See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268440220

Exergy analysis of the industrial symbiosis model in Kalundborg

Article

CITATIONS READS
3 676

3 authors, including:

Alicia Valero Sergio Usón

CIRCE Institute - Universidad de Zaragoza University of Zaragoza
96 PUBLICATIONS   570 CITATIONS    54 PUBLICATIONS   536 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pilot experience on flipped classroom in Thermal Engineering View project

MEDEAS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alicia Valero on 19 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 PROCEEDINGS OF ECOS 2012 - THE 25TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
EFFICIENCY, COST, OPTIMIZATION, SIMULATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ENERGY SYSTEMS
JUNE 26-29, 2012, PERUGIA, ITALY

Exergy analysis of the industrial symbiosis

model in Kalundborg
Alicia Valero, Sergio Usón and Jorge Costa
CIRCE, Research Centre for Energy Resources and Consumption, University of Zaragoza,
Zaragoza, Spain, email: aliciavd@unizar.es

Abstract
In this paper, the first exergy analysis of the main energy and material flows interchanged in the ecoindustrial
park of Kalundborg is carried out. Being the Asnaes power plant the “heart of the industrial symbiosis”, the
main flows coming in and out of it are considered. These are the following: waste gas from Statoil refinery
used by Asnaes, steam from Asnaes used by Statoil and the pharmaceutical company Novo group, district
heating steam from Asnaes used in the municipality of Kalundborg, hot water from Asnaes used for a fishing
farm, ashes from Asnaes used by Portland cement and gypsum from the desulphurization process of
Asnaes for the gypsum board company Gyproc.
The exergy analysis allows a physical and hence rigorous characterization of each of the interchanged flows
studied. Furthermore, it constitutes the first step for a later exergy input-output analysis based on
Thermoeconomics.

Keywords:
Exergy, Material Flow Analysis, Eco-industrial park, Industrial Symbiosis, Kalundborg.

1. Introduction
Natural ecosystems do not produce waste. In a cyclic way, wastes produced by a living system are
used as feedstock for another one. All resources are used in an optimal and sustainable way, with
the sun as ultimate energy source. Those are the premises of Industrial Ecology: to imitate Nature
for reducing the resources inputs, wastes and emissions of the industry, by closing the energy and
material’s cycle. This innovative alternative to the traditional industrial development emerged at the
end of the 20th century.
Industrial ecology is materialized in the form of Eco-industrial parks. The main objective of the
latter is that the companies situated in the park obtain important economic savings and minimize
environmental pollution by interchanging resources and wastes. The result is what is called
“industrial symbiosis”. The latter refers to a network of exchange of wastes and by-products among
different industries. For that purpose, it is imperative to overcome the traditional concept of
industrial park where the establishment of industries does not follow any organizational criterion
and all facilities follow linear input-output schemes. An eco-industrial park needs to be diversified,
so that the different industries are able to use as feedstock, the wastes of other neighboring
companies. This evolution requires cooperation and a long-term planning between companies.
The Industrial Symbiosis model of Kalundborg [1] is probably the best known eco-industrial park
in the world. It is based essentially in physically connecting neighbouring companies so as to
interchange water, materials (in the form of wastes as feedstocks) and energy, resulting in the
minimization of production costs and waste treatment. The Kalundborg park was created in a
natural and gradual way, as a result of a common will of optimizing the use of resources. Since its
first establishment in the sixties, this park has saved yearly many tons of raw-materials, cubic
meters of water and gigajoules of energy. Kalundborg constitutes nowadays the best model of eco-
industrial park to follow.

