Subscribe in a reader
Log in |
EnvironmentalManager.org

Recent posts in The EM as an Industrial Ecologist [1]

RIT Symposium Conclusions

Environmental managers are evolving to become sustainability managers.

Their analytic perspective needs to move from a risk/hazard mentality to resilience/sustainability mentality.

Current Strategies for Resilience
Business
• Contingency Planning
• Supply Chain Diversity
• Supply Chain Ownership
Environmental
• Source Reduction
• Personal Protection
• Remediation

What is needed is capability to change, adapt, and be flexible to market place, regulatory, and environmental conditions.

We need to move from our current linear system of resource use and production to a network that mimics a natural ecosystem.

 “Industrial symbiosis” is a network in which regional companies can use each other’s material and energy wastes and share resources to achieve higher efficiencies in resource use.

 An “eco-industrial park” is a similar but perhaps broader network concept focusing more on benefiting the communities.

Both build resiliency because the components each become part of the interdependent network and recognize the robustness of maintaining the relationships.

Environmental managers can benefit from the strategy in a variety of ways and it also provides opportunities to simultaneously benefit the business end of the operation.

You can view the symposium powerpoint HERE.

No Comments »


Topic for Discussion

Our moderator for this topic has indicated his preference for a discussion relating to the difference between “resiliency” in engineering and ecosystems, so I think it would be good to work around this. Considering Greg’s questions:
 - How does industrial ecology fit with the values of environmental management? 
 - What are the changing elements related to industrial ecology that the environmental
      manager needs to prepare for? and
 - Where should we apply the industrial ecology disciplines to maximize results?
. . . and, Frances comment that “The articles spoke a lot about the difficulty of emulating natural systems due to their multiple points of equilibrium and the fact that this multiplicity increases the resilience of the system. Engineered systems on the other hand focus on one point of equilibrium.” and question:
- Can our brains or computers even handle the complexity of designing around multiple
equilibrium?
It seems that a great topic for discussion would be: “What should the environmental manager know about the differences between ecological and engineering resiliencies and how can s/he put this knowledge to use in doing their jobs and guiding the organizations which they serve?”

No Comments »


Vital Perspectives for Environmental Managers

Tom Seager, has just provided this important, hopeful, and encouraging discussion that expands and enriches this topic. Thanks, Tom.

One of the difficulties in environmental management is that the EM is often perceived within the organization as an overhead cost to be minimized, rather than a valuable resource to be maximized. Corporate decision makers engage EM only through the prism of risk. That could be risk of jail, risk of fines, or risk of loss of brand image. So the idea of risk in some organizations is sufficiently broad for EM to have a voice, but rarely is EM part of the overall strategy of the company.

The concept of sustainability is challenging the traditional role of EM as a service unit within a typical corporation. Corporate approaches to sustainability are beginning to recognize the other side of the risk coin, which is opportunity.

Just as sustainability challenges and broadens our understanding of environment, resilience challenges and broadens our understanding of risk. Resiliency is about risks that you can not anticipate, can’t quantify and probably aren’t prepared for. A resilient organization or business model must be adaptive, flexible and responsive. It must also tolerate some redundancy, some spare capacity. Strategies for resilience can be antithetical to strategies for optimization. So, in a cost minimization mentality, resilience is typically sacrificed as a result of a narrowing of perspective. The result can be something like Polaroid, which failed to adapt to a digital marketplace despite their reputation has a high tech company. Or it could be Kodak, which developed an on-line picture sharing business model for digital photography that completely missed the idea of social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace, which are primarily about sharing and adding content to pictures. The idea of risk in design might ask the question “what are the odds that it will break.” By contrast, the idea of resilience might ask “How will it work when it is broken?”

What is the role of the EM in business strategy, then? I argue that EM can be especially valuable to corporate strategists if EMs can move their own understanding of the organizational relationship to the environment -> sustainability transition from the perspective of a risk -> resilience transition.

So, EMs have to be among the first in their organizations to understand both sustainability and resilience and they have to invest themselves in teaching it to people within.

