TWO YEARS ago the Tasmanian Government revived the dream of developing a world-class pulp mill.
It was based on their belief that the technology of the pulp and paper industry had evolved to such a degree that an environmentally-safe pulp mill could be built in Tasmania.
You’ll recall that 15 years ago the Wesley Vale pulp mill failed to meet the environmental expectations of the community. In particular, there was concern about the level of toxic organochlorines called dioxins and furans that would be discharged into Bass Strait.
I was writing for The Australian at the time and was opposed to Wesley Vale for that very reason and had many verbal stoushes with the then premier Robin Gray about it.
If I weren’t convinced that it is now possible to have environmentally-acceptable pulp mills, using technology in place in Scandinavia, the US, Canada and South America, I wouldn’t be standing here talking to you today.
The Government asked the Resource Planning and Development Commission to examine the state of the art in pulping and bleaching technology around the world in order to set the environmental guidelines that could be applied to a mill in Tasmania.
Last year the commission delivered the guidelines. They were universally endorsed as the toughest in the world for this type of pulp: bleached kraft eucalypt.
The Government invited companies to rise to the challenge. As expected Gunns Ltd said that it felt it could build a pulp mill meet these tough standards.
Initially, it proposed two alternative sites for the mill – Bell Bay and Hampshire. There were pros and cons of both sites, but essentially Gunns and independent economists agreed that Bell Bay self-selected because it was closer to the forest resource.
Tasmania currently produces about six million tonnes of woodchips a year, with more than three million tonnes produced by mills at Bell Bay. The Bell Bay site offered Gunns most if not all the chips that it would need for a mill.
Essentially a pulp mill is a large chemistry set
Gunns’ proposal is for a pulp mill that produces 800,000 tonnes of pulp a year. You need about four times that amount in green woodchips as the feedstock. The reason for this 4:1 ratio is that green woodchips are 50 per cent water. Once dried, half the chip is the fibre you are seeking for the pulp. Removing the fibres from the brown glue that holds them together, lignin, is the easy part. Recycling and disposing of the chemicals in the process is the task.
Essentially, a pulp mill is a large chemistry set. Chipped wood is put into a digester to make pulp. The pulp is bleached and then dried and baled. This particular type of pulp, bleached kraft eucalypt pulp, is used for fine writing paper and printing paper.
Gunns’ proposal does not provide for a paper mill at this stage but it is the logical next step.
The key change that has occurred in pulping technology since Wesley Vale 15 years ago is the bleaching process. With Wesley Vale, chlorine gas would have been used to bleach the pulp. It was the toxic organochlorines that were a byproduct of the process that caused so much public concern. Organochlorines themselves are not a problem. It is only the toxic ones – dioxin and furans – that are the problem.
The emission guidelines set by the RPDC and the Government effectively dictate that the level of dioxins and furans coming out of the mill have to be the same as in the water going in. In other words, the mill must have no appreciable impact on the marine environment.
The two major technologies that have evolved in the last 15 years for bleaching pulp are called elemental chlorine-free bleaching, which is ECF, and totally chlorine-free bleaching, which is called TCF. One does not use chlorine at all, the other uses chlorine dioxide.
Research has found that they can achieve the same level of brightness in the final product and they have the same negligible impact on the receiving waters. Gunns has opted to use the ECF process.
One of the issues that I’m sure you are all concerned about is the resource that will be used. When the now Premier Paul Lennon set this whole thing in train he said that not only had the mill to be environmentally safe but that it would only use the woodchips that are currently exported. In other words the mill itself was not to result in any additional demand for trees to be woodchipped.
The preferred feedstock for the mill is plantation eucalypts. They provide the optimum fibre for the sort of pulp that will produce fine writing papers and printing papers. The choice between plantation timber and old-growth for instance in akin to being given the choice between shortbread and dog biscuits. Initially the mix of plantation timber to native forest will be about 30-70. In about 10 years that ratio will be reversed and it will be 70-30 plantation timber.
The future of our milling industries will be plantation timber
The reliance on plantation timber raises the question of the major changes that are taking place in the Tasmanian forests following the May 13 Forestry Agreement between the Australian Government and Tasmania.
It is now quite evident that the future of our milling industries will be in plantation timber, much more than native forest. That is the result of more reserves being created and the change to harvesting practices in wet eucalypt forests.
So our plantations will have to provide not only pulpwood, which can mature in eight to 10 years, but also sawlogs that take considerably longer and need more management so that you can produce thick stems and the close grains that characterise sawlogs. You can only get that in plantation forests that are thinned, fertilized, closely managed and grown three to four times longer in terms of years.