218-1
Unfortunately, the replication of Kalundborg elsewhere is not an easy task. There are not few
barriers to overcome. Facilities need to be close in proximity except for high-value by-products.
Generally, a big plant such as a power plant or a refinery should be present, constituting the “heart”
of the eco-industrial park. For instance, the presence of a power plant acting in cogeneration can
help to reduce the total energy consumption. Security of supply is also a key issue. It is important to
achieve sufficient scale in by-products. Moreover, new technologies are usually required for their
valorization. Additionally, the law requires that by-products be matched to specific mandatory
protocols through a very extensive set of rules that leaves little room for innovation. However,
regulatory actions can also encourage industrial symbiosis.
But probably, the most important barrier to overcome is the willingness of the different companies
to collaborate. It is not infrequent to bump into confidential issues. Although private actors need not
be the initiators, they clearly must be committed to the implementation of industrial symbiosis.
Companies will do what is in their economic interest. If they can eliminate waste in a cost-effective
manner, they will do so. That is the reason why a good design of the network and a rigorous savings
assessment is imperative.
In this aspect, the exergy analysis and particularly Thermoeconomics, can constitute very useful
tools for assessing objectively the real costs appearing in the park, independently of their economic
value. The idea that exergy can help quantifying the benefits of industrial ecology was stated by a
number of authors [2-7]. The further use of Thermoeconomics in the cost assessment was also
stated in [8].
This paper makes the first exergy assessment of the main energy flows interchanged in Kalundborg.
It should serve as the starting point for the thermoeconomic cost evaluation described in the second
part of this paper1. The aim is to show over a real case study, the usefulness of the exergy and
thermoeconomic cost assessment.
As stated before, the industrial symbiosis model of Kalundborg appeared in a rather spontaneous
way favoured by resources scarcity problems but also by the mutual trust among the leaders of the
facilities in the network. It has worked so well, that no complicated planning has been required
during its transformation. This is the reason why very little detailed information of the exchanged
fluxes is available. The information found in the literature is qualitative rather than quantitative.
Hence, different assumptions need to be carried out in our particular model.

2. Description of the Park

Currently the Kalundborg Industrial Symbiosis model is made up mainly of five facilities: Asnaes
DONG Energy (power plant), Statoil (refinery), Gyproc (plasterboard manufacturer), Novo Group
(pharmaceutical and biotechnology company) and the municipality of Kalundborg. Additionally,
the park includes another ten industrial facilities.
The industrial symbiosis started when Gyproc decided to install its plasterboard factory in
Kalundborg2, in order to reduce their production costs through the exploitation of surplus gas that
Statoil was burning unprofitably. From this moment on, neighboring companies started to see the
economic and environmental benefits of such exchanges.
Due to underground water shortages, Asnaes changed its water supply system through a
combination of water from Lake Tisso with cooling water and wastewater from the Statoil refinery

1
Sergio Usón, Antonio Valero, César Torres and Alicia Valero. Thermoeconomic Fuel Impact Approach for Assessing
Resources Savings in Industrial Symbiosis. Application to Kalundborg Eco-Industrial Park. Paper accepted for
publication at the ECOS 2012 conference. June 26-29 (2012), Perugia, Italy.
2
Source: www.symbiosis.dk
218-2
in 1976. Additionally, Asnaes began to reuse its own wastewater, avoiding a 100% use of
underground water.
The municipality of Kalundborg profits from the energy surplus of the power plant. The latter
provides energy for the district heating system which replaces around 3,500 individual heating
systems. This has allowed reducing by 80% the waste energy of the power plant, producing a cost-
effective energy alternative to the community.
Asnaes also distributes several thousand tons of steam to Statoil and Novo Nordisk. This industry
also built a fish farm in which water is heated with waste energy.
The ashes and the gypsum produced in the desulphurization process in the power plant are reused to
make cement by Aalborg Portland and for plasterboards by Gyproc, respectively. Finally, Asnaes
receives surplus gas from the refinery, reducing its coal consumption and hence lowering the
emissions of greenhouse gases.
On the other hand, the insulin and enzymes manufacturer Novo Nordisk recovers the sludge rich in
phosphorous and nitrogen from the fermentation process and converts it into fertilizers, which are
distributed free of charge to local farmers.
It should be stated that each of the interchanged byproducts have been subjected to a separate and
confidential negotiation, giving rise to different transaction options: trade, barter, get a good price in
exchange of constructing the transport infrastructure, etc. Since the facilities are close to one
another, the byproduct prices can be traded at convenient low prices.

Fig.1 shows in a schematic way the main flows exchanged in the park currently found.

Wastewater (19) Sludge

(28) Lake RGS 90
wheat Tisso KALUNDBORG treatment
straw
(24) Alcoholic residues
(17) Waste water

INBICON (1) (22) Water

Surface (3) (7) Purification of
water Surface Thermal water
(30) water energy
Pellets (27) Steam (10) Waste water

(29)
Bioethanol
(25) Seawater
(9) Steam (8) Steam

STATOIL (11) Refrigeration water ASNAES (6) Heat water NOVO GROUP
(15) Gas

(13) (14)
Ammonium tiosulphate Waste water
FISH FARM
Reuse basin (18) Water
(5) (20) (12) (4)
FERTILIZER
(2) Fly Ash Fly Ash Yeast slurry Fertilizer
INDUSTRY
Gas (21) Deionized water Orimulsion

(16) Gypsum

NORDISK
ALUMINAT
AALBORG RECYCLING OF
(23) Recycled gypsum PORTLAND METALS FARMS
(26) PIG FARMS
GYPROC Aluminum

KARA/NOVEREN ALUSCAN
(31)
Molasses

Fig. 1. State of the Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg in year 2011. Source: adapted from
Andersen [9].

