I N D U S T R I A L ECOSYSTEMS A N D E C O - I N D U S T R I A L PARKS

t
The Eco-industrial Park Model
Reconsidered
Marian R. Chertow
Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies
New Haven, CT,USA

I n April 1998, t h e U.S. National Science yet arrived. But if we are willing to see the con-
Foundation sponsored a workshop in Wash- cept more broadly, we will have much more
ington, D.C. on “Linking Industrial Ecology to symbiosis and environmental protection and,
Public Policy.” Cohosted by the President’s simultaneously, will create a new model for lo-
Council o n Environmental Quality and cal economic development.
Princeton University, the purpose of the meet- For the past two years, a requirement for the
ing was “to bring together researchers and graduate level industrial ecology course my col-
policymakers to discuss the emerging field of in- leagues and I teach at the Yale School of For-
dustrial ecology and its relevance to environ- estry and Environmental Studies has been to
mental policy” (Andrews et al. prepare a group paper on an in-
1998). T h e 44 participants dustrial ecosystem prearranged
Restructured electricity
compiled impressive lists of with a willing real-world cli-
past achievements, emerging markets encourage many ent. We now have data from
issues, and new goals for gov- varied independent power 13 projects that explore a
ernment, industry, and non- producers to create new range of possibilities for orga-
governmental organizations. nizing eco-industrial parks as
The organizers assembled a electric generating plants all part of industrial symbiosis.
strawman list for each category ower the country. Why not Projects ranged from convert-
as a means of stimulating dis- have each one be the anchor ing an existing business incu-
cussion. Under emerging issues bator into a n ecopark, to
they suggested “limited feasi- tenant of a surroundingeco- working with a n industrial
bility of eco-industrial parks is industrid park? compost operation to incorpo-
being recognized.” True, while rate residues from nearby in-
much has been written, there dustries, to doing market
have been few ground breakings for actual parks. research on a n actual park proposed for
I suggest that, at present, we are at the earliest Londonderry, New Hampshire, USA, for a pub-
stages of industrial symbiosis and that t h e lic and then a private developer. We have
model of the full-blown industrial ecosystem learned a great deal from these 13 studies. They
provided by t h e industrial district in suggest a continuum of industrial symbioses that
Kalundborg, Denmark should not be viewed as can occur as follows:
the sine qua non for eco-industrial parks (Lowe
et al. 1997). To borrow a n analogy from the 1. Through waste exchanges. Many businesses
software industry, we are at the Visicalc stage recycle and sell recovered materials on a
and Lotus 1-2-3 and Microsoft Excel have not regular basis to other firms such as scrap
dealers. Waste exchanges formalize trading
Q Copyright 1999 by the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology opportunities by creating hard-copy or on-
and Yale University line lists of materials one company would
Volume 2, Number 3 like to get rid of and another company

