Model-Centered Approach to Early Planning and Design of an Eco

We used the approach to propose the colocation of a number of industrial ... park in China (4, 5) emphasize the slow, incidental evolution of these ec...
2 downloads 0 Views 590KB Size
Download PDF
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 4958–4963

Model-Centered Approach to Early Planning and Design of an Eco-Industrial Park around an Oil Refinery XIANGPING ZHANG, ANDERS H. STRØMMAN, CHRISTIAN SOLLI, AND EDGAR G. HERTWICH* Industrial Ecology Program and Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway

Received May 15, 2007. Revised manuscript received March 27, 2008. Accepted April 3, 2008.

Industrial symbiosis promises environmental and economic gains through a utilization of the waste of some processes as a resource for other processes. Because of the costs and difficulties of transporting some wastes, the largest theoretical potential for industrial symbiosis is given when facilities are colocated in an eco-industrial park (EIP). This study proposes a model-centered approach with an eight-step procedure for the early planning and design of an eco-industrial park consideringtechnicalandenvironmentalfactors.Chemicalprocess simulation software was used to model the energy and material flows among the prospective members and to quantify the benefits of integration among different firms in terms of energy and resources saved as compared to a reference situation. Process simulation was based on a combination of physical models of industrial processes and empirical models. The modeling allows for the development and evaluation of different collaboration opportunities and configurations. It also enables testing chosen configurations under hypothetical situations or external conditions. We present a case study around an existing oil and gas refinery in Mongstad, Norway. We used the approach to propose the colocation of a number of industrial facilities around the refinery, focused on integrating energy use among the facilities. An EIP with six main members was designed and simulated, matching new hypothetical members in size to the existing operations, modeling material and energy flows in the EIP, and assessing these in terms of carbon and hydrogen flows.

Introduction Industrial symbiosis offers a better utilization of available material and energy resources through the integration of traditionally separate industries, where one facility uses what was traditionally the waste of another facility as valuable input. Because of the relatively low value density of the waste resources, a relative geographic proximity is often a prerequisite for the development of industrial symbiosis because the transport of these waste resources would be too expensive. When collaborating facilities are located together on the same or adjacent properties, we speak of an eco* Corresponding author phone: 47-735989649; fax: 47-73598943; e-mail: [email protected]. 4958

9

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008

industrial park (EIP) or estate. It is common to require at least three resource streams to be exchanged among at least three firms to define something as an industrial park. Unlike traditional estates, where there is little attempt to encourage synergies, EIPs are built around networks of associated supplier and distribution chains that have a greater dependence upon local material and energy flows (1). Descriptions of successful cases such as the Kalundborg industrial symbiosis in Denmark (2, 3) and the Guitang industrial park in China (4, 5) emphasize the slow, incidental evolution of these ecosystems. Many planned industrial ecosystems, including most of the 15 projects proposed by the U.S. President’s Council on Sustainable Development, have failed to materialize, at least as industrial symbioses (6). The field of industrial ecology has hence turned its attention to social processes and networks, organizational cultures, and policy environments that give rise to the emergence of industrial symbiosis, as well as barriers to the development of such symbioses where opportunities for collaboration have been identified. We fully acknowledge the findings of this qualitative research, which emphasize the importance of including social, cultural, and business factors in the development of policies and planning approaches to promote the development of industrial symbiosis. Our work is complementary to this research, as a better understanding of the technical possibilities and benefits based on accepted modeling approaches can provide confidence to the decision makers. In this study, we attempted to improve and demonstrate methods to use quantitative process models of different industrial facilities, modeling the interaction among potential partners, as part of a process to identify and plan for an EIP. In this paper, we present the design of a hypothetical EIP including six main members around the existing oil and gas refinery in Mongstad, on the west coast of Norway. This design has been developed following an eight-step procedure including a process simulation of the different members to identify integration options and match the different members. We present a carbon and hydrogen flow analysis to illustrate the features of the hypothetical EIP. The interest in EIPs has coemerged with the focus on materials reuse and material cycles modeled on nature’s nutrient cycles, powerfully put forward by Ayres as an industrial metabolism (7) and by Frosch and Gallopolous (8) as industrial ecosystems. In the English language literature, the focus on the exchange of byproducts among facilities in close geographic proximity has been traced back to the description of industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark, in the Financial Times in 1990 (6). The subject of many studies, the industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg is a good example for the spontaneous but slow evolution of resource exchange among companies. Once the possibility for collaboration between two firms is discovered, its implementation clearly depends on detailed planning and design. Our question is, however, as to whether such planning and design can be introduced earlier to discover and evaluate opportunities and thus accelerate the evolution of EIPs. Several industrial symbioses have evolved or been established so far, and these symbioses have achieved evident economic, environmental, and social benefits (1, 2, 9–13). Relying on spontaneous emergence, the number of such arrangements for resource exchanges among facilities is quite small (14, 15). The phenomenon of byproduct exchange and process integration needs to become far more widespread and systematic for it to move from being a curiosity to having a substantial impact on our society’s environment. Casavant and Cote (16) proposed using chemical process simulation 10.1021/es071138l CCC: $40.75

