Chemi-thermomechanical pulp - Baikal

[Jennie Sutton <bew@monster.icc.ru>]

Dear All,

In response to Jennifer Adibi's request for information on
Chemi-Thermo Mechanical Pulp, some snippets of information: (If anyone
is interested in getting more information about the impact the mill
has had  on  the lake that contains one-fifth of the world's fresh wa-
ter, please contact us) :


....  Translation of part of letter to V.I.Dani-
lov-Danilyan, Chairman of the State Committee for the Environment, RF.

Dear Mr Danilov-Danilyan,

     We are writing to you in connection with the future of  the  Bai-
kalsk Pulp and Paper Plant as we are very disturbed by the decision of
the Government Committee on Baikal of 9 January 1997.

     It is in your power to make a historical decision on stopping the
production  of  pulp  and  paper at Baikal and put an end to a problem
that has existed and been discussed for the last thirty years.  Remem-
ber,  we are talking not about the preservation of one of thousands of
pulp and paper mills, but about the preservation of the ecosystem of a
unique lake.

     We ask  you  not to support the project for the conversion of the
plant with the introduction of BCTMP for the following reasons:

1) According to independent sources,  although there are a  number  of
advantages by comparison with the production of kraft pulp, this tech-
nology also involves negative impact on the environment.  The  Science
Laboratory of Greenpeace (Greenpeace Research Laboratories,  Earth Re-
sources Centre, University of Exeter) in Great Britain has informed us
that "This will need to be very carefully watched, however, since some
mills which have gone this route at the design stage have reverted  to
generating  effluent  after  process difficulties have become evident.
These seem largely to do with the need to purge non-process  chemicals
which  build  up  in the system." Confirmation of this can be found in
the journal "Pulp&Paper""Pulp&Paper International" for 1994,  where it
is also mentioned that waste problems are inevitable:

     "Of course, complete or total elimination of all effluents from a
pulp and paper mill, bleached or unbleached, is not feasible under any
current technologies or concepts. There will always be upsets, spills,
leaking seals,  uncontrollable runoffs,  and various  limited  process
discharges  not  matter what approaches are used.  This report assumes
these exceptions in its use of the term "closure" throughout.
      Also effluent  closure does not mean that there will be no waste
disposal problems.  On the contrary,  closure will tend to concentrate
relatively large volumes of various materials, metals and other conta-
minants (that come in with the wood and process water) to  be  handled
along with slaker rejects, dregs, precipitator ash, etc. currently be-
ing land-filled in most cases, or else built into growing leachate pi-
les in and around the mill.  So while effluent closure may practically
eliminate water discharges from future pulp  and  paper  mills,  solid
waste disposal problems will likely increase."

     The present  sludge  tanks  are overfilled and present a constant
danger to the lake.  Their contents are washed out by  spring  floods,
seep through into ground water and eventually into Baikal. This danger
was confirmed in the speech of the deputy mayor of Baikalsk at the me-
eting  of  the  Government Committee when he spoke of the necessity of
constructing "flood protection barriers which will prevent flooding of
the  town..."  It is difficult for us to understand how the Government
Committee can think of resurrecting such a plant on the shores of Bai-
kal and in such a place so liable to natural disasters.

   The sodium-peroxide  method of bleaching paper will mean the use of
reagents from the Khimprom factory at Usolye-Sibirsk where the mercury
electrolysis method of obtaining sodium hydroxide is used:  that means
that the problem of polluting Baikal with mercury and dioxins remains,
since  financing  for  the  transformation of the above factory to the
membrane method is not planned.
   
   An objective assessment of various not always  successful  attempts
at closing the water cycle both at mechanical and chemical pulp plants
is given by the authors of the above  mentioned  journal,  judging  by
which  it  is possible to say that closed-loop technology is extremely
complex,  demanding highly qualified personnel and careful analysis of
the  dynamics  of  the process throughout the entire production cycle.
Deviations from the necessary conditions could lead either to environ-
mentally  dangerous situations or to economic loss.  Can an enterprise
ignore either of these? Is the present staff of BPPP capable of provi-
ding  such a level of operations service?  However unpleasant it is to
admit, experience of the last thirty years of the mill's operation le-
ads  us to have serious doubts.  Throughout the world closing the loop
at similar plants remains at the stage of industrial  experimentation.
Yet  another experiment should not be undertaken on the shores of Bai-
kal.

2) Apart from all this,  by no means should it be forgotten that  BPPP
is  situated in one of the two most seismically dangerous zones in the
Baikal rift valley. In the event of an earthquake pollution of the la-
ke will be inevitable.

3) The  distance of the mill from its raw material will mean that tim-
ber will have to brought over considerable  distances,  which  contra-
dicts  the vital principles of sustainable development.  Moreover,  in
the opinion of two forest specialists (R.M.Babintseva, Forest Institu-
te,  Krasnoyarsk,  and Dr. V.N.Molozhnikov, Academy of Sciences) there
is an insufficient amount of those deciduous trees needed for the pro-
duction of BCTMP in the Baikal region.  This,  in addition to the need
to transport cellulose from Bratsk or Ust-Ilimsk in order  to  produce
paper of a quality higher than newspaper. Can one possibly say that it
makes sense to risk Baikal for the sake of  producing  what  could  be
produced at Ust-Ilimsk and at less expense?

