressure drop, as compared to other gas-liquid contacting technologies (e.g.
packed towers, venturis, reverse-jet). This higher mass transfer rate results in a smaller
equipment footprint and lower capital investment. The scrubber works with all traditional
scrubbing media (eg. NaOH/Na2CO3, H2O2, NH3, sea water), and can also handle slurries owing
to the non-fouling nature of its fluidized bed. This slurry compatibility opens the door for using
alternative scrubbing media such as limestone/hydrated lime, from which the scrubbing product,
CaSO4, may be disposed of in existing gypsum piles.
An interesting feature of NORAMs TurboScrubber technology is its process flexibility. For
example, the scrubber can handle gas turndown rates of up to 1:12, and the efficiency of both
SO2 and acid mist aerosol removal can variably be increased during plant turndown and start-up
operations. The TurboScrubber also has merit in efficiently removing acid spray/mist carryover
from the upstream Final Absorption Tower. Hence, NORAMs TurboScrubber process offers the
possibilities of SO2 emission reduction, blue smoke aerosol mist removal, acid mist/spray
carryover removal, continuous and start-up emission reductions, and the use of scrubbing slurries
- all achievable in one process unit operation, with a lower capital cost and smaller foot print than
other scrubbing technologies.
Keywords: Sulphur dioxide, acid mist, blue smoke, blue haze, tail gas, scrubbing, plant startup, fluidized bed, pollution control
INTRODUCTION
Many sulphuric acid plants around the world are facing increased pressure from environmental agencies
and/or stakeholders to reduce emissions in the form of SO2 and sometimes acid mist and blue smoke. It is
the standard to measure and report these emissions during continuous operation, but many producers are
also experiencing increasingly stringent emission targets for the duration of plant start-up. During plant start-up
many plants experience spikes in SO2 concentrations, and a blue smoke or stack opacity from SO3 slippage
can be of concern.
Tail gas scrubbing processes are a proven way of reducing SO2 emissions, during both continuous and startup operations. However, most scrubbing technologies will only remove SO2 and must rely on additional
downstream technologies such as high-efficiency Brownian diffusion (BD) mist eliminators or wet electro static
precipitators (WESPs) to remove fine acid mist aerosols i.e. blue smoke.
In this paper we propose the use of NORAMs TurboScrubber. This is a proven fluidized bed scrubbing
technology, which allows the use of all standard scrubbing chemicals (eg. NaOH/Na2CO3, H2O2, NH3, amines,
sea water), and also handles slurries such as limestone/hydrated lime (e.g. CaCO3, Ca(OH)2, Mg(OH)2).
Furthermore, this fluidized bed technology has inherent particle/mist removal capabilities, which results in the
possibility to remove both SO2 and acid mist/blue smoke in one single process unit.
THE TURBOSCRUBBER PROCESS

FTL/Ospreys patented TurboScrubber system, licensed by NORAM, uses hollow plastic elements of varying
shape, marketed as Turbofill, Turboid and TurboPak depending on shape (Figure 1), and selected
according to the process requirements to generate a three phase fluidized bed. This fluidized bed increases
Reynolds numbers (turbulence) in the gaseous phase and the liquid phase to provide an intense enhancement
of turbulent action which in turn leads to substantial increases in overall mass and heat transfer coefficients as
148
Sulphur 2013 International Conference (Miami, USA 4-7 November 2013)
Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing using fluidized Bed Technology
well as interphase surface renewal rates as compared to classical packings and other scrubbing technologies
(see next section). Figure 2 shows images of the fluidized bed.
Fig. 1:
Photos of the two main packing elements ; Left: Turboid; Right: TurboPak
In addition, the fluidized bed simultaneously removes particulates down to very fine sub-half-micron diameters
(<0.5 m). System design varies from application to application as process operations or pollution control
needs vary widely.
When very hot gases are to be treated and cleaned using the TurboScrubber technology they are first
passed through a quench chamber which is usually integrated with the scrubber such that quenching can
occur in two steps using both the inlet quench section and a specially designed sump to maximum effect. The
cooled gases then enter the fluidized bed where ascending gas is intimately mixed by the fluidized packing
elements with the descending and usually recirculated liquid.
The TurboScrubber system allows operation with slurries, mud and oily or viscous liquids due to the 100%
non-clogging nature of the fluidized bed. The system is also highly versatile operating with highly variable
flows and conditions.
TurboScrubber fluid bed technology is employed by process operators to clean gases for mining & minerals,
boiler & incinerator, pyrolysis & gasification, food production, power generation & fuel cells, chemical &
petrochemical plants. TurboScrubbers unique value is that it simultaneously absorbs toxic gases, removes
very fine particulate and recovers energy in a single compact unit.
Figure 3 shows four examples of the over 100 TurboScrubber installations and gives a flavour of its
application.
149
Gas Flow
Fig. 2:
150
Sketch of TurboScrubber tower indicating flows and turbulent action along with an image showing the
general arrangement of the TurboScrubber tower
Fig. 3: Four examples of the over 100 TurboScrubber installations