The network between different the participants of the Industrial Symbiosis is constituted by 31
flows, which can be classified into three categories: water, energy and byproducts.

218-3
Table 1 summarizes the data collected of the exchange network, obtained through an extensive
search in different bibliographical sources. It should be pointed out that different values have been
found for the same flow from different information sources in the literature. This could be due to
changes in the production volume or production process. This fact makes the data collection task
even more difficult.

Table 1. Description of the flows of the Industrial Symbiosis

Nº  Flow  Type Quantity/year Source

3
1  Superficial water  Water 1.600.000 m [10]
2  Gas  Energy 8.000 t [11]
3  Superficial water  Water 686.000 m3 [10]
4  Fertilizer  Byproduct 150.000 t www.symbiosis.dk 
5  Fly ash  Byproduct 200.000 t [11]
6  Heat wáter  Energy 390.000 GJ [10]
7  Thermal energy  Energy 931 TJ [10]
8  Steam  Energy
1.500 TJ  www.symbiosis.dk 
9  Steam  Energy
10  Superficial water  Water 491.000 m3 [10]
3
11  Cooling wáter  Water 483.000 m [10]
3
12  Yeast slurry  Byproduct 92.000 m www.novonordisk.com 
Ammonium  [11]
13  Byproduct  2.800 t 
thiosulphate 
14  Wastewater  Water 9.000 m3 [10]
15  Gas  Energy 60.000 t [11]
16  Gypsum  Byproduct 80.000 t [11]
17  Waste wáter  Water 2.300.000 m3 [10]
3
18  Water  Water 200.000 m [10]
19  Slurry  Byproduct ‐ ‐
20  Orimulsion ashes  Byproduct ‐ ‐
3
21  Deionized wáter  Water 50.000 m [10]
22  Purified wáter  Water ‐ ‐
23  Recycled gypsum  Byproduct 8.000 t [12]
24  Alcoholic residues  Water ‐ ‐
25  Seawater  Water ‐ ‐
26  Aluminium Byproduct ‐ ‐
27  Steam  Energy ‐ ‐
28  Wheat Straw  Byproduct 30.000 t www.inbicon.com 
29  Bioethanol Energy 4.300 t www.inbicon.com 
30  Pellets  Byproduct 8.250 t www.inbicon.com 
31  Molasses  Byproduct 11.100 t www.inbicon.com 

3. Case study

218-4
Our case study includes the most representative flows of the Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg. It
focuses on the power station, as Asnaes represents the heart of the Industrial Symbiosis. The
integrations considered are the following: (1) surplus gas from the refinery used in the boiler of the
power plant, substituting part of the feeding coal; (2) process steam from the power plants turbines
for its use in companies Novo Group and Statoil; (3) steam from the Asnae’s turbines used for
feeding the District Heating system of Kalundborg municipality; (4) seawater heated at low
temperature from the condenser used for the fish farm; (5) fly ashes generated in the burning of
coal, substituting clinker for the production of cement; (6) use of the gypsum generated in the
desulphurization process of the power plant’s waste gases as raw material for the manufacturing of
plaster boards and as a substitute of natural gypsum imported from Spain.
In order to assess the effect of the Industrial Symbiosis on resources saving, the case study is
divided into the base case and the alternative case study. The base case study simulates the
symbiosis with the six considered integrations (Fig. 2-a). The alternative case study simulates a
fictitious situation where no integration among the facilities exist. Accordingly, the symbiotic flows
are substituted by conventional processes. This way, the surplus gas from Statoil is burnt in a torch
leading to an additional coal consumption in the power plant; water and steam integrations are
replaced by natural gas boilers; fly ashes are substituted by clinker produced in a kiln and the
gypsum is shipped from Spain (Fig. 2-b).