 2008 American Chemical Society

Published on Web 05/22/2008

technology to design industrial ecosystems to quantify associated technical synergies. In the present paper, we implement Casavant and Cote’s proposal. A quantitative model of the (potential) exchange of material and energy in an EIP carries a number of promises: (i) Chemical process modeling software enables a consistent and seamless coupling of models of different facilities and can hence produce a match between input and output streams, taking into account not only the characteristics of existing streams but also the ability and cost to change these streams to a required quality level. Associated databases contain models of many existing processes, and existing modeled configurations can be easily extended. (ii) A small change in the production of one member may impact the performances of the others (17) and subsequently of the entire EIP. Models allow for the sensitivity analysis of a dynamic network to provide a better understanding of the interdependence among the EIP members. This ability can be used to understand and limit operational risks to each member, either through backup systems or contractual arrangements. (iii) A quantitative evaluation of the material and energy flows can provide an indication of costs and environmental benefits (18, 19) in different configurations and a tradeoff among these criteria. (iv) Various EIP assessment approaches exist, such as life cycle assessment (LCA), exergy (20) and emergy analyses (21–23), and environmental impact analysis of waste and emissions (19). The proposed method provides much of the data required by those assessments. As an industrial complex, an EIP could involve many industries, such as chemical, energy, steel, cement, aquaculture, etc. The common feature for these industries is their ability to carry out physical changes and chemical conversions of the raw material to (by)products. Fortunately, process models for various industries have been developed and verified, such as a power plant (24, 25), a methanol synthesis process (26, 27), a CO2 capture process (28), etc. Commercial software (e.g., Aspen Plus, HYSYS) provides comprehensive tools for simulating units and processes. These available technologies and tools can now be used to provide insight into the complicated synergic relationship among various members in an EIP.

Materials and Methods Figure 1 shows the eight-step procedure for the early planning and design of an EIP, in which the utilization of process models plays an important role. Step 1. Analysis of Goals and Opportunities. Why should the EIP be established? What are the expectations related to economic, environmental, and social issues? To answer these questions, collaboration between governments, industries, and academic organizations is required. The associated regulations and laws, as well as commercial changes and market conditions, should be taken into account. Additionally, the boundary and site of the planned EIP should be determined. Step 2. Analysis of Current Existing Activities on Site Considering Technical, Social, and Market Dimensions. The comprehensive analysis of the current status should consider resource availability, product market status, geographical characteristics, environmental regulations, governmental planning, transportation, information, security services, products, utilities, etc. Step 3. Identification of New Potential Activities. On the basis of results from Steps 1 and 2, certain new activities could be selected to achieve the goals in Step 1. In this work, ad-hoc, brainstorming approaches were utilized. The adaptation of more systematic process selection procedures as developed in chemical engineering remains to be explored.