Top Left: Fluidized bed scrubber replacing a bag-house on a fluidized bed dryer (PCS Lanigan)
Top Right: 30 MWe wood burning power generation plant Heat recovery (9 MW), with SO2 and fine particulate
abatement
Bottom Left: Boiler plant (heavy oil fired) - SO2 and fine particulate (soot) abatement, and heat recovery (2-stage)
Bottom Right: Shale oil plant Retrofit of Venturi scrubbers to enhance SO2 and fine particulate abatement
(Plant pressure drop maintained)
151
CONVENTIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS

The following tables compare the proposed fluidized bed technology with other commonly used conventional
technologies.
The benefits of the TurboScrubber over alternative technologies can be summarized as follows:
1. For gas scrubbing (Table 1): smaller size and hence lower capital cost, good dust/particle removal
efficiency, high mass transfer efficiency and the ability to handle slurries.
2. For particle/aerosol removal (Table 2): The TurboScrubber may have higher operating costs than for
example a WESP, but will have a considerably smaller size and lower capital cost to off-set that.
3. For aerosol removal (Table 3): In general smaller size and lower capital cost, good turndown with
good sub-micron particle removal efficiencies.
Table 1
Comparison of Various Scrubbing Technologies
SCRUBBING
TECHNOLOGY
EQUIPMENT
SIZE
DUST
REMOVAL
Medium
Large
Medium
Large
Good
Blockage
Good
Some
TurboScrubber
Fixed Packed
Venturi type
Spray Tower
MASS
TRANSFER
High Efficiency
Medium Efficiency
Low Efficiency
Low Efficiency
HANDLES
SLURRIES
ENERGY
REQUIREMENTS
Yes
No
No
No
Low to Medium
Low to Medium
High
Low
Table 2
Comparison of Common Particle/Aerosol Removal Technologies
PARTICLE REMOVAL
TECHNOLOGY
TurboScrubber
Bag Filter
WESP
Venturi type
MECHANISM
OVERALL SIZE
Wetting/ Entrapment
Bed Filtration
Electrical Attraction
Wetting/Entrapment
Medium
Very Large
Very Large
Medium
ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
Medium
High
Low
High
Table 3
Comparison of Operational Parameters for Common Aerosol Removal Technologies
TECHNOLOGY
RELATIVE
SIZE
CAPITAL
COSTS
OPERATING
COSTS
Medium
Medium
Medium
Bag Filter
Large
High
High (replacement bags

and maintenance)
WESP
Large
High
Medium
Spray Tower
Large
Medium
Low
Venturi type
Medium
Medium
High (P)
TurboScrubber
152
OPERATING
CONSIDERATIONS
Good sub-micron efficiencies and wide
gas turn-down capability
Good sub-micron efficiencies but only
normally suitable for solids.
Good sub-micron efficiencies but only
for suitable components.
Very low efficiencies
for particles < 5.0 m
Very high P for high efficiencies of
sub-micron removal
NOVEL SOLUTION FOR SULPHURIC ACID PLANTS

The TurboScrubber fluidized bed technology has been successfully applied to a wide range of scrubbing and
particle removal applications and can potentially be used with great benefit in the sulphuric acid industry. The
fluidized bed scrubber provides a means of removing both SO2 and acid mist/blue smoke efficiently in one
single process unit. These features are highlighted by the following two case studies.
Case Study 1 SO2 and Blue Smoke Scrubbing