1 Comment »


Discussion Objectives and Intended Outcomes

In an attempt to firm up specific discussion objectives and intended outcomes for this discussion topic.  I have listed topic questions for the

participants to review and comment on. Please feel free to add and inquire to any of these topic questions.

Importance of Industrial Ecology to the Environmental Manager

1. What are the values that are at the forefront of the environmental management?

2. How does industrial ecology fit with the values of environmental management?

3. What are the changing elements related to industrial ecology that the environmental manager needs to prepare for?

Application of Industrial Ecology Principles 

1. What important successes shoulf we build upon and how?

2. Where should we apply the industrial ecology disciplines to maximize results?

3. What resistance or risks should we prepare for?  

Define and post the related objectives or intended outcomes for the discussion.

4 Comments »


Industrial Ecology: From Theory To Practice

Industrial Ecology: From theory To Practice by Steven W. Peck

The author of this article describes the concept of “Dematerializing the Economy” and a path of transformation from Industrial Infrastructure to Eco Industrial Infrastructure. The point where using pollution prevention and sustainable technologies is preferred to remediation and abatement technologies. Several examples of developing industrial ecosystems and industrial ecology practices are given.

http://www.newcity.ca/Pages/industrial_ecology.html

1 Comment »


Resilience, Adaptability, and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems

I found this article to be relevant to our discussion.

Copyright © 2004 by the author(s). Published here under licence by The Resilience Alliance. Walker, B., C. S. Holling, S. R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society 9(2): 5. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5 Perspective

Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social–ecological Systems

Brian Walker1, C. S. Holling, Stephen R. Carpenter2, and Ann Kinzig3

ABSTRACT. The concept of resilience has evolved considerably since Holling’s (1973) seminal paper. Different interpretations of what is meant by resilience, however, cause confusion. Resilience of a system needs to be considered in terms of the attributes that govern the system’s dynamics. Three related attributes of social–ecological systems (SESs) determine their future trajectories: resilience, adaptability, and transformability. Resilience (the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks) has four components—latitude, resistance, precariousness, and panarchy—most readily portrayed using the metaphor of a stability landscape. Adaptability is the capacity of actors in the system to influence resilience (in a SES, essentially to manage it). There are four general ways in which this can be done, corresponding to the four aspects of resilience. Transformability is the capacity to create a fundamentally new system when ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable.

The implications of this interpretation of SES dynamics for sustainability science include changing the focus from seeking optimal states and the determinants of maximum sustainable yield (the MSY paradigm), to resilience analysis, adaptive resource management, and adaptive governance.

 See attached file for full article…

 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/

No Comments »


Concepts and Approaches – Jelinski

Jelinski, L. W.; Gradel, T. E.; Laudise, R. A.; McCall, D. W.; and Patel, C. K. L. Industrial ecology: Concepts and approaches. Introduction to colloquium, entitled, “Industrial Ecology”, National Academy of Sciences, May 1991.  

This was an introduction to a Colloquium on the subject of Industrial Ecology (attached) and the need to educate people to become leaders in the field. This is a very good paper, with excellent refrences.

ABSTRACT – Industrial ecology is a new approach to the industrial design of products and processes and the implementation of sustainable manufacturing strategies. It is a concept in which an industrial system is viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems but in concert with them. Industrial ecology seeks to optimize the total materials cycle from virgn material to finished material, to component, to product, to waste product, and to ultimate disposal. To better characterize the topic, the National Academy of Sciences convened a colloquium from which were derived a number of salient contributions. This paper sets the stage for the contributions that follow and discusses how each fits into the framework of industrial ecology.

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/89/3/793

No Comments »


Definitions of Industrial Ecology

I have mentioned this paper in a previous post, but I believe it is a great resource for the discussion topic.

Here are some selected definitions of Industrial Ecology, which should be able to give someone a good idea of what this topic is all about. The main paper describes the background of industrial ecology, defines its main attributes, and puts it in the perspectives of an academic discipline and a field of ecology. Covers goals, key concepts, sustainable development, system tools (life cycle design, life cycle assessment, and design for environment), and future needs. It also lists a summary of definitions found from a variety of books and publications.  

