89
waste generation is minimized and the effl uents from one process serve as the raw
material for another” (Frosch and Gallopoulos 1989 ). The notion of an industrial
ecosystem has played an especially large ideation role in industrial symbiosis. This
construct not only denotes a space where industrial symbiosis can occur but also
does so through the introduction of a compelling tie back to natural systems. Indeed,
we now know that the authors had proposed an alternative title that the editors
rejected, but may have offered even more prominence to what would become industrial ecology ideas. This title was “Manufacturing: The Industrial Ecosystem View.”
As industrial ecology developed, industrial symbiosis became known as a subfi eld of industrial ecology, distinct from other branches of the new fi eld in that it
straddles both theory and practice. Not only were Frosch and Gallopoulos employed
by one of the largest automobile companies in the world, but the date of their article,
1989, is the convergent year that the industrial cluster in the City of Kalundborg ,
Denmark, which had been developing since the 1960s, began to come into much
view given the extensive network of cooperating industrial operations there.
Industrial ecology lore cites 1989 as the year the label “industrial symbiosis” was
applied to Kalundborg by Inge Christensen, a pharmacist, and her husband,
Valdemar Christensen, the Kalundborg power plant manager, to describe what was
happening in the Kalundborg industrial ecosystem (Hewes and Lyons 2008 ). The
inviting imagery of “the effl uents from one process” serving “as the raw material for
another” and the recognition of the extensive and interconnected resource sharing
network of Kalundborg have proven so powerful for reimagining sustainable industrial development that many people, even today, mistake industrial symbiosis as
what defi nes all of industrial ecology.
In Kalundborg , 1972 is regarded as the year of the fi rst real interfi rm symbiosis
which, it should be noted, also brought a new enterprise to town. The gypsum board
company was established in Kalundborg, in part because of the availability of excess
butane from the nearby oil refi nery. The butane transaction lasted nearly 30 years,
and while it is now inactive, the gypsum board company remains in place under its
third set of owners. Having offi cially celebrated 40 years with a newly published
booklet (Kalundborg Symbiosis 2014 ), there is much to look back upon, and it is
hard not to be impressed with the way this icon has continued to evolve and change,
even with the generational passage to new management (Ehrenfeld and Chertow
2002 ; Ehrenfeld and Gertler 1997 ; Gertler 1995 ; Jacobsen 2006 ; Kalundborg
Symbiosis 2014 ). In addition to substantial participation from the long-term partners, several new organizations have joined the symbiosis with 33 identifi ed
instances of interfi rm resource sharing (Fig. 5.1 ).
There were foundational changes over the years in Kalundborg that could have
shaken the entire system if it were fragile. Instead, this industrial ecosystem has
continuously weathered many varieties of disturbance, from changes in the fuel
type at the power plant to signifi cant ownership and organizational changes within
the companies such as the doubling in size of the oil refi nery and the splitting up of
the pharmaceutical operation into two separate companies. Even the offi cial City of
Kalundborg expanded from 20,000 to 50,000 residents during this period based on
reorganization of municipal boundaries. While some have been concerned about
5 Scholarship and Practice in Industrial Symbiosis: 1989–2014
waste generation is minimized and the effl uents from one process serve as the raw
material for another” (Frosch and Gallopoulos 1989 ). The notion of an industrial
ecosystem has played an especially large ideation role in industrial symbiosis. This
construct not only denotes a space where industrial symbiosis can occur but also
does so through the introduction of a compelling tie back to natural systems. Indeed,
we now know that the authors had proposed an alternative title that the editors
rejected, but may have offered even more prominence to what would become industrial ecology ideas. This title was “Manufacturing: The Industrial Ecosystem View.”
As industrial ecology developed, industrial symbiosis became known as a subfi eld of industrial ecology, distinct from other branches of the new fi eld in that it
straddles both theory and practice. Not only were Frosch and Gallopoulos employed
by one of the largest automobile companies in the world, but the date of their article,
1989, is the convergent year that the industrial cluster in the City of Kalundborg ,
Denmark, which had been developing since the 1960s, began to come into much
view given the extensive network of cooperating industrial operations there.
Industrial ecology lore cites 1989 as the year the label “industrial symbiosis” was
applied to Kalundborg by Inge Christensen, a pharmacist, and her husband,
Valdemar Christensen, the Kalundborg power plant manager, to describe what was
happening in the Kalundborg industrial ecosystem (Hewes and Lyons 2008 ). The
inviting imagery of “the effl uents from one process” serving “as the raw material for
another” and the recognition of the extensive and interconnected resource sharing
network of Kalundborg have proven so powerful for reimagining sustainable industrial development that many people, even today, mistake industrial symbiosis as
what defi nes all of industrial ecology.
In Kalundborg , 1972 is regarded as the year of the fi rst real interfi rm symbiosis
which, it should be noted, also brought a new enterprise to town. The gypsum board
company was established in Kalundborg, in part because of the availability of excess
butane from the nearby oil refi nery. The butane transaction lasted nearly 30 years,
and while it is now inactive, the gypsum board company remains in place under its
third set of owners. Having offi cially celebrated 40 years with a newly published
booklet (Kalundborg Symbiosis 2014 ), there is much to look back upon, and it is
hard not to be impressed with the way this icon has continued to evolve and change,
even with the generational passage to new management (Ehrenfeld and Chertow
2002 ; Ehrenfeld and Gertler 1997 ; Gertler 1995 ; Jacobsen 2006 ; Kalundborg
Symbiosis 2014 ). In addition to substantial participation from the long-term partners, several new organizations have joined the symbiosis with 33 identifi ed
instances of interfi rm resource sharing (Fig. 5.1 ).
There were foundational changes over the years in Kalundborg that could have
shaken the entire system if it were fragile. Instead, this industrial ecosystem has
continuously weathered many varieties of disturbance, from changes in the fuel
type at the power plant to signifi cant ownership and organizational changes within
the companies such as the doubling in size of the oil refi nery and the splitting up of
the pharmaceutical operation into two separate companies. Even the offi cial City of
Kalundborg expanded from 20,000 to 50,000 residents during this period based on
reorganization of municipal boundaries. While some have been concerned about
5 Scholarship and Practice in Industrial Symbiosis: 1989–2014