Journal of Industrial Ecology 8

 I N D U S T R I A L E C O S Y S T E M S A N D E C O - I N D U S T R I A L PA R K S
might need. The scale of trades can be lo-
cal, regional, national, or even global.
One of our teams looked at an expanded
waste exchange concept for community
sharing of food products and residues.
2. Within a facility, firm, or organization. At
the facility level, we explored a model
where a manufacturer could look beyond
end-of-life options (e.g., for recycling or
exchange) to develop a more systematic
view of its own multiple resource flows. It
could then consider symbiosis opportuni-
ties by integrating operations farther up
the life-cycle chain, including corporate
purchasing. We also looked at the flow
through a complex organization of one
product, personal computers at Yale Uni-
versity, to model the flow and opportuni-
ties for symbiosis.
3. Among firms colocated in an “eco-industrial
park.” This has been the focus of efforts in
the United States. In this approach, busi-
nesses located within the same industrial
park exchange energy, water, and materials
and can go further to share information
and services such as permitting, transpor-
tation, and marketing. The Londonderry
group even drafted a set of covenants
(never enacted) that included aspects of
design and operation of participating busi-
nesses. These projects are business based,
building new industrial parks or retrofit-
ting old ones to work with organizations
that a public or private developer can at-
tract. One of our teams looked at an exist-
ing industrial park in the Philippines with
over 200 businesses and considered ways
to link them environmentally.
4. Among local firms that are not colocated.
This model relies on using existing busi-
nesses and filling in some new ones to cre-
ate industrial symbiosis. In one project,
our students investigated resources near an
existing cogeneration operation where a
coal-fired power plant was providing
steam to a boxboard manufacturer. The
students found a municipal sewage plant
and agricultural operations nearby and,
combining them conceptually with the
available steam and boxboard, proposed
Chertow, The Eco-industrial Park Model Reconsidered
1
siting a brewery that would grow hops with
biosolids, use steam from the power plant
to make beer, and package the final prod-
uct in cardboard. Another project exam-
ined the feasibility of using organic waste
streams from several nearby facilities to
enhance an existing food-composting op-
eration. These projects are stream based;
they begin with an examination of avail-
able flows through actual industries.
5. Virtual eco-industrialparks. If it is necessary
to colocate businesses for industrial sym-
biosis, then the number of companies that
are willing to participate is constrained by
the need to move. The virtual eco-indus-
trial park links businesses-in very differ-
ent industries-largely by sharing waste
streams in a region or even on a broader
scale.’ In class we considered a virtual
eco-industrial park for greater New Haven
that could link up, for example, our local
pharmaceutical industry’s organic waste
streams with our regional nursery bedding
industry. We are now working to show
how this type of regional industrial sym-
biosis is a means of business retention (by
lowering costs for existing businesses
through reduced disposal expenses) and
business attraction (by having businesses
locate because of the availability of value
added raw materials).
This continuum, and variations left out for
brevity, offer a broad range of approaches to shar-
ing resources. When the US. President’s Coun-
cil for Sustainable Development funded four
communities as demonstration sites for eco-in-
dustrial parks in 1994, it sought to demonstrate
different visions of industrial symbiosis. 1 believe
the model about which there is so much pessi-
mism is the one where a community tries to de-
sign a n ecopark ex nihilo-from nothing. Not
only is this task ambitious, but outsiders happily
pile on an even larger wish list of nonmarket
items that demand giant steps, not baby steps, in
sustainability. Surely we want to experiment
with many other models rather than adhere to
one that is as yet unproven. N o t even t h e
mother of all eco-industrial parks, Kalundborg,
sprung from its creator fully formed, as research-
9
1 I N D U S T R I A L ECOSYSTEMS A N D E C O - I N D U S T R I A L PARKS
ers have been careful to tell us (Cohen-
Rosenthal et al. n.d.; Ehrenfeld and Gertler
1997).Kalundborg, rather than the realization of
a rational planner’s dream, evolved as a series of
bilateral linkages over 25 years.
The model I find most promising uses what I
have dubbed “the anchor tenant approach.” It is
the same concept as building a shopping mall
around one or more large department stores to
anchor the commercial development within. In
practice, it involves looking for a starting point
that already exists, such as the cogeneration
project mentioned above. In another instance, a
utility company was already generating power
from a fuel cell in a landfill, and we examined
opportunities for using leftover steam and car-
bon dioxide. Having one willing private sector
anchor is likely to be much more promising than
a well-intentioned public entity trying to cook
up an eco-industrial park from scratch.
The anchor tenant approach also works with
planned businesses. We helped a newsprint
manufacturer think through an eco-industrial
park in which the plant would anchor a network
of businesses needed to supply materials and re-
use residues from the newsprint operations. The
anchor tenant approach is especially timely be-
cause of its coincidence with the restructuring of
the electric industry in the United States. Re-
structured electricity markets encourage many
varied independent power producers to create
new electric generating plants all over the coun-
try. Why not have each one be the anchor ten-
ant of a surrounding eco-industrial park?
The ideal model combines the business ap-
proach, where a developer wants to gather to-
gether a number of tenants, with the stream
approach, where developers follow specific re-
source flows through an eco-industrial system.
Our Philippines team, rather than try to link
companies, segregated out a number of flows
10 journal of Industrial Ecology
such as solvents, water, and waste water and ap-
proached symbiosis as a means of networking the
primary users of each stream. A useful starting
point, ideally, is to have the results of a survey
that looks at the significant inputs and outputs
of each business to facilitate matches between
businesses and their flows.
The opportunities await for industrial ecosys-
tems. They are feasible and all around us. We
need to think in other categories and around
some very sharp comers, but we can greatly in-
crease our level of industrial symbiosis, and soon.
Note
1. David Cobb at the Bechtel Corporation pio-
neered the notion of virtual eco-industrial parks.
References
Andrews, C., D. Rejeski, R. Socolow, and V. Thomas.
1998. Linking industrial ecology to public policy.
Draft Workshop Report. Available at http://
policy.rutgers.edu/projects/ie.htm.
Cohen-Rosenthal, E., T. McGalliard, and M. Bell.
n.d. Designing eco-industrial parks: The North
American experience. Ithaca, NY Cornell Work
and Environment Institute.
Ehrenfeld,J. and N. Gertler. 1997. Industrial ecology in
practice: The industrial ecosystem in Kalundborg.
J o u of~lnd~scrial
~ Ecology 1(1): 67-79.
Lowe, E., J. Warren, and S. Moran. 1997. Discovering in-
dustrial ecology: An executive briefingand sourcebook.
Richland, Columbus, OH: Batelle Press.
Address correspondence to:
Marian Chertow
Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies
205 Prospect St.
New Haven, CT 06511-2106 USA
email:marian.chertow@yale.edu