4) Over  the  last few years the Plant has been working at the expense
of state subsidies allowed by  the  Irkutsk  Regional  Administration,
that is,  the mill does not pay fines for environmental damage in full
and uses the lake's water practically free of charge! For example, ac-
cording  to  information from the State Committee for the Environment,
in 1995 the mill should have paid 2.5 trillion roubles for environmen-
tal  pollution,  however a resolution of the Consultative Committee of
the Regional Administration allowed the mill to pay  only  14  billion
roubles, or 10% of its profits. In 1996 BPPP operated without profits,
which means that even this minimal payment of fines will not be  made.
This raises the question: for what reason should a bankrupt enterprise
be reanimated by state subsidies?  Who needs this?  And this is on top
of  the fact that it continues to destroy Russia's and the world's na-
tural heritage. Such a state of affairs cannot continue, if we want to
preserve our environment.

5) The  Baikal region was chosen as a model site for sustainable deve-
lopment.  All the above mention points indicate that this  variant  of
conversion  of the mill is not sustainable,  either from an ecological
or from an economic point of view.

6) Having signed the International Convention for the Conservation  of
World Heritage sites, the Russian State took on itself a definite com-
mitment. The decision to extend the life of polluting production imme-
diately  on the shores of this unique lake that has only recently been
nominated a World Heritage Site defies understanding.

7) Continued operations of the pulp and paper industry in the  Central
zone of the Baikal region are banned by the draft Law on the Protecti-
on of Lake Baikal which has passed its First Reading in the State  Du-
ma.

8) Insufficient  efforts have been made on the part of the Irkutsk Re-
gional Administration and Federal Ministries involved to stimulate the
creation of new projects and find a more appropriate alternative. This
leads one to believe that it is more likely that  lack  of  desire  to
find  an  alternative  to pulp and paper production is the true reason
for the absence of alternative variants rather than their impossibili-
ty as such.

9) The management of the Mill both in words and deeds has shown an ir-
responsible  attitude  to  environmental  questions.   The   Director,
V.V.Glazyrin, in conversations and interviews has on more than one oc-
casion stated that the Mill does not have a negative impact on the Ba-
ikal  ecosystem (in spite of the results of research,  evidence to the
contrary and common sense).
   There are no reasons to suppose that this irresponsible attitude of
the Mill's management towards Lake Baikal will change in  the  future,
so it is possible to imagine its attitude towards environmental safety
in the case of a new technology.  You must agree that any  potentially
environmentally  dangerous  technology requires a particularly respon-
sible approach, all the more so on the shores of a unique lake.

10) The bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulp project in any case  does
not solve the problem of employment for the local population as it as-
sumes large-scale cutbacks in present staffing.

   The development of a number of small-scale enterprises, less dange-
rous  for Baikal would provide work and be in accord with the princip-
les of sustainable development.

......  

Signatures: Markova, Rikhvanova, Sutton, (Baikal Environmental Wave)
Molozhnikov (Russian Geographical Society, Baikal Branch)
...

     Excerpts from  a letter to IUCN regarding the proposed modernisa-
tion of the Baikalsk Mill:

   One additional  technical reason,  other than the ones mentioned in
our letter (above), for not approving of the project is that while the
Canadian  mill,  that has successfully implemented the new technology,
uses only aspen as raw material, the Russian Federal Programme project
proposes  to  use  aspen and birch.  Such a change in the raw material
used could well cause unforseen problems  in  the  production  process
which would lead to the mill's going back to a wastewater system.

   Monitoring of changes in the lake is  expensive  to  undertake  and
there is  no independent body here that has the finances to carry this
out on a regular basis.  Local scientists carrying out  analyses  with
the help of Bayreuth University,  however, have discovered a dangerous
build-up of organochlorines (PCBs and dioxins) in the lake's food cha-
in.  The  major  source  of these is most likely the present pulp mill
which, according to the draft Federal Programme, will continue working
with  even increased output till 2002,  perhaps beyond,  while the new
proposed technology will be being installed. This in itself is comple-
tely unacceptable. If this project of the Federal Programme is eventu-
ally accepted,  and if, as in other pulp mills around the world, prob-
lems crop up in "closing the loop", the Baikalsk mill will most likely
be the most significant factor in bringing about  the  destruction  of
Baikal's unique ecosystem,  as it is today.  It is unlikely that there
will be a well-equipped independent  monitoring  system  in  existence
then that could observe the impact of the newly implemented technology
on the lake, which will by that time have been seriously if not fatal-
ly degraded as a result of the operation of the Plant in question.

     I would  add  that  even  the local State Environmental Committee
(the Russian equivalent of the  EPA)  cannot  finance  the  monitoring
programme for the mill.