This sulphur burning plant produces up to 260 MTPD of sulphuric acid. The stack emissions during continuous
operation are approximately 180 ppmv SO2.
During start-up when sulphur is first fired into the furnace this plant experiences a spike in the SO2
concentration in the stack. It may exceed 1000 ppmv for several minutes, and have forced the operators to
shut down and re-start the plant several times during the start-up period, to be able to comply with regulatory
emission requirements. These start-up SO2 emissions may be caused for example by the lack of preheat in
one or more converter passes (Haldor Topsoe, 2004). Furthermore, during start-up the plant has two sources
of acid mist/blue smoke:
1. Firstly, as the sulphur furnace and converter is heated up any unreacted sulphur or sulphur dioxide
trapped in brick work or catalyst will desorb and react with excess oxygen to produce sulphur trioxide.
Once these gases are released to the atmosphere through start-up vents, they react with humidity in
the air to produce fine sulphuric acid aerosols often referred to as blue smoke/haze.
2. Secondly, when the plant starts burning sulphur and if the sulphuric acid in the absorption towers is
not quite hot enough, the acid will not efficiently absorb sulphur trioxide. During this time period the
acid plant stack may show an acid plume formed by SO3 and water in the ambient air.
Both sources of acid mist pose a general nuisance on site and is of concern in regards to neighbours and the
community.
NORAMs TurboScrubber system is proposed as a solution to this dual start-up problem of SO2 and blue
smoke. The core of the system is the fluidized bed scrubbing tower using caustic (NaOH) as the scrubbing
media.
Table 4
Case Study 1 Predicted System Performance
TurboScrubber Diameter
Number of Turboids
Liquid Circulation Rate
SO2 Removal Efficiency
D50 0.6 micron acid mist removal efficiency, SG 1.6
D50 0.8 micron acid mist removal efficiency, SG 1.6
Pressure Drop
Units
m
m3/h
inch W.C.
Continuous Start-up
1.8
32,000
82
610
> 95%
> 99.99%
40%
94%
56%
99%
5.8
12.7
D50: Mass-median-diameter. Considered as the average particle diameter by mass.

SG: Specific gravity
The performance data in Table 4 highlights the flexibility of the scrubbing system. In this case study the
scrubber has been sized for a SO2 removal efficiency of minimum 95% (9 ppmv SO2 in the stack) during
continuous operation with only 5.8 inch W.C. pressure drop. During normal operation the system will also
remove sub-micron acid mist with an efficiency of 40-55%. During start-up, when the plant gas flow is about
55% of the full capacity flow rate, and by increasing the scrubbing liquid circulation rate, the degree of
turbulent mixing is increased considerably at the expense of 7 inch W.C. of pressure drop. However, this
153
pressure drop is readily available during start-up due to the low gas flow rate. The increased turbulence of the
fluidized bed results in a predicted acid mist removal of more than 94%.
The efficiency of acid mist removal depends not only on the liquid flow rate and pressure drop, but also on the
inherent properties of the acid mist particle such as the particle size and the specific gravity. The exact
values for these particle parameters are not known for the plant considered. To be conservative the specific
gravity was assumed to be 1.6 similar to that of 75 wt% sulphuric acid at process temperature. Also, it is
known that some of the smallest mist particles in an acid plant are generated in an interpass tower with oleum
production due to gas quenching and high local SO3 vapour pressures. In these towers the minimum acid mist
particle size is about 0.3 micron. In a normal Final Absorption Tower the acid mist particle mean size is about
1.5 micron (Louie, 2008). In the performance predictions above a median acid mist particle size of 0.6 or 0.8
micron was used, which is an order of magnitude smaller than the expected mean size from the upstream
FAT. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect even higher removal efficiencies than reported in Table 4.
It is also worth noting that the increased turbulence and residence time of the scrubber increases the SO2
removal efficiency to more than 99.99% during start-up.
Case Study 2 SO2 Emission Flexibility and Reduction of Acid Mist

Emissions
This sulphur burning plant produces up to 600 MTPD of sulphuric acid. The stack emissions during continuous
operation are approximately 310 ppmv SO2.
Flexibility
Four different performance criteria (60%, 86%, 99.9% and 99.99% SO2 removal) are shown in Table 5 to
demonstrate the TurboScrubber system flexibility in target SO2 removal efficiencies by modifying the number
of Turboids and pressure drop. These numbers illustrate how the scrubbing system can be built for 60%
removal efficiency, and at a later date, the removal efficiency can be improved without any physical changes to
the system other than the easy addition of more Turboids or increased liquid flow rate. With a 6-7 inch W.C.
pressure drop the SO2 removal efficiency can be improved significantly to >99% efficiency. This flexibility of
the installed scrubbing system is a unique feature of the TurboScrubber, which cannot be attained for example
with a packed bed scrubbing tower.
Table 5
Case Study 2 Predicted System Performance
Units
Turboscrubber Diameter
Number of Turboids
Liquid Circulation Rate
Pressure Drop
SO2 in the Stack
SO2 Emissions
D50 0.4 micron acid mist
removal efficiency, SG 1.6
154
60% SO2
Removal
86% SO2
Removal
30,000
51,000
760
5.6
44
0.53
feet
USGPM
inch W.C.
ppmv
lb SO2 / ton acid
4.2
125
1.51
99.9% SO2
Removal
9.0
180,000
99.99% SO2
Removal
14
0.3
0.004
180,000
2550
18
0.03
0.0004
20%
37%
66%
25%
48%
78%
32%
58%
87%
60%
89%
99%
Acid mist reductions

