Page 144 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

Ch003-P373623.qxd 3/22/07 5:29 PM Page 123
Achievements Sustainable Development and Industrial Ecology 123
• Making plans and getting funds for demolition and site preparation.
• A state sponsored cleaner production monitoring program.
• Implementation of a land swap and ordinance process.
• Construction of new rail and road.
• Reuse of some unused sites by building new buildings and industrial
projects.

Main goals
• Fairfield Housing Project: The goal of this project is to reduce the
amount of waste that comes from the demolition process of the build-
ings and especially lead that has hazardous effects as a waste material.
• Hazardous waste: Recycling of waste that will help in using it as
potential raw material for different industries.
• To avoid paperwork and duplicated reports.
• Voluntary inspection and maintenance: To ensure operation is at
highest levels of efficiency.

Expected results
• Higher rates of solid wastes and hazardous wastes recycling.
• Eliminate illegal dumps.
• Decrease air emissions.
• Improve the quality of the air.
• Improve contaminant of non-point source run-off.

Analysis and comments
Of course there is still a great deal to be done for the completion of the closed
loop of the Fairfield EIP but it is still considered as one of the more success-
ful emerging examples. Still new ideas and creativity are being developed to
improve the current situation. “By using the creativity of businesses, the
desires of local residents, the experience of employees, the knowledge of
educators, and the regulatory flexibility, the EIP will become a model of eco-
nomic and environmental performance” (EPA).
In a study (Heeres et al., 2004) of three designed EIPs from USA and
three from the Netherlands, the Dutch parks (INES, RiVu, Moerjdik) were
found more successful than the ones in the USA (Fairfield, Brownsville, Cape
Charles). The participation in the Dutch companies was more active than
the US companies. The presence of an anchor person or champion was found
to be very important for the success of an EIP. The champions in Netherlands
were local Dutch entrepreneurs. EIP’s projects were mainly led by companies
receiving local and regional financial and advisory support.
In the US cases, the most crucial point against success was a lack of
companies’ interest in the project. The US EIPs were initiated by local gov-
ernment and the companies were not interested in the project. In Fairfield
and Brownsville, the majority of companies did not want to invest in the