_ The Zero Emissions Strategy Conference

The Podium, 25 August

A Commentary on "Zero Pollution Industry" by Nelson B. Nemerow

Contributed by Robert Ayres, Sandoz Professor of Management and the Environment, INSEAD


For the Zero Emissions Targeting Conference, The Commons, 25 August 1997.

Page Contents:

_Podium Presentation
_Your comments and discussion of this presentation
_Other Presentations in this Series

Whatever the virtues of this conference may be (and they are many) so far it has not elicited any suggestions for Zero Emissions case studies, other than the ones I put into play myself. As it happens, today I received a book I had ordered several weeks ago. It is entitled "Zero Pollution Industry" by Nelson B. Nemerow (New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1995). I wish Nemerow were on line to discuss his book, but he is not. So I will summarize it for the benefit of our faithful registrants.

Nemerow notes three methods to eliminate all pollutants. He presents them in order of probable acceptance.

• First (he says) is recovery and reuse of wastes within the same plant. He says this could eliminate all wastes under optimum conditions, but that a typical plant will find ways to save 25% to 75% of wastes. He mentions paper companies' recovery of ":white water" as an example.
• The second method (he says) is to sell the wastes to another plant, either directly or via a regional exchange. He mentions tanneries selling fleshings to a rendering plant for the recovery of grease and the manufacture of soap and animal glue.
• The third method is a combination of the first two, namely to bring the producer and user together in the same industrial complex. (Nowadays we call this an "industrial ecosystem"). This saves treatment costs on the part of the waste generator and transportation costs on the part of the user. Theoretically!

Unfortunately, despite a lot of talk over the years, the number of successful industrial complexes that utilize locally produced wastes economically remains at one: the famous Kalundborg case. Nemerow then goes on to discuss the economics of waste minimization and treatment in some detail. I will not attempt to summarize that discussion.

The interesting part of the book is a series of discussions of hypothetical industrial ecosystems. He calls them "industrially balanced industrial complexes and innovative solutions to attain zero pollution". Not only that, he does the arithmetic. That is, he considers quantity relationships (mass balances) and costs. Here is his list, with a very brief description:

1. A pulp and paper mill complex consisting of eight subsidiary units, five of which produce products consumed within the complex. These sub- units are: (1.1) a pulp mill using the sulfite process, (1.2) a fine paper mill, (1.3) a road binder plant, (1.4) a vanillin plant, (1.5) a groundwood pulp plant, (1.6) a low grade wrapping paper plant, (1.7) a pressed hardboard plant and (1.8) a sulfate recovery furnace. There is also a paperboard plant that utilizes by-products (BOD and suspended organic matter) from the sulfate recovery process. It will not be surprising that many of these units are already co-located in modern pulp and paper complexes. However Nemerow demonstrates that there are significant economies of integration as compared to stand-alone plants.
2. An integrated feedlot-slaughterhouse- tannery and rendering plant. He also includes a biogas plant and generating plant to utilize cattle dung and other organic wastes. This could supply electric power and gas to a housing complex for the workers. Products of the complex would be meat products of all kinds, leather, high protein animal feeds, tallow and bone meal.
3. An integrated sugarcane complex. This would utilize the bagasse (waste from the crusher) as fuel for a power plant to provide electricity for the other operations. The complex would produce refined sugar from cane. (Most current refineries are located near markets, not near the canefields). Nemerow also considers an extended version in which waste water is re-used for irrigation in the canefields.
4. Integrated textile operations, combining weaving, dyeing, printing and finishing with internal wastewater recycling and dye recovery. It is shown that integration generates significant savings.
5. Fertilizer-cement complexes. The general idea is to utilize "phosphogypsum" wastes from phosphate rock processing in a Portland cement plant (in place of limestone). This process generates waste sulfur dioxide from the calciner. The sulfur dioxide can then be catalytically converted on site into sulfuric acid, that is used in the phosphate rock processing. Fluorides can also be recovered for sale, either to the aluminum industry or to municipalities for water treatment. Nemerow goes into considerable detail on this combination, which is indeed very promising.
6. Ash utilization (in concrete blocks) from electric power plants. Ash can be used, to an extent, as a substitute for Portland cement.
7. Steel-fertilizer-cement complexes. So- called integrated steel mills already co-locate a number of related functions, from coking and sintering, blast furnace, steel furnace, casting, hot and cold rolling, etc. Nemerow suggest adding a phosphate rock treatment facility, a sulfuric acid plant and cement complex (based on #5 above), plus a cement product plant using blast furnace slag and a glass plant, along with a pickling acid recovery facility. However, he does not do the mass balance analysis or discuss the economics of this ambitious scheme.
8. Plastic recycling. He suggests linking production and recycling of polyethylene and polystyrene, but without any serious analysis. Not convincing.
9. Cement-lime-power plant complexes. This is an extension of #6, co-located with a limestone mine. The idea is to use unsalable wastes and fines from the mine in the cement plant (along with ash), while the limestone can be used for flue-gas desulfurization.
10. Lumber mill complexes, utilizing waste wood for power generation or (more advanced) in a low temperature gasification facility with recovery and re-use of other chemicals. Only described in general terms.
11. Power plant agriculture complexes. The idea would be to use the ash from a power plant as a soil conditioner, while using low temperature waste heat in a fish farm. (This is already being done in Kalundborg). Only described in general terms, and obviously not applicable in many areas.
12. Power plant concrete block complexes. This is an adaptation of (#6). The idea is to utilize waste heat, ash and dust within the complex and produce only salable products. Discussed in general terms only.
13. Cannery agriculture complexes. Here the idea is to use liquid waste from the cannery for irrigation purposes while using agricultural wastes as fuel for power plant supplying the cannery. Why not?
14. Nuclear power-glass block complexes. One way of stabilizing high level nuclear wastes is in glass blocks. Nemerow proposes to combine a glass block manufacturing facility with a nuclear fuel rod reprocessing facility and to sell the decorative glass blocks (!) or bury them. He also proposes a white-water recreational boating facility fed by the cooling water from the nuclear plant (!!) Well...
15. Feedlot-plant food complexes. Here the feedlot wastes (manure and urine) would be captured by a water hyacinth pond. The hyacinths would then be harvested, crushed and used as a soil conditioner or fed to a biogas plant to produce methane. (Gunter Pauli and ZERI have worked on similar ideas with a few other twists, such as mushroom growing and fish farming).

O.K. That's it for today. I welcome your comments on Nemerow's ideas, or any better ones you can come up with. Cheers!

Back to top

__ Commentary & Discussion of This Paper (Once you have registered)

__ Go to Other Podium Presentations

Back to top