FIGURE 1. Procedure for the planning and design of an EIP with a model-centered approach. Step 4. Formation of Preliminary Structure of EIP. A preliminary structure of the EIP from Steps 1-3 should be formed. Step 5. Modeling and Simulation of Members. This step consists of establishing the models of all members and obtaining the performances through simulation, as well as listing material and energy flows and designing the potential exchange network. It also includes the evaluations of the economic, environmental, and social benefits and an optimal network among the members. Step 6. Sensitivity Analysis of Key Variables or Parameters in Members as well as in Whole Park. The aim is to identify as to how a small change in the production of one member impacts the performances of the others and subsequently of the entire EIP. The iteration of Steps 5 and 6 by parameter adjustment was carried out to ensure that the models of the members were adequate and provided a good fit. Step 7. The Proposition of Alternative Strategies and Scenarios Improve Structure Obtained in Step 4 with Respect to Selected Performance Attributes. Because of the complexity of social and market factors, actor-oriented methods and participative processes can be used for evaluating exchange opportunities and EIP configurations. Steps 3-7 were repeated until the final EIP structure satisfies the goal proposed in Step 1. Step 8. Conclusion of Early Planning and Design of EIP. An early version of this procedure was used in an iterative fashion to develop a proposal for an EIP at Mongstad, Norway. It is not possible or desirable to explain as to how we went through the procedure or to display the technical details concerning decisions about the selection, dimensioning, or design on which the individual members are based. Rather, we have chosen to present, in the following section, the resulting design proposal of the EIP. We provide a rationale for the selection of the design and show an analysis of the mass and energy flows. Various other designs that differ in technical details have emerged from the present design method, and a change of boundary conditions will probably lead to a different design recommendation. The purpose of VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

9

4959

the present paper, however, is not to present the best possible specific design but rather to illustrate the capabilities and potential outcomes of the approach, as well as to provide insight into potential solutions. With the Mongstad EIP as a case study, based on the procedure in Figure 1, Goals and Opportunities at Existing Site demonstrates Steps 1-3. Step 4 is embodied in Elements and Structure of EIP. Modeling of Mongstad EIP describes the modeling and analysis of the members; a detailed description in the Supporting Information illustrates Steps 5-7. The Results and Discussion provides the results analysis of this study, including Step 8.

Mongstad Case Study Goals and Opportunities at Existing Site. The potential EIP presented is located in Mongstad in western Norway, ca. 60 km north of Bergen. The existing anchor tenant is an oil refinery, and the complex includes a gas processing facility, a port, and significant underground storage tanks. The refinery’s operator, Statoil, also operates the oil refinery in Kalundborg and is hence very familiar with the concept of industrial symbiosis. In the refinery, the principal products are petrol, diesel oil, jet fuel, and other light petroleum products. The heaviest oil components are used in part to produce petroleum coke, an important raw material for anode production in the aluminum industry. The refinery processes fairly light crude petroleum from the North Sea and produces transportation fuels for European and U.S. markets. It thus has the flexibility to adjust the composition of the fuel to the requirements of the markets. Environmental policy and the depletion of North Sea oil fields will clearly influence the future refining and fuel supply business. The Mongstad refinery will have to process heavier crude from further afield. Heavier feed and tighter specifications on sulfur and aromatics imply an increasing hydrogen demand. Statoil has for a long time intended to build a gas-fired combined heat and power plant (CHP), comprised of gas turbines to produce electricity for onsite and offsite usage and a heat-recovery steam generator to produce the highpressure (HP) steam required by the refinery. At the present time, there are no onshore, fossil fuel-fired power plants in Norway, and the construction of such a plant has been a political hot topic for the past 10 years. The oil companies are under pressure to electrify offshore oil platforms, and such an action would aggravate the electricity shortage on the Norwegian West coast. Statoil has argued that a power plant in Mongstad would supply the electricity for the offshore electrification and that the retirement of inefficient offshore gas turbines would more than offset the additional CO2 emissions from a gas-fired CHP. Statoil received a permit for the construction of the CHP in the fall of 2006; however, CO2 emissions must be controlled from 2014 onward through a postcombustion CO2 capture facility. Part of the CO2 may be utilized for an enhanced oil recovery in the Halten or Draugen field, and the rest will be injected into a saline aquifer. The largest and potentially most valuable waste stream from both the refinery and the future power plant is lowtemperature heat. Today, 330 MW of cooling water at 27 °C runs into the fjord, and further heating of the fjord will not be permitted by environmental authorities. Potential additional tenants, however, are difficult to identify as a result of the region having low unemployment and high labor costs, being remote from potential markets, and the Norwegian economy being mature enough so that there are few companies looking for sites to locate new industrial production (29). The special geographical situation and previous investigations exclude a large number of activities. For example, petrochemical and pharmaceutical options have already been investigated, and it was found that the large distance to the respective markets and the lack of qualified 4960

