WR1210 Sustainable Paper

www.defra.gov.uk

Project WR1210 – How can paper be made more sustainable?

A desk-based review

February 2012

Acknowledgements

Defra would like to thank the Confederation of Paper Industries (CPI) and Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) for providing valuable information and input to this project.

Executive Summary Globally, 1Mt of paper are consumed every day, making paper both a very important commodity and a significant resource. From its production to its end-of-life paper has the potential to cause significant negative environmental effects. The UK paper industry has made, and continues to make, good progress towards minimising its environmental impacts and the Government is keen to continue to work with the industry to make it even more sustainable.

The aim of this project is to draw together, via a literature review, a robust evidence base to help inform and direct future policy development. The literature review focuses on:

 The paper making process, including the technical, financial and market implications associated with the use of recovered fibre (RCF).

 The profile of the UK paper industry and the flow of fibre through the UK.

 Material inputs and outputs to the UK paper industry, including water, energy and waste, quantifying them where possible.

 The environmental impacts associated with each stage of the life cycle of paper, from forestry to end-of-life.

The report focuses on the environmental aspects of the paper industry‟s performance and, to a lesser extent, the economic and social aspects.

Paper making process

Overall, UK paper mills use approximately 75% recovered fibre and 25% virgin fibre. The virgin fibre used in UK paper manufacturing is mostly imported, as virgin fibre production in the UK is limited to two sites, both of which use all the virgin fibre they produce for their own paper products. Virgin paper production and paper recycling are fully dependant on each other for paper production to remain sustainable. There is a minimum fibre length requirement for recycling of paper to be feasible and since the re-pulping process shortens the paper fibre, virgin fibre or high quality recovered fibre (RCF) must be introduced to the paper loop to compensate for the loss of fibre.

Newsprint manufacturing uses the highest percentage of RCF, with almost 100% of newsprint produced in the UK made from recovered fibre. The lowest recycled contents, on the other hand, are found in printings and writings (P&W) and tissue paper, mostly because of customer perceptions and requirements. Although virgin fibre in P&W can be recycled, virgin fibre used in tissue and other hygienic products is lost after its first use. Therefore, an opportunity exists to work with industry and the public to promote the greater use of RCF in these products.

To further increase paper recycling the industry must overcome the important barrier of contamination. While paper contamination can occur either before or after use of the paper product, post-consumer contamination is most easily avoidable. The most important paper contaminants are glass and grease/food. Glass is broken down to an abrasive dust

causing wear and tear of the mill equipment whereas grease and food contamination impacts on the strength and presentation of the finished product. Other contaminants include difficult to remove inks and integral additives used to make paper and paper products.

Profile of the UK paper industry

The UK paper industry is comprised of 52 active mills and contributes about 2% to the UK‟s manufacturing economy. The UK is in fact the 8th largest European paper producer and the 5th largest European RCF consumer.

In 2009, 12.1 Mt of paper were consumed in the UK. Some of this paper was produced domestically, mainly from recovered fibre, although the majority was imported as unconverted paper (7.0 Mt), as packaging around products (1.2 Mt) and as converted and printed paper products (0.5 Mt). A total of 8.2 Mt of waste paper were collected in the UK in 2009 and slightly less (8 Mt) in 2010. The UK paper collection rate (amount collected/amount in circulation) has been increasing steadily year-on-year, reaching 68% in 2009, although 2010 saw a small decrease to about 65%. This was probably due to a typical lag between an increase in consumption and an increase in collection of waste paper; the collection rate is likely to increase in 2011 to reflect the increase in paper consumption in 2010.

There is a practical limit to the amount of paper that can be collected for recycling, due to the fact that much of the uncollected paper either remains in circulation (e.g. banknotes and in libraries) or is unrecoverable for hygienic or practical reasons (e.g. tissue paper). However, over 1 Mt of paper still ends up in the residual stream. It could be possible to increase the UK‟s paper collection rate by focusing efforts on historically difficult to reach sources such as recycling on the go, SMEs, densely populated areas such as high rise flats etc.