Novo Novo Group

2. Process Group
steam Natural Gas Natural gas 2. Process steam
Boiler
Statoil
Statoil

3. District Heating
steam Natural gas Natural gas 3. District Heating steam
Kalundborg Kalundborg
Statoil Boiler
(refinery)

1. Surplus gas 1. Surplus coal

Statoil Electricity Surplus Gas Asnaes Electricity
Coal Asnaes Coal

Combustion
4. Hot water in a torch Natural Gas Natural gas 4. Hot water
Fish farm Fish farm
Boiler

Fuel-oil
5. Fly ash Aalborg 5. Fly ash Aalborg
Lime Clinker kiln
Portland Portland

6. Gypsum Fuel-oil
Gyproc Shippment 6. Gypsum Gyproc
Natural gypsum from Spain

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Base case study with symbiosis (a) and alternative case study without symbiosis (b)

4. Thermodynamic model

In this section, the exergy analysis of the case studies described previously, are done. Due to the
lack of detailed information for some of the integrations considered, similar alternative processes
found in the literature have been used for obtaining technical data and adopting reasonable
assumptions.

4.1 Base case with symbiosis

218-5
Coal and surplus gas
It has been assumed that the coal composition used in Asnaes power station is the one given by
Larson et al. [13]. The exergy content of the flux is assumed as being equivalent to its HHV. For the
refinery surplus gas, it has been assumed that it is in the form of natural gas with an exergy content
of 50.500 kJ/kg [14].
Fly ash
It has been assumed that the composition of fly ash is 49% SiO2, 26% Al2O3, 15% CaO y 10%
Fe2O3, and its specific exergy, , is equal to 454 kJ/kg [8]. The mass flow of fly ash is
obtained from the composition of coal mentioned before.
Flows for the desulphurization plant
The desulphurization plant is based on wet technology with limestone and forces oxidation. This
process gives as byproduct gypsum from the SO2 contained in the combustion gases. The SO2
production can be obtained from the coal composition and consumption. Accordingly, with the
stochiometric reaction and considering a 5% lime surplus, the production of gypsum, water and
limestone required can be obtained. The chemical exergy of the different flows are calculated with
the well known formula proposed by Szargut and Morris [15].
The required energy used for the desulphurization process is unknown. However, it has been
assumed that this energy is around 4.000 kW, which is equivalent to that of the Lada power plant in
Asturias [16].
Process steam
For the process steam generated in the power station and delivered to Statoil and Novo Group, it has
been considered pressure and temperature conditions of 8,5 bar and 300 °C, which have been fixed
with the conditions of steam at the exit of a medium pressure turbine of a similar power plant [8]. It
has been also assumed that all steam is returned at 180ºC with no pressure losses.
District heating steam
At the exit of the medium pressure turbine, the steam is distributed into the low pressure turbine and
the heat exchangers for the district heating system. In the latter, water is heated at 100-120 °C and is
pumped into the district heating system3. It is assumed that the supply system is at 25 bar and 120ºC
and the return is at 60ºC [16]. No pressure losses are assumed. The water flow is obtained from the
thermal power delivered to the district heating system.
Fish farm water
Seawater increases its temperature 8°C in the condenser of the power plant. Around 23.000.000
m3/year are delivered to the fish farm [10]. The exergy of this water is calculated assuming an
average water temperature of the Baltic sea of 15°C [18].
Turbine steam
The thermodynamic model is closed by calculating the exergy of the superheated steam used for the
electricity production in the turbine. Unfortunately this information is not available. It has been
assumed that 60% of the fuel exergy (coal plus gas) is destroyed in the boiler.

Fig. 3 shows a schematic diagram of the base case and alternative case. The dashed lines represent
the flows exchanged only in the base case (with integration). They would disappear in the
alternative case (with no integration).