9

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008

specialists was a problem. Another option under investigation was greenhouses; however, unfavorable sunlight conditions would cause a substantial additional electricity demand for lighting as compared to other Norwegian locations. Processes connected to the aquaculture value chain, however, including fish farms, fodder pellet production, and processing of fish and fish wastes, seem promising (30). Wood pellet production is also an option, using excess low-pressure steam. Elements and Structure of EIP. Six main members are included in this EIP (Figure 1 in the Supporting Information): (i) refinery plant; (ii) coal gasification; (iii) combined heat and power plant; (iv) production of synthetic transportation fuels; (v) carbon capture and utilization; and (vi) aquaculture. In the following sections, we present a rationale for the new activities. Combined Heat and Power Plan with Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS). The rationale for building a natural gas (NG)-CHP lies in that it would allow for the retirement of existing boilers at the facility and meet the power needs of the region, including the electrification of off-shore oil platforms, which is required to reduce CO2 and NOx emissions. The energy demands of the refinery are 330 t/h (metric tonnes per hour) of HP steam for distillation and 70 to ∼90 MW of heat for preheating the crude. As the feedstock of CHP, NG is a more valuable and scarce resource and obtains a higher price. Given its lower carbon content of 0.2 kg CO2/kW h thermal (vs 0.33 kg CO2/kW h thermal for coal), it is probably wise to save it for applications where CCS is unlikely. There exist various technologies for a CHP with CCS (31–34), and a precombustion solution would offer more heat surplus for the refinery and flexibility with respect to the utilization of the hydrogen produced in the process. The gas turbine technology, however, has not yet been verified for hydrogen, given the high temperature of the combustion (32). Statoil and the Norwegian government have already agreed on building a gas-fired CHP with postcombustion technology. Thus, we chose to model the planned facility. An amine-based CCS system will be installed, but given the large demand for HP steam by the refinery, not much steam is available to run an additional steam turbine. An infrastructure for handling the CO2 will be put in place, making it interesting to colocate other facilities that utilize CCS. Coal Gasification and Transportation Fuel Production. Coal is an inexpensive and abundant fossil fuel but is also dirty and inconvenient. Given a growing global fuel demand and an increasing shortage of oil, there is a rising interest in producing transportation fuels from coal (35, 36). Coal gasification could produce syngas with varying H2/CO ratios with different technologies, but the relative environmental merit and economic viability of coal-based transportation fuels produced with CCS remains to be determined. In the overall project, we investigated the production of a number of different fuels, including hydrogen and biofuels. Since the distribution and on-board storage of hydrogen still faces numerous technical and commercial hurdles, we also investigated other energy carriers, such as methanol and DME, since they are regarded as possible replacements for petrol and offer an interesting illustration of our approach. The synfuel production train consists of coal gasification, CO2 capture, and fuel synthesis. The coal gasification also opens the possibility of producing hydrogen for the needs of the refinery or to utilize the syngas as a supplementary fuel in the gas turbine to improve or maintain the capacity of the CHP in case of a shortage of natural gas. Aquaculture. Land-based systems for aquaculture offer a good possibility for utilizing low-temperature waste heat. Elevated temperatures and the controlled conditions allow for a faster maturation of species such as lobster, turbot, and cod. The use of waste heat leads to a substantial reduction in both energy use and costs for such facilities, thus rendering