In 2009 and 2010, about 54% of the UK collected RCF was exported for reprocessing primarily to the Far East markets and particularly to China, although 2010 saw a marked increase in European demand for UK RCF. The 2008 recession highlighted the volatility of RCF prices when a decrease in demand caused a significant dip in prices and a short stockpiling of collected RCF. Although the market recovered, the recession demonstrated the importance of taking action to secure the UK‟s position in supplying RCF to the global market. By ensuring that high quality RCF is collected (e.g. minimising contamination by non-target material), UK exports will become more competitive in the international paper market.

Material inputs and outputs

Virgin fibre (1.2 Mt), recovered fibre (3.8 Mt) and non-fibrous additives (0.3 Mt) were the main raw material inputs to the UK paper industry in 2009. Water is another important input for the industry as it is used for pulp and paper production but also for cooling down the equipment. About 60% of the industry‟s water intake is from the mains with the remaining 40% coming from direct abstraction. Water consumption is about 12.5 million m3 per year; approximately 15% of the industry‟s total water intake.

exported to the grid). Energy from waste is becoming important for recovered mills as well, with RCF residues being used for energy production. The energy source within a mill is a key factor in determining its overall environmental impact. The principal energy sources for papermaking in the UK are natural gas and electricity, although other sources such as coal, oil and biomass are also used to generate energy on site.

The amount of energy consumed by each mill depends on its products and on the processes employed within the mill. The industry‟s energy consumption in 2009 was 1,705 thousand tonnes of oil equivalents (toe) accounting for approximately 6.4% of the UK industrial consumption and about 0.8% of the total UK energy consumption. Pulp and paper mill energy efficiencies have improved greatly over the years achieving a 42% reduction in specific energy consumption when comparing the industry‟s 2010 performance to its 1990 performance. This is due to the increased use of more energy efficient technologies and combined heat and power (CHP). Currently, there are nineteen operational CHP plants either in the pulp and paper manufacturing sector in the UK or servicing the sector and, although the majority currently run on gas, an increasing number use biomass. These CHP plants exported approximately 731 GWh of electricity to the grid in 2009.

In 2009, the UK paper industry produced 1.1 Mt of newsprint, 0.5 Mt of P&W, 1.7 Mt of Packaging, 0.7 Mt of Sanitary and Household and 0.3 Mt of other paper grades (such as specialities), for a total paper production of 4.3 Mt. Other main industry outputs are wastewater, discharge of which lies within 16 and 17 m3/t product, and waste. In 2009, about 1.0 Mt of waste was produced during the production of paper (production loss) but more detailed waste data for the sector are not available. Data from 2002/03 suggest that about 1/3 of the sector‟s waste is card and paper that is usually sent for recycling, 1/3 is rejects from sorting and pulping and 1/3 is sludge. The industry‟s waste in 2002/03 amounted to 1.8 Mt.

Environmental impacts

Over the years the UK paper industry has greatly improved its environmental credentials. Starting from sourcing of raw materials, significant efforts have been made to reduce the amount of illegally sourced timber that is imported into the UK. Although the industry only uses a very small amount of virgin pulp, arising mostly from European countries and thus legally sourced, large amounts of converted and unconverted paper and paper products enter the UK. It is often very difficult to determine whether the raw materials for these products were legally sourced or not. New European regulations on the banning of illegal timber and timber products, coupled with chain of custody certifications, should help to significantly minimise the amount of illegally sourced wood and paper entering the UK, either directly or indirectly.

UK emissions to air and water arising from the production of pulp, paper and paper products have also been significantly reduced. Emissions are in compliance with Environmental Permitting Regulation requirements and are similar to emissions from mills in other European countries. The industry‟s water emissions for 2008 were 48 kg/t of product BOD and 8.52 kg/t product COD. Air emissions in 2008 were 0.18 kg/t product SO2 and 0.78 kg/t product NOx.

Over half of the UK RCF is sent abroad for recycling, mostly to China and this is associated with increased emissions arising from the transport of material and with uncertainty in emissions from Chinese paper mills. WRAP work suggests that recycling of paper is preferable to landfill even if this means shipping the material to China. Furthermore, since most of the material is now being reprocessed in new Chinese mills using state of the art technology, processing emissions are also reduced.

Despite the UK‟s high paper collection rates, a substantial amount of paper waste (1.4 Mt) is still contained within residual waste and is either disposed of in landfill or incinerated in Energy from Waste (EfW) facilities. In determining the best end-of-lifetime treatment for waste paper the waste hierarchy must be respected and particular emphasis must be placed on waste prevention and recycling. In fact, reviews of paper lifecycle assessments have shown that paper recycling is the most sustainable waste management option in most situations, when compared to EfW and landfill.