Garner, Andy and Keoleian, Gregory. “Industrial Ecology: An Introduction” National Pollution Prevention Center for Higher Education. November, 1995. University of Michigan, Center for Sustainable Systems. April 4th, 2008. http://www.umich.edu/~nppcpub/resources/compendia/INDEpdfs/INDEintro.pdf

———————————————————————————

The idea of an industrial ecology is based upon a straightforward analogy with natural ecological systems. In nature an ecological system operates through a web of connections in which organisms live and consume each other and each other’s waste. The system has evolved so that the characteristic of communities of living organisms seems to be that nothing that contains available energy or useful material will be lost. There will evolve some organism that will manage to make its living by dealing with any waste product that provides available energy or usable material. Ecologists talk of a food web: an interconnection of uses of both organisms and their wastes. In the industrial context we may think of this as being use of products and waste products. The system structure of a natural ecology and the structure of an industrial system, or an economic system, are extremely similar.

— Robert A. Frosch, “Industrial Ecology: Philosophical Introduction,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 89 (February1992): 800–803.  

Somewhat teleologically, “industrial ecology” may be defined as the means by which a state of sustainable development is approached and maintained. It consists of a systems view of human economic activity and its interrelationship with fundamental biological, chemical, and physical systems with the goal of establishing and maintaining the human species at levels that can be sustained indefinitely, given continued economic, cultural, and technological evolution.

— Braden Allenby, “Achieving Sustainable Development Through Industrial Ecology,” International Environmental Affairs 4, no.1 (1992).  

Industrial Ecology is a new approach to the industrial design of products and processes and the implementation of sustainable manufacturing strategies. It is concept in which an industrial system is viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems but in concert with them. Industrial ecology seeks to optimize the total materials cycle from virgin material to finished material to component, to product, to waste products, and to ultimate disposal. . . . Characteristics are:(1) proactive not reactive, (2) designed in not added on,(3) flexible not rigid, and (4) encompassing not insular.

— L.W. Jelinski, T. E. Graedel, R. A. Laudise, D. W.McCall, and C. Kumar N. Patel, “Industrial Ecology: Concepts and Approaches,” Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, USA 89 (February 1992).  

The idea of an industrial ecology is based upon a straightforward analogy with natural ecological systems. In nature an ecological system operates through a web of connections in which organisms live and consume each other and each other’s waste. The system has evolved so that the characteristic of communities of living organisms seems to be that nothing that contains available energy or useful material will be lost. There will evolve some organism that will manage to make its living by dealing with any waste product that provides available energy or usable material. Ecologists talk of a food web: an interconnection of uses of both organisms and their wastes. In the industrial context we may think of this as being use of products and waste products. The system structure of a natural ecology and the structure of an industrial system, or an economic system, are extremely similar.

— Robert A. Frosch, “Industrial Ecology: Philosophical Introduction,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 89 (February1992): 800–803.  

Somewhat teleologically, “industrial ecology” may be defined as the means by which a state of sustainable development is approached and maintained. It consists of a systems view of human economic activity and its interrelationship with fundamental biological, chemical, and physical systems with the goal of establishing and maintaining the human species at levels that can be sustained indefinitely, given continued economic, cultural, and technological evolution.

— Braden Allenby, “Achieving Sustainable Development Through Industrial Ecology,” International Environmental Affairs 4, no.1 (1992).  

Industrial Ecology is a new approach to the industrial design of products and processes and the implementation of sustainable manufacturing strategies. It is a concept in which an industrial system is viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems but in concert with them. Industrial ecology seeks to optimize the total materials cycle from virgin material to finished material to component, to product, to waste products, and to ultimate disposal. . . . Characteristics are:(1) proactive not reactive, (2) designed in not added on,(3) flexible not rigid, and (4) encompassing not insular.

— L.W. Jelinski, T. E. Graedel, R. A. Laudise, D. W.McCall, and C. Kumar N. Patel, “Industrial Ecology: Concepts and Approaches,” Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, USA 89 (February 1992). 