FIGURE 2. Structure of the planned EIP displaying the main material and energy flows. it potentially interesting. It is not yet clear as to whether such systems are commercially viable, and there are ecological concerns regarding the use of fish as feed in aquaculture and high-energy requirements connected to the fishing for feed (37). Intensive work is ongoing to produce other types of feed, including fishing lower on the food chain and adding plant-based materials to the fodder. Another attractive option is placing young lobsters from an aquaculture-based nursery into waters that used to have natural lobster populations and harvesting them there once they are mature. This should work fairly well since the Norwegian lobster is a stationary and territorial species, and in this case, the lobster would only be kept in culture in its first life stage (37). We also investigated a number of other options for utilizing the heat (30), mostly low-pressure (LP) steam in drying and processing, but these results are not included here. Modeling of Mongstad EIP. Models for the individual members were developed based on a chemical engineering approach. The model and its components are described in more detail in the Supporting Information, which also provides a description of the park members. Two CO2 absorption facilities, one for the flue gas from the CHP and one for the syngas from the coal gasification, both with a similar design, use diethanolamine as the solvent. Strict simulation shows that the heat required for capturing CO2 is 2.9 and 4 to ∼5 MJ per kg of CO2 in gas with a CO2 content of 18 and 4%, respectively, which served as a guide for selecting a suitable technology for capturing CO2 industrially. The detailed results are shown in the Supporting Information (SI2 and SI4). For coal gasification, it is important to have a suitable H2/CO ratio in the syngas for petrochemical industries such

as synfuel production than in a power plant. Ratios typically range from pure CO for the production of acetic acid to 2:1 for methanol, and 1.8-2 to 1 for a typical Fischer-Tropsch syngas in the Sasol process (38). In the present study, we have considered a Shell entrained gasifier where the feedstock is Surat coal (39), and methanol and DME were selected as the case products. The related parameters and flowsheet descriptions were taken from literature (26, 27, 39). The detailed simulations were shown in the Supporting Information. Modeling for the integrated CHP with the CO2 capture system included a sensitivity analysis to investigate as to how the CO2 capture influenced the net heat and electricity efficiencies in the CHP system, as well as evaluating the benefit of the supplemental firing of coal syngas to produce more heat.

Results and Discussion We established a preliminary structure of Mongstad EIP with an eight-step method shown in Figure 1. The utilized models allowed us to dimension the facilities, calculate the energy and mass balance, understand the exchange relationships among the members, analyze the flow of carbon and hydrogen, and evaluate the park in terms of important parameters, such as CO2 emission. Material and Energy Flow Analysis. A quantitative description of energy flow and material exchange is presented in Figure 2. The feedstock of the EIP is 1000-1200 t/h of crude oil for the refinery, 41.7 t/h of natural gas for the CHP, 92 t/h of coal for gasification, 2470 t/h of air for combustion and gasification, and 49 t/h of steam for coal gasification. The refinery delivers 15.4 t/h of refinery gas to the CHP. VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