Contents

Executive Summary ...... 1

Glossary ...... 9

1. Introduction ...... 12

2. Project objectives, scope and background ...... 13 2.1 Environmental priorities ...... 13 2.2 Project scope and structure ...... 14

3. Making paper ...... 15 3.1 Virgin fibre ...... 16 3.2 Recovered paper ...... 17 3.3 Bleaching and OBAs ...... 21 3.4 Additives ...... 21 3.5 Problems with the use of RCF ...... 21 3.5.1 Technical issues ...... 22 3.5.2 Financial and market implications ...... 24 4. The UK paper industry ...... 25 4.1 Virgin fibre as a raw material ...... 27 4.2 RCF as a raw material ...... 28 4.3 Paper production ...... 29 4.4 Paper consumption ...... 31 4.5 Imports and exports of new paper ...... 32 4.6 Collection and sorting of recovered paper ...... 34 4.6.1 Collection from the municipal waste stream ...... 35 4.6.2 Collection from the C&I waste stream ...... 36 4.6.3 Paper sorting at MRFs ...... 37 Missed fibre ...... 38 Contamination ...... 39 4.7 Loss of material ...... 40 4.8 Recovered paper exports and imports ...... 41 4.9 The economics of the UK paper industry ...... 45 4.10 The UK paper industry in the international market ...... 47

5. Material flows in the UK paper market ...... 50 5.1 Inputs ...... 50 5.1.1 Raw material ...... 50 5

5.1.2 Energy ...... 51 Combined heat and power ...... 53 Energy consumption for different paper grades ...... 54 Differences in energy consumption between paper mills ...... 55 5.1.3 Water ...... 58 5.2 Outputs ...... 59 5.2.1 Waste...... 60 5.2.2 Water emissions ...... 62 5.2.3 Air emissions ...... 63 6. Environmental impacts of the paper life cycle ...... 64 6.1 Forestry ...... 65 6.1.1 Illegal logging ...... 65 6.1.2 Managed plantations and sustainable forestry ...... 67 6.1.3 The UK situation ...... 67 6.2 Pulp production ...... 70 6.3 Collection and transportation of recovered fibre ...... 74 6.4 Disposal and treatment of residual waste...... 76 6.5 Life cycle analysis – recycling vs. landfill and incineration ...... 77 6.5.1 Energy demand ...... 77 6.5.2 Other energy related impacts ...... 77 6.5.3 Resource consumption ...... 78 6.5.4 Waste...... 79 6.5.5 Water consumption ...... 79 6.5.6 Toxicity ...... 79 6.5.7 COD and land use ...... 79 6.5.8 Climate change ...... 79 Differences between paper grades ...... 80 6.5.9 Remarks ...... 81 6.6 Other impacts ...... 81

7. Summary and concluding remarks ...... 83

Appendix A – Environmental policy landscape ...... 92

Appendix B - EN 643 Grades of paper ...... 96

Appendix C – Main process and product aids in the paper industry ...... 103

Appendix D – Emissions description and limits ...... 105

Table of Figures FIGURE 1 A DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE PAPER SYSTEM ...... 15 FIGURE 2 THE PAPER-MAKING PROCESS ...... 17 FIGURE 3 PROCESSES FOR THE REMOVAL OF UNWANTED MATERIAL FROM RCF ACCORDING TO THEIR SIZE.. 20 FIGURE 4 MATERIAL FLOWS THROUGH THE UK PAPER SYSTEM IN 2009 ...... 26 FIGURE 5 TRENDS IN WOODPULP USAGE FOR UK PAPER MANUFACTURING ...... 27 FIGURE 6 RECOVERED PAPER UTILISATION BY SECTOR IN CEPI COUNTRIES 2009 ...... 28 FIGURE 7 OVERALL PAPER AND BOARD MANUFACTURING IN THE UK FROM 1989 TO 2010 ...... 30 FIGURE 8 TRENDS IN PAPER AND BOARD MILLS AND EMPLOYEES IN THE UK FROM 1989 TO 2010 ...... 30 FIGURE 9 TRENDS IN PAPER PRODUCTION (