In this study, the hydrogen sulfide removal performance of materials that can be used instead of NaOH was evaluated to reduce the amount of NaOH, a harmful substance used in chemical cleaning methods. Three alternative chemical agents were evaluated: commercially available chemical-based CB, enzyme-based EB, and natural substance-based NB. The hydrogen sulfide removal performance evaluation consisted of three lab tests: the EL608 method, a method using a bag, a method using a sensor and a chamber, and a field test conducted on a scrubber in operation in the actual field. As a result of evaluation by the EL608 Method, CB was 92.3% (±2.9%), EB 60.5% (±5.8%), and NB 88.3% (±3.6%), similar or somewhat similar to NaOH (5%) 99.8% (0.1%). In the evaluation of the hydrogen sulfide removal performance using Bag, the Michaelis-Menten coefficient was CB 4.30 and EB 5.30, lower than NaOH 6.60, and the affinity for hydrogen sulfide was evaluated to be stronger. Even in the method using the sensor and chamber, CB and EB showed similar hydrogen sulfide removal performance of NaOH, but NB showed low treatment performance. In the evaluation using the scrubber in the actual field, the treatment efficiency of CB and EB was higher than that of NaOH under all hydrogen sulfide inlet concentration conditions. If microorganisms grow on the packing material filled inside the scrubber, treatment efficiency may decrease. In order to prevent this phenomenon, the microbial growth inhibitory function of alternative materials was evaluated, and CB, EB, and NB were all superior to NaOH. As a result of this study, it was shown that CB and EB can replace NaOH because they have excellent performance in removing hydrogen sulfide and inhibiting microbial growth.