9

4961

FIGURE 3. Schematic representation of the element balance and flow of (a) carbon and (b) hydrogen in the park. The outputs from the EIP are 1121 t/h of refinery products (including C3/C4, naphtha, gasoline, etc.), 31.6 t/h of methanol, 22.7 t/h of DME, 270.7 t/h of CO2 (99.1%) (which could be used for enhanced oil recovery (41)), 4.9 t/h of H2 produced inside the park to be used by the refinery itself or for the market, approximately 960 t/h of warm water (partly used in aquaculture), and 1925 t/h of purge gas (N2, O2, etc.). The energy balance for the EIP is tabulated in the Supporting Information. Air compression consumes 48% of the total produced electricity, air separation 7.6%, and the refinery 11.5%, so that only 21.9% could be sent to grid. For the heat cogenerated in the park, 52.3% of HP steam came from the CHP and 11.53% from the heat recovery of hot coal syngas. Some of the HP steam is used directly in the processes, but ∼28.5% of the total heat is used to produce LP steam by a steam turbine and then is sent to the CO2 capture process. Evidently, the steam produced in the coal gasification process is not enough for capturing CO2 in the coal syngas, so an additional 64 t/h of LP steam is provided by the CHP. CO2 capture carries a substantial efficiency penalty. In this facility, the total heat efficiency was reduced by 22.9% (LHV). Similar results are reported in the literature (34). A significant amount of energy will eventually be converted to waste heat. Because of the use of process heat in the new facilities, the amount of waste heat increases as compared to the situation today. Since the facility is not allowed to discharge more heat into the fjord, a cooling tower is required. Utilization of part of the waste heat (395 t/h of water, ∼11.6 MW) in aquaculture has been investigated (37), and it is considered that additional waste heat from new activities may be recovered with this method in the future. Although the coal gasification tends to be cleaner than direct combustion, inevitable ash and byproduct sulfur are produced in the process. Using biomass as a replacement would be a possible future choice. Carbon Flow Analysis. One of the advantages of the method proposed in this work is that it allows for an analysis of material flows of the most important elements through the overall system. In this case, we focused on hydrogen and carbon, two vital elements that are contained both in the raw materials and in the products. Figure 3a shows the carbon flow in the planned EIP. The balance of the refinery is not included: the carbon flow of 4962

9

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008

1000 t/h of crude oil through the refinery is much larger than the other flows, which are on the order of tens of tonnes per hour. The carbon for the nonrefinery portion of the park is derived from three sources: natural gas, coal, and refinery gas; the proportion of feed stock could be adjusted depending on the demand for the products as well as on the price and availability of the resources. In this case, 77.79% of the total carbon is converted to CO2, and 11.32 and 11.31% of carbon are stored in methanol and DME, respectively. If the amount of syngas required by the power plant is reduced, more methanol and DME can be synthesized, and more carbon can be stored in these products. Because of the tradeoff between the heat consumption and the CO2 recovery efficiency as well as CO2 purity, 6.4% of carbon is discharged from this system to the environment. Limiting CO2 emissions is one of the critical considerations for this park. In the refinery plant, the old boilers would be shut down, and the refinery gas would be utilized in the CHP. This would lead to a reduction in the CO2 emissions of at least 0.36 million t/year. According to this carbon flow diagram, 2.41 million t of CO2 would be captured annually in this EIP. Hydrogen Flow Analysis. Figure 3b shows the hydrogen flow through the park. The hydrogen proportions in four hydrogen-containing feedstocks were 34.5 wt % in coal (39), 33.87 wt % in natural gas, 12.85 wt % in refinery gas, and 18.8 wt % in steam used for coal gasification and water gas shift. Of the total amount of hydrogen in the coal syngas, 23.6 wt % is used for supplementary firing, and the remaining 77.66% is used for producing substitute fuels. An amount of 55.48% of the total hydrogen is utilized in the CHP, 23.8% for fuels, and 16.87% as H2 product. H2 from the park is sent to the Mongstad refinery to satisfy the tighter fuel specifications. The hydrogen production can be expanded if H2 is planned as a transportation fuel. The hydrogen balance inside the refinery plant, as well as the hydrogen flow of the utility systems (steam, cooling water, etc.), has not been considered. In conclusion, the proposed method made it possible to predict the quantitative energy and material flows of the members, their collaborations, and the scenario of the EIP as opposed to carrying out real-life tests. Such information could be used in financial evaluation and public planning, thus supporting the development of an EIP. One challenge

in such a model-centered approach is to find the appropriate level of scales, as each of the individual facilities can be described in terms of minutia of the specific physical and chemical properties, reaction mechanism, as well as the configurations of equipment. We have chosen here a middlescale level with significantly more detail than the conventional industrial ecology description of an EIP, which would be accepted by industries more easily and shorten the distance between EIP planning and its implementation in practice. In this work, we used a hierarchy analysis method to connect different pieces and subsequently to size the facilities according to existing partners. Eventually, the actual development of an EIP according to such plans depends on the profitability of all the involved operations, on agreement and trust among participants, and on legal and policy aspects. It has been suggested that these issues may addressed by social systems analysis (40), which may form a useful complement to the present analysis.