3
Source: www.dongenergy.com.
218-6
 Natural gas
Nat. gypsum
Fuel-oil

Flue gases
Boiler Natural gas
(without SOx)
Shippment from Spain

Lime
Boiler

Water Desulph. Gypsum Process steam

6 2
plant

Electricity
3 District Heating Steam

Burning gases Superheated steam

With SOx

Coal Electricity
Turbine-Generator

Natural gas/
coal Boiler
Coal Steam
1

Seawater
Condensed steam Condenser
Waste gas Fjord water

Fuel-oil Fly ash

Natural gas 4 Fish farm water

Lime Clinker Clinker Clinker/fly ash Boiler
Furnace 5

Fig. 3. Physical structure of the base and alternative case study

4.2 Alternative case without symbiosis

In the alternative case there is no integration among the different industries of the Industrial
Symbiosis. This means that each facility operates independently, so that the integrations of the base
case disappear (the flows represented by the dash lines of Fig. 3 do not exist).
Coal
The surplus gas of the refinery is replaced by a greater coal consumption in the power plant.
However, as there is no district heating supply, not so much fuel is required. Both factors need to be
taken into account.
Since the mass flow of coal increases with respect of the base case, more ashes, SO2, lime, water
and gypsum are produced/needed.
Natural gas
The energy supply from the power plant in the integrated case is now substituted by individual
natural gas boilers with a 90% efficiency. They will be used for process steam, the District Heating
network and the fish farm.
Flows for the production of clinker
The use of fly ash in the cement factory is substituted by a greater clinker production. The clinker
flow mass produced in the furnace is equal to the fly ash generated in the power plant. The specific
exergy of clinker assumed is 1.240 kJ/kg [8].
On the other hand, the kiln where the clinker is produced is fed with limestone as rawmaterial,
requiring 1,54 kg of limestone per kg of clinker [8]. Additionally, an extra 4.195 kJ of fuel per kg
of Clinker needs to be accounted for [8]. It is assumed that the fuel used has a HHV of 35,71 MJ/kg.
Fuel-oil for gypsum shipment
The supply of gypsum to Gyproc from the power plant is replaced by the import of natural gypsum
from Spain. Hence, we need to consider the additional fuel used in the shipment. The required data
218-7
are the energy intensity in sea transport, assumed to be 0,2 kJ/kg·km [19], the sea distance
considered (from Algeciras to Odense), which is 3.180 km and the load to be transported,
corresponding to the gypsum produced in the desulphurization plant. The latter values give an
exergy demand of 1,565 MW.

The exergy results of the thermodynamic model for both studies are shown in Table 2.
Table. 2. Yearly exergy demand of the case studies

      ⁄
Flow  With  w/o symbiosis 
symbiosis 
Coal  10.376 10.591 
Surplus gas*  841,7 841,7 
Electricity  3.968 3.968 
Fly ash*  21,79 22,24 
SO2  25,98 26,51 
Desulfurization lime 1,933 1,973 
Desulfurization water 4,51 4,604 
Gypsum*  2,036 2,078 
Desulfurization electricity 24,8 24,8 
Process steam  193,4 193,4 
District Heating Steam 63,8 63,8 
Fish farm water*  14 14 
Turbine steam  4.487 4.487 
Process natural gas ‐ 495,8 
District Heating natural gas ‐ 307,7 
Fish farm natural gas ‐ 254,4 
Clinker limestone  ‐ 16,2 
Clinker Fuel oil  ‐ 213,4 
Clinker  ‐ 59,5 
Natural gypsum  ‐ 2,0 
Fuel‐oil for gypsum transport ‐ 9,7 

The flows with an asterisk represent those which are wasted in the alternative case (without
symbiosis) since they cannot be avoided. We have only considered the dissipation process of the
refinery surplus gas through a torch, since this flux could not be omitted due to its elevated exergy
content.

218-8
Additionally, applying the exergy analysis, we can obtain the irreversibilities generated in each of
the components analyzed, as the exergy difference between the integrated case and the alternative
case (Table 3).

Table. 3. Analysis of the irreversibilities of the case studies (with and without integration)

Component I, 
GWh/year 
Separation unit+desulph. ‐25
Boiler  357
Turbine  0
Process steam boiler ‐302
District heating boiler ‐244
Fishing farm boiler ‐240
Clinker kiln ‐170
Gypsum transport ‐10
Torch  ‐842
TOTAL  ‐1476

As can be seen in Table 3, the symbiosis network constitutes an irreversibilities reduction of 1,476
GWh/year. The fuel saved with the integration is equal to 1,514 GWh/year. The difference of both
figures relies on the fact that the quantity of clinker substituted by fly ash was carried out in mass
terms and not in exergy terms.
Table 3 also shows that all components show an improvement in their performance except for the
boiler in the power plant. This is not due to the fact that the boiler is working deficiently in the
integrated case. The reason is because the boiler needs to produce more steam for feeding the
district heating system, the fish farm and the production of process steam. Hence, we can observe
that exergy alone does not provide enough information. If we want to find out the real contribution
of each component to the savings obtained, we should resort to the thermoeconomic analysis, which
is explained in the second part of this paper.
However, property exergy gives also important insights to the analysis. We were able to estimate
with a single unit, the savings achieved. This cannot be done, if the accounting property is with
mass. Moreover, it constitutes the starting point of the thermoeconomic analysis. With the latter, the
physical costs of the interchanged products can eventually be rigorously assessed and “fair” prices
to by-products can be calculated.