The stage we are at here at the moment is that the Resource Planning and Development Commission will shortly issue guidelines that Gunns must follow when it prepares its integrated impact statement for the mill.
There has been public input into this process. The commission has asked people to suggest questions or issues that Gunns should address when it completes the impact statement. The final guidelines for that study will probably be out in a couple of weeks and Gunns will get on with preparing it.
Originally Gunns had hoped to complete the statement by July but it is clear that is it will not be finished until towards the end of the year.
When it is completed, it will be subject to public comment before the RPDC assesses it. That analysis will itself be subject to public comment before the commission gives its final verdict on the mill.
At the outset it was the Government that was to have the final say on whether the mill would go ahead and, if so, under what conditions. However, recently Mr Lennon said that the commission’s decision would be final.
Gunns remains confident that it can be in a position to call tenders in September this year
In other words, if the commission said that the mill would not go ahead then it will not go ahead. The Government would not override it. If the commission were to say that the mill could go ahead under certain conditions, then those would be the conditions that the Government would apply to the project.
It is quite clear that this process is going to take us well into next year. However, Gunns remains confident that is it can still be in a position to call tenders in September this year. I have checked this with Gunns and they have confirmed it but I’m sure many people will regard that as optimistic.
What is clear in my mind is that Gunns is going to have to pay scrupulous attention to detail to ensure that the mill is environmentally sound. The RPDC will brook no short cuts.
If it goes ahead, the mill will be the single biggest investment by the private sector in Tasmania’s history; about $1.3 billion, about 4000 people working on the construction of the mill, 2350 on site, several thousand more people indirectly employed elsewhere and 320 full-time jobs at the mill when it is operating and, according to the Centre of Policy Studies at Monash University, about 1500 long-term jobs altogether.
Monash completed an economic study of the mill based on a smaller mill than the one proposed by Gunns but still came up with impressive figures in terms of economic impact. It predicted that gross state product would increase by about two per cent per annum and that the mill would add about $600 million a year to our economy.
The initial task of the Pulp Mill Task Force, with whom I work, was to inform groups such as yours about the emission guidelines, the planning process and the Monash study.
Since we are now at the stage where the mill development is a matter between Gunns and the RPDC, the task force has moved to our second phase in which it is consulting with business around Tasmania to ensure that they are aware of the potential of the mill, should it be approved.
Therefore we talking to those businesses about their preparedness for the mill, the skills in their workforce, what preparations they are making. It’s quite clear that anybody who waits until after the mill is approved will be waiting too long to make their plans.
What has impressed me as I have gone around the State talking to these businesses is the their absolute optimism to cope with a project of this magnitude.
When you talk to companies like Fairbrother, Russell-Smith, Shaw Contracting, Haywards, Vos Constructions, Delta Hydraulics, you can’t help but be impressed with their can-do attitude.
If they miss out, they know there will be consequential work created because other companies, who do win contracts, will have to let other work go.
It is clear that is that the workforce will be a blend of local labour, imported labour and labour coming out of retirement, thinking they had hung up their boots and their working life was over.
It’s going to be a matter of all hands to the pump.
Bruce Montgomery is Communications Manager, Forests & Forest Industry Council, currently seconded to the Pulp Mill Taskforce. He was for 20 years a journalist with The Australian in Tasmania.
This article is based on Bruce Montgomery’s notes which formed the basis of a speech to Legacy, Tuesday, May 24, and notes taken by Lindsay Tuffin.
David Mohr
May 25, 2005 at 07:13
Ironically it could be the pulp mill issue which confirms the expected hung parliament after the next election.
To the immense frustration of the two major parties it appears that the Green vote is “rusted on” at 15%.
These are Tasmanians who have a different vision for Tasmania than Liberal/Labor and are not going to be easily swayed in the run up to the next state election.
It is just a matter of how many seats the Greens will win 3 or 4? Kim Booth has been seen as vulnerable in Bass and this is where the pulp mill will be crucial. TRAC already has well over 1000 households in the Tamar valley committed to its cause.
Admittedly a number of these people already are Green voters however I know many who have traditionally voted for one of the major parties who feel so strongly about the effects of the mill on the environment in the Tamar Valley that they would support the party that opposes the Longreach Mill.
These extra votes for the Greens in a tight election would be enough to retain their seat in Bass and result in a 11 10 and 4 result for Labor, Liberal and Greens respectively
Prince of Darkness
May 25, 2005 at 08:54
Funny thing, but I think that the pulp mill is not the best option for the forest industry in Tasmania. It will put a lot of pressure on forest management to be able to feed the mill and deliver sawlogs for the rest of the processors.
I think that Bruce is on drugs if he thinks that Gunns can reduce the rotation age to 8 years. This pressure may affect Forestry Tasmania too, with the government leaning on it to feed that thing. This would not be good for a company that is trying to produce sawlogs with a longer rotation.