Another important feature of the TurboScrubber is its capability of removing acid mist. In this case study, the
plant has an upstream Final Absorption Tower (FAT) with Brownian diffusion (BD) candles. The acid tower
operates with an acid inlet concentration of 98.5 wt% and inlet temperature of 80C. The BD candles operate
with a 10 inch W.C. pressure drop. The purpose of the BD candles is to remove the majority of the acid mist
formed to meet the legislated emission limit on sulphuric acid, which in general in the USA is 0.075 kg
H2SO4/MT H2SO4 (as 100%) or 0.15 lb H2SO4/ton H2SO4 (USA EPA, 1974).
There are three sources of acid mist emissions through the stack:
1. Acid spray and mist
2. H2SO4 vapour
3. SO3 slippage
Acid spray is generally formed by mechanical splashing or by spray nozzles and are >3 micron. The mist (or
fog) is generally <3 micron and is produced by gas cooling which results in gas phase condensation. Mists can
also be formed by gas phase reaction which results in the smallest particle sizes.
The process gas leaving the Final Absorption Tower will be close to equilibrium with the incoming sulphuric
acid. Hence, the partial pressure of H2SO4 in the feed acid to the final tower would be the absolute minimum
acid emission possible from an absorption tower with perfect mist elimination and 100% SO3 absorption. The
last source of acid emissions is indeed from SO3 slippage. In a correctly designed and operating acid tower the
absorption efficiency should be 99.9% or higher.
In a Final Absorption Tower of a sulphur burning double absorption plant the acid spray and mist load is up to
1000 mg/m3, with an approximate distribution by weight of 30% <1 micron, 40% 1-3 micron and 30% >3
micron. Using these numbers, but with a mist load of 700 mg/m3 and a FAT absorption efficiency of 99.99% for
the Case Study 2 plant we obtain the results shown in Table 6.
Table 6
Case Study 2 Estimated acid emissions from acid plant with
Brownian diffusion candles in the Final Absorption Tower (FAT)
Inlet to FAT
mist eliminator
Acid mist
<1 micron
1-3 micron
>3 micron
Overall removal efficiency
Total acid mist
700
20
30%
40%
30%
mg/m3
mg/ft3
by wt
by wt
by wt
47
1.940
kg/h
kg/MT *
Acid vapour
SO3 slippage
TOTAL acid emission
Outlet of FAT
Brownian diffusion candles
Removal
efficiency
98%
100%
100%
99.4%
4.2
0.1
4.2
0
0
mg/m3
mg/ft3
mg/m3
mg/m3
mg/m3
0.3
0.012
1.5
0.060
0.3
0.011
2.0
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
0.083
kg/MT *
* kg H2SO4 emitted per metric tonne H2SO4 produced (as 100% H2SO4)
155
The predictions in Table 6 show that the plant operating with a Final Absorption Tower equipped with high
efficiency Brownian diffusion candles will be pressed to meet the general US acid emission limit of 0.075 kg
H2SO4/MT H2SO4 (as 100% H2SO4). In fact the prediction is that the emissions would be 11% too high. The
problem is that the outlet gas, if saturated with acid and SO3 vapour will be very close to the limit, which leaves
very little room for upsets due to mist eliminator candle or SO3 absorption performance excursions. The reason
for the high relative acid vapour load is that the plant operates at a low SO2 concentration to the first pass of
about 9.5 vol% SO2.
The acid emissions can be lowered by the use of a tail gas SO2 scrubber, since the aqueous scrubbing agent
will be able to react with the acid vapour and SO3 slippage. As the outlet gas from the Final Absorption Tower
is cooled further to 50C and mixed with water vapour in the scrubber, the SO3 and H2SO4 will readily react
with water and condense. Most of this condensation will likely take place homogeneously or on already
existing acid mist particles not removed in the upstream FAT. To remove this newly formed mist in the
scrubber and take advantage of this phenomenon to lower the acid emissions, it is necessary to remove the
mist efficiently. The TurboScrubber fluidized bed system can achieve this without the use of costly Brownian
diffusion candles as discussed in the following.
It is proposed to replace the FAT BD candles with a low pressure drop mesh pad, followed by a NORAM
TurboScrubber downstream. Removing the BD candles will free up about 10 inch W.C. pressure drop with
about 2 inch W.C. being used in the replacement mesh pad. The net 8 in W.C. saved can be used in the
scrubber for mist removal. Removing the BD candles will result in more acid carry-over to the scrubber which