5. Conclusions
In this paper the first exergy analysis of the Industrial Symbiosis model of Kalundborg has been
carried out. The analysis has been focused on the main energy flows exchanged between the “heart”
of the symbiosis which is the power plant and the rest of the neighbouring facilities. The analysis
could be done after a careful and comprehensive data collection which was not always available.
Hence, for those cases were data was lacking, reasonable assumptions were done.
The results obtained are therefore approximations and should not be taken as definitive. They
should rather show an order of magnitude of the exchanges present in the park and moreover they
are the basis for a further thermoeconomic analysis of Kalundborg eco-industrial park. The final
218-9
aim is to show the applicability of Thermoeconomics for the analysis, optimization and rigourous
cost-assessment of eco-industrial parks. Thermoeconomics could eventually serve as a powerful
tool for helping decision makers in the establishment of Industrial Ecology world-wide.

Acknowledgments
Authors would like to acknowledge ARAID and IberCaja for its support within the project
“Thermoeconomics and Industrial Ecology. Application to Teruel coalfield”, Young researchers
program, 2010.

References
[1] Chertow, M. "Uncovering" Industrial Symbiosis Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2007, 11, 11-30
[2] Ayres, R. and Ayres, L. Industrial Ecology. Towards closing the material cycle; Edward Elgar
Publishing: 1996.
[3] Connelly, L.; Coshland, C. Exergy and industrial ecology. Part 2: A non-dimensional analysis
of means to reduce resource depletion. Exergy Int. J., 2001, 1, 234-255.
[4] Finnveden, G.; Ostland, P. Exergies of natural resources in life-cycle assessment and other
applications. Energy, 1997, 22, 923-931.
[5] Cornelissen, R. L.; Hirs, G. G. The value of the exergetic life cycle assessment besides the LCA
Energy Conversion and Management, 2002, 43, 1417-1424.
[6] Dewulf, J.; Langenhove, H. V. Assessment of the Sustainability of Technology by Means of a
Thermodynamically Based Life Cycle Analysis ESPR. Environ Sci & Pollut Res, 2002, 9, 267-
273.
[7] Dewulf, J.; Langenhove, H. V. Integrating industrial ecology principles into a set of
environmental sustainability indicators for technology assessment. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 2005, 43, 419-432.
[8] Valero, A.; Usón, S; Torres, C.; Valero, A. Application of Thermoeconomics to Indsutrial
Ecology. Entropy, 2010, 12, 591-612.
[9] Andersen, M. “Kalundborg Industrial Symbiosis”. Resource Efficiency, Green Week, Brussels,
2011.
[10] Jacobsen, N.B. “Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark. A Quantitative Assesment
of Economic and Environmental Aspects”. Journal of Industrial Ecology, vol. 10, nº 1-2,
pp.239-255, 2006.
[11] Lowe, E.A. “Eco-industrial Park Handbook for Asian Developing Countries. A Report to
Asian Development Bank”. Environment Department, Indigo Development, Oakland, CA,
2001.
[12] Grann, H. “The Industrial Symbiosis at Kalundborg, Denmark”. The Industrial Green Game,
pp. 117-123. National Academies Press, 1997.
[13] Larsen, M.; Bech, M.; Bidstrup, T.; Christensen, N.P.; Vangkilde-Pedersen, T.; Biede, O.
“Kalundborg case study, a feasibility study of CO2 storage in onshore saline aquifers”.
Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, Ministry of the Environment, 2007.
[14] Hermann, W.A. “Quantifying global exergy resources”. Energy, 31(12), pp. 1685-1702,
2005.
[15] Szargut, J. & Morris, D. Calculation of standard chemical exergy of some elements and their
compounds based upon seawater as the datum level substance
Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Techical Sciences., 1985, 33, 293-305
[16] Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Ordenación del Territorio e Infraestructuras. “Resolución
de 9 de marzo de 2009, por la que se modifica la Autorización Ambiental Integrada de la

218-10
 instalación industrial Central Térmica de Lada con emplazamiento en Langreo, promovida por
la empresa Iberdrola Generación, S.A.U., al objeto de incluir la Planta de Desulfuración del
Grupo IV”. Boletín Oficial del Principado de Asturias nº 195, 2009.
[17] Renedo, C.J. “Sistemas a escala urbana: District Heating y District Cooling”. Curso de
Postgrado Construcción Sostenible, UPV-EHU, 2007.
[18] European Environmental Agency. www.eea.europa.eu
[19] UNCTAD. “Review of maritime transport 2005”. United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development, 2006.

218-11

View publication stats