Acknowledgments This research was funded by Statoil Mongstad. We thank Signy Midtbø Riisnes, Frode Skaar, Geir Aspelund, Bjørn Kåre Viiken, and others at Statoil for fruitful discussions. We also thank Truls Gundersen for valuable feedback.

Supporting Information Available Preliminary structure of planned Mongstad EIP, modeling of gasification, CO2 absorption, methanol and DME synthesis, postcombustion CHP, as well as the scenario of energy balance for planned EIP. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

Literature Cited (1) Roberts, B. H. The application of industrial ecology principles and planning guidelines for the development of eco-industrial parks: An Australian case study. J. Cleaner Product. 2004, 12 (8-10), 997–1010. (2) Jacobsen, N. B. Industrial symbiosis in Kalundborg, DenmarksA quantitative assessment of economic and environmental aspects. J. Ind. Ecol. 2006, 10 (1-2), 239–255. (3) Ehrenfeld, J.; Gertler, N. Industrial Ecology in Practice: The Evolution of interdependence at Kalundborg. J. Ind. Ecol. 1997, 1 (1), 67–79. (4) Zhu, Q. H.; Cote, R. P. Integrating green supply chain management into an embryonic eco-industrial development: A case study of the Guitang Group. J. Cleaner Product. 2004, 12 (810), 1025–1035. (5) Zhu, Q. H.; Lowe, E. A.; Wei, Y. A.; Barnes, D. Industrial symbiosis in ChinasA case study of the Guitang Group. J. Ind. Ecol. 2007, 11 (1), 31–42. (6) Chertow, M. R. “Uncovering” industrial symbiosis. J. Ind. Ecol. 2007, 11 (1), 11–30. (7) Ayres, R. U. Industrial Metabolism: Closing the Materials Cycle. Clean Production Strategies Developing Preventive Environmental Management; Jackson, I. T., Ed.; Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, 1993. (8) Frosch, R. A.; Gallopoulos, N. E. Strategies for manufacturing. Sci. Am. 1989, 261 (3), 144–152. (9) Chertow, M. R. Industrial symbiosis: Literature and taxonomy. Ann. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000, 25, 313–337. (10) Gibbs, D.; Deutz, P. Implementing industrial ecology? Planning for eco-industrial parks in the USA. Geoforum 2005, 36 (4), 452– 464. (11) Heeres, R. R.; Vermeulen, W. J. V.; de Walle, F. B. Eco-industrial park initiatives in the USA and the Netherlands: First lessons. J. Cleaner Product. 2004, 12 (8-10), 985–995. (12) Mirata, M.; Emtairah, T. Industrial symbiosis networks and the contribution to environmental innovationsThe case of the Landskrona industrial symbiosis program. J. Cleaner Product. 2005, 13 (10-11), 993–1002. (13) van Beers, D.; Corder, G.; Bossilkov, A.; van Berkel, R. Industrial symbiosis in the Australian minerals industrysThe cases of Kwinana and Gladstone. J. Ind. Ecol. 2007, 11 (1), 55–72. (14) Allen, D. T.; Rosselot, K. S. Pollution Prevention for Chemical Processes; Wiley: New York, 1997; p XVIII.