Industrial ecology is the means by which humanity can deliberately and rationally approach and maintain a desirable carrying capacity, given continued economic, cultural, and technological evolution. The concept requires that an industrial system be viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems, but in concert with them. It is a systems view in which one seeks to optimize the total materials cycle from virgin material, to finished material, to component, to product, to waste product, and to ultimate disposal. Factors to be optimized include resources, energy, and capital.

—Braden Allenby and Thomas E. Graedel,Industrial Ecology (New York: Prentice Hall,1993; pre-publication edition).  

Industrial ecology provides for the first time a large scale, integrated management tool that designs industrial infrastructures “as if they were a series of interlocking, artificial ecosystems interfacing with the natural global ecosystem.” For the first time, industry is going beyond life-cycle analysis methodology and applying the concept of an ecosystem to the whole of an industrial operation, linking the “metabolism” of one company with that of another.

— Paul Hawken, The Ecology of Commerce(New York: HarperBusiness, 1993).

No Comments »


Geoengineering

Braden Allenby, worked at AT&T at the time, is kind of the “father” of industrial ecology. He and T.E. Graedel wrote the first textbook on the topic. Over time though, Allenby’s ideas of what an environmental manager should do evolved into a concept that moved beyond management systems or pollution prevention technologies and almost into the realm of science fiction– Earth Systems Engineering and Management. The idea was when there was no remaining option, we should be working to engineer the planet to protect the environment. Since humans already are affecting natural systems, we might as well be working to affect them in a “good” way …So instead of worrying about cutting the amount of carbon dioxide we emit we should be worrying about ways to get our oceans to absorb more CO2 (things like that).

I’m including an article that Allenby wrote on ESEM: http://www.eoearth.org/article/Earth_systems_engineering_and_management#

And some newspaper articles from the Wall Street Journal: http://ezproxy.rit.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.rit.edu/pqdweb?did=1292814331&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=3589&RQT=309&VName=PQD

And from the Seattle Post: http://ezproxy.rit.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.rit.edu/pqdweb?did=1360064051&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=3589&RQT=309&VName=PQD

What are your opinions on whether or how geoengineering fits in with Hollins arguments for resilience? Does it fit with this new paradigm or is it still too close to the traditional engineering paradigm of resilience?

4 Comments »


Merger of Environmental and Ecological Sciences

Hello, my name is Neil Miller and I would like to contribute to this EM discussion topic and will be attending the Environmental Management Workshop. I would like to move forward in the discussion and talk about the two paradigms that are associated between the merger of both the environmental and ecological sciences.  

“With the beginning of interdisciplinary efforts between the two fields, some of the fundamental differences between them are generating conflicts caused more by misunderstanding of basic concepts than by any difference in social purposes or methods. Those differences are most vivid in that part of ecology called ecosystem science, for it is there that it is obvious that both the biota and the physical environment interact such that not only does the environment shape the biota but the biota transforms the environment.” 

This can be a very involved discussion because of the immense amount of project or work specific situations. To get through the management portion of this career there has to be a fundamental understanding of how the environment works, ecology, and a strong understanding of new methods for planning solutions or creating alternate designs. 

For example if we look at the article by C.S. Holling “Engineering Resilience versus Ecological Resilience” : There are examples of managed ecosystems that work as efficiently as the original, sustainable, and also there are ones that have a gradual lose functional diversity. With the overwhelming amount of inter-connecting biological interactions between the biological and plant life, it can be impossible to, accurately, forecast the future conditions of an improvement to the environment.  As I understand, there is no universally accepted definition of an Industrial Ecologist. The article I have linked below has a very nice list of attributes that are tied to the field, located on page 4. As a suggestion, I would like to start a discussion, with an end goal of establishing a defining that we all agree on. Since I am new to the concepts, I believe that it will come together as we discuss other topics and that there might not be a need for separate discussions. Input from professionals in the field could help out “beginners”, like myself, and others to learn about the field and the difficulties associated with the multi-disciplinary approach.   

Also, here is a link for supplemental information on the relation of Life-Cycle Analysis, which I am also interested in, to support an Industrial Ecologist (pg. 12-26), this could lead to some very good discussions in the future.

http://www.umich.edu/~nppcpub/resources/compendia/INDEpdfs/INDEintro.pdf

2 Comments »