ChlorTainer was much preferred to a scrubber-type solution, which would require major building modifications. A scrubber system would also have required a six-member, trained response team to be available to deal with a leak within the building.  With the vessels, it is all done automatically, with minimal personal exposure.  And with two tanks for each gas, we don't have to suffer any plant process interruption if there is leak containment going on in one of them.

This technology single-handedly saves the chlorine gas industry, allowing us [at the water treatment site] to continue to use chlorine gas without having to convert to bleach as a disinfectant alternative.

Cost was a guideline and safety was our primary concern. 'Passive' was a selling point to me.it made a very important difference since we are governed by the EPA rules and regulations. The ChlorTainer has a preventative maintenance schedule which requires no special training or skills to complete.

It is always preferable to avoid any Hazmat occupancy because OSHA requires a six man trained response team to respond to any release of toxic gas. Since many facilities do not have a six member team available to address a release, Hazmat occupancy environments are not practical. Total containment is the safest and most cost effective treatment system available.

ChlorTainer is a big money saver, especially compared to scrubber solutions. It meets the fire code and exceeds all other standards. And the dual vessel makes auto switchover of a new container practical. In fact, it virtually takes care of itself.

Total Containment is easier [to use] than a scrubber. It does what is says it will do and we don't have to worry about leaks.

Safety for our operators and the surrounding area [was the primary concern]. The locking door adds extra security from prying hands. It seems to be a fool-proof system. Simplicity is the best ticket