(15) Lowe, E. A.; Moran, S. R.; Holmes, D. B. Fieldbook for the Development of Eco-Industrial Parks: Final Report; Research Triangle Institute: Research Triangle Park, NC, 1996. (16) Casavant, T. E.; Cote, R. P. Using chemical process simulation to design industrial ecosystems. J. Cleaner Product. 2004, 12 (8-10), 901–908. (17) Singh, A.; Lou, H. H. Hierarchical pareto optimization for the sustainable development of industrial ecosystems. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006, 45 (9), 3265–3279. (18) Lowe, E. A. Eco-Industrial Park Handbook for Asian Developing Countries; October 3, 2001; Indigo Development: Oakland. (19) Chertow, M. R.; Lombardi, D. R. Quantifying economic and environmental benefits of co-located firms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39 (17), 6535–6541. (20) Hau, J. L.; Bakshi, B. R. Expanding exergy analysis to account for ecosystem products and services. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38 (13), 3768–3777. (21) Hau, J. L.; Bakshi, B. R. Promise and problems of emergy analysis. Ecol. Model. 2004, 178 (1-2), 215–225. (22) Wang, L. M.; Ni, W. D.; Li, Z. Emergy evaluation of combined heat and power plant eco-industrial park (CHP plant EIP). Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2006, 48 (1), 56–70. (23) Wang, L. M.; Zhang, J. T.; Ni, W. D. Emergy evaluation of ecoindustrial park with power plant. Ecol. Model. 2005, 189 (1-2), 233–240. (24) Chiesa, P.; Lozza, G. CO2 emission abatement in IGCC power plants by semiclosed cycles: Part B. With air-blown combustion and CO2 physical absorption. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 1999, 121 (4), 642–648. (25) Chiesa, P.; Lozza, G. CO2 emission abatement in IGCC power plants by semiclosed cycles: Part A. With oxygen-blown combustion. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 1999, 121 (4), 635–641. (26) Ballman, S. H.; Gaddy, J. L. Optimization of methanol process by flowsheet simulation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1977, 16 (3), 337–341. (27) Chang, T.; Rousseau, R. W.; Kilpatrick, P. K. Methanol synthesis reactionss Calculations of equilibrium conversions using equations of state. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1986, 25 (2), 477–481. (28) Freguia, S.; Rochelle, G. T. Modeling of CO2 capture by aqueous monoethanolamine. AIChE J. 2003, 49 (7), 1676–1686. (29) Rusten, G. ; Eldegard., I. Mongstadklyngen: Del 1: Industrielle og Regionale Utfordringer og Muligheter Med Utgangspunkt I Det Eksisterende Næringsliv. Samfunnssog Næringslivsforskning. In 27/06; SNF: Bergen, 2006; p 83s. (30) Myrvang, M. ; Strømman, A. H.; Jonassen, O. Mongstad Pilot: Utilization of Excess Refinery Heat in Dehydration Processes; 1/2007; Industrial Ecology Program, NTNU: Trondheim, Norway, 2007. (31) Consonni, S.; Vigano, F. Decarbonized hydrogen and electricity from natural gas. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2005, 30 (7), 701–718. (32) Bolland, O.; Undrum, H. A novel methodology for comparing CO2 capture options for natural gas-fired combined cycle plants. Adv. Environ. Res. 2003, 7 (4), 901–911. (33) Gambini, M.; Vellini, M. Comparative analysis of H2/O2 cycle power plants based on different hydrogen production systems from fossil fuels. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2005, 30 (6), 593–604. (34) IPCC. Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage; Cambridge University Press: New York, 2005. (35) Williams, R. H.; Larson, E. D.; Jin, H. Synthetic Fuels in a World with High Oil and Carbon Prices; NTNU: Trondheim, Norway, 2006. (36) Celik, F.; Larson, E. D.; Williams, R. H. Transportation Fuel from Coal with Low CO2 Emissions. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Sept 5-9, 2004. (37) Myrvang, M. Life Cycle Assessment of a Marine Farm Co-Located with a Refinery. M.S. Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2006. (38) Van Dyk, J. C.; Keyser, M. J.; Coertzen, A. Syngas production from South African coal sources using Sasol-Lurgi gasifiers. Int. J. Coal Geol. 2006, 65 (3-4), 243–253. (39) Ing, W. H. Gasifier to Methanol Plant; The University of Queensland: Queensland, Australia, 2004; http://www.cheque.uq.edu.au/ugrad. (40) Hoffman, A. J. Linking social systems analysis to the industrial ecology framework. Org. Environ. 2003, 16 (1), 12. (41) Hertwich, E. G.; Aaberg, M.; Singh, B.; Stromman, A. H. Lifecycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture for enhanced oil recovery. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 2008, 16, in press.

ES071138L

VOL. 42, NO. 13, 2008 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

9

4963