will increase the chemical consumption for scrubbing. As shown in Table 7 the total acid mist carry-over with a
mesh pad in the FAT is about 7.5 kg/h vs. 0.3 kg/h with BD candles. The additional 7.2 kg/h acid mist carryover will only add about 10% to the alkaline chemicals consumption as the SO2 flow rate of 46 kg/h
corresponds to 71 kg/h of H2SO4.
Table 7
Case Study 2 Estimated acid emissions from acid plant with
mesh pad in the Final Absorption Tower (FAT)
Inlet to FAT
mist eliminator
Acid mist
<1 micron
1-3 micron
>3 micron
Total acid mist
700
20
30%
40%
30%
mg/m3
mg/ft3
by wt
by wt
by wt
47
1.940
kg/h
kg/MT *
Outlet of FAT
Mesh Pad
Removal
efficiency
60%
90%
100%
84.0%
Acid vapour
SO3 slippage
TOTAL acid emission
112
3
84
28
0
mg/m3
mg/ft3
mg/m3
mg/m3
mg/m3
7.5
0.310
1.5
0.060
0.3
0.011
9.2
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
0.382
kg/MT *
156
The gas leaving the Final Absorption Tower mesh pad will have acid mist, acid vapour and SO3 vapour from
slippage. As described above, these gas-phase species will start condensing in the scrubber. Due to the
inherent high heat transfer rates of the fluidized bed it can be assumed that a large fraction of these vapours
will condense homogenously and on existing acid mist aerosols, which forms the basis for the calculations of
Table 8.
Table 8
Case Study 2 Estimated acid emissions from a tail gas SO2
TurboScrubber following a FAT with mesh pad (Table 7)
Inlet to
TurboScrubber **
Acid mist
<1 micron
1-3 micron
>3 micron
Total acid mist
138
4
75%
25%
0%
mg/m3
mg/ft3
by wt
by wt
by wt
9
0.382
kg/h
kg/MT *
Outlet of
TurboScrubber
Removal
efficiency
89%
99%
100%
96.3%
Acid vapour
SO3 slippage
TOTAL acid emission
11.7
0.3
11.4
0.3
0
mg/m3
mg/ft3
mg/m3
mg/m3
mg/m3
0.8
0.032
0.0
0.000
0.0
0.000
0.8
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
kg/MT *
kg/h
0.032
kg/MT *
** Assuming that all SO3 slippage and (H2SO4/SO3) condenses.
Condensation takes place on existing acid mist particles, no particle size change.
The result is that about 96.3% of the acid mist entering the fluidized bed scrubber is removed by using the
extra 8 inch W.C pressure drop freed up from the BD candles for a total 14 inch W.C. pressure drop. Overall,
by the use of the TurboScrubber system and compared to the original FAT, the acid emissions have been
reduced from 0.083 to 0.032 kg H2SO4/MT H2SO4 (as 100% H2SO4), well below the regulatory limit. In
addition, the SO2 removal efficiency of 99.9% provides a large margin for the SO2 emission requirements,
which for some clients may be used for SO2 credit trading.
CONCLUSION
One of the most interesting features of NORAMs TurboScrubber technology is its process versatility and
adaptability. For example, it can handle gas turndown rates of up to 1:12, and the efficiency of both SO2 and
blue smoke aerosol removal can variably be increased during plant turndown and start-up operations. It has
also been shown that the proposed scrubbing system has merit in efficiently removing acid spray/mist
carryover from the upstream Final Absorption Tower.
The TurboScrubber process offers the possibilities of SO2 emission reduction, blue smoke aerosol mist
removal, acid mist/spray carry-over removal, continuous and start-up emission reductions, and the use of
scrubbing slurries. All these benefits are achievable in one process unit operation, with a lower capital cost
and smaller foot print than other scrubbing technologies.
157
References
Haldor Topsoe, 2004, Improved Start-up and Flexibility using Caesium Catalyst, HaJH/HVH 07/2004.
Louie, Douglas K., 2008, Handbook of Sulphuric Acid Manufacturing, 2nd ed., DKL Engineering, Richmond Hill, Ontario,
Canada.
USA EPA environmental standards, 1974, 40 CFR 60 Subpart H 60.83.
158

Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing Using Fluidized Bed Technology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing Using Fluidized Bed Technology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing Using Fluidized Bed Technology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tail Gas SO2 Scrubbing using

fluidized Bed Technology

Corresponding author. email: knikolaisen@noram-eng.com

K. Nikolaisen, D. Missions, H. Davis, A. Mahecha-Botero

THE TURBOSCRUBBER PROCESS

Sulphur 2013 International Conference (Miami, USA 4-7 November 2013)