Although the Greens dream with anything that may give them the balance of power, this it is not the issue they are looking for. Most people in the area will go for the jobs, because even when the standards are not “the toughest in the planet”, they are probably good enough for all practical purposes.
Les Rochester
May 25, 2005 at 09:06
Bruce is also deeply involved with the True Blue magazine, which featured that much insightful piece on John Gay.
Bruce, it would appear, really hasn’t read the Draft Scope Guidelines closely, or he has overlooked a major point in the approvals process. He is at great pains to point out it was going to be the Premier to give the final nod to the project, but now he is committed to whatever decision the RPDC makes.
Well I’m afraid to enlighten you Bruce, but neither of these two have the power to make the final decision. The Federal Minister in the Draft Scope Guidelines makes it quite clear that the final approval for the project actually rests with him.
As for the woodchips produced at Bell Bay. Well why not round off the figure to 3 million tonnes, when in actual fact there were 2.6 million tonnes exported from Bell Bay last year. (see Port of Launceston annual report). So using the 4 to 1 ratio, and the mill’s starting capacity of 800,000 tonnes, the result would require 3.2 million tonnes of chips. 600,000 tonnes more than were exported from Bell Bay last year.
So where will they come from Bruce?
Just one other minor point, this state’s Premier is on record as saying (Hansard 2003) that this new mill will produce 25% of the organochlorines that the old Wesley Vale Mill would have produced. I don’t think that is a minimal amount, especially when the RPDC’s Environmental Guidelines Vol 2.allows Gunns to produce .2 of a kilogram of organochlorines per one tonne of pulp.
Once again do some maths here, 800,000 tonnes of pulp multiplied by .2 of a kilogram, the answer 160 tonnes of organochlorines per year.
It is amazing how truly informed one can become by just reading some real basic documents.
Dave Groves
May 28, 2005 at 20:46
What, no reply to your letter Les?
To quote some lyrics, “silence is golden, but my eyes still see”.
Nudger
May 31, 2005 at 10:40
MONTY!!!!!!! Just found this article.
How great to see your by-line again, even if it was really a speech scribbled down by His Tuffness at one of Mr Nice Guy’s legacy nights.
Once the Monty by-line was the totem for telling it how it really is in Tasmania, the highly readable but largely unread Australian letting us in on all the secrets the Mock studiously chose to ignore, well until the old Shock Jock came along. Gee that’s all a while ago now and the Mock can’t work out what sort of newspaper it is any more, or even if it is a newspaper or just the Princess Mary Newsletter.
But you’re back, Monty, telling it as it is. Hope you’re right about the Pulp Mill technology and your brand of grey wisdom, as distinct from Gray, garners as much coverage as the green folk. Love a stoush!
Better get the silent phone number ready though, mate. Remember that bloke who spoke out about the platypusses. The green folk don’t like people of credibility disagreeing with them. You could be in for it, as if you haven’t been already. If the phone goes at 3am and it’s a Wesley Vale number, don’t answer it!
Anyway hope you are well? Miss spotting you alfresco in Salamanca, the subtle mix of the distinguished Monty grey, navy blue and the brown Gucci deck shoes. When you go over to the suits, ah doesn’t life change?
Bet you’re doing a bit better than the old Beamer though! And I bet the company car is far more greenhouse friendly than the old Toyotas and Datsuns those from the other side drive around in, belching all sorts of evils into the pristine air. I mean, what kind of ancient bombs do Flanagan, Peg, Chrissie or Bob, drive, eh?
Yes technology can do marvellous things. A really caring environmentalist would have a new car every year – except a lot of energy goes into making those cars, so maybe not.
If horses didn’t fart and shit all the way up and down Murray and Macquarie Street, that would really be the way to go wouldn’t it. Imagine getting a company Clydesdale instead of a gas guzzling, greenhouse producing Fairlane.
Anyhow must look each other up old mate. Next time you’re wandering into the ugly building in Murray Street I’m the one smiling and waving. No not Paul Lennon, me Nudger! The good looking one. No amount of TV make-overs will ever do that for Big Red.
Though he did look a bit impressive walking next to the prime midget on the telly the other night. Almost a Statesman, another environmentally friendly car, if ever there was one.
Bet the walk in the forest was your idea Monty!
If it was, you can relax now. That and the talk at the Guy’s Night means you’ve earned your big money.
Onya,
Your old cobber Nudger
hunting range finder
November 5, 2008 at 04:53
Once again do some maths here, 800,000 tonnes of pulp multiplied by .2 of a kilogram, the answer 160 tonnes of organochlorines per year.