| Comparison | Dry Desulfurization | Wet Desulfurization | Micro Wet Desulfurization | Biological Desulphurization |
| Application | Small and medium projects with gas less than 5000m³/day; Second high precision desulfurization after other methods | Large Gas Plant up to 100,000 m^3/ day; High sulfur content around 5g/Nm³ | Large-scale | Large-scale, high sulfur-containing gas (100ppm~20000ppm) |
| Power Consumption | None | High | Moderate | Moderate |
| Operating Cost | Moderate, the desulfurizer need to be changed periodically | Moderate | Low | Low cost on electricity bill |
| Land Scale | Small | Full set of equipment for gas desulfurization, regeneration, filtration and melting sulfur, in result, large land is required. | Moderate | Moderate |
| Operation Management | Easy to manage, reliable operation, dispense with staff on duty | Need people on duty to control the operation | Automatic operation, simple maintenance | Automatic operation, simple maintenance |
| Remarks | Refueling at fixed period, one use one reserve, alternate operation | Many equipment | Less equipment than wet desulfurization | |
| Advantages | Simple structure, low investment, long lifetime, high precision of desulfurization (lower than 15ppm) | It can deal with large amount gas, and the system can run continuously by using PH value to keep the efficiency. | High efficiency by Iron Chelate, small in size, and high processing capacity | High desulfurization efficiency 99.5%, no second pollution, stable performance, suitable for large-scale, high sulfur-containing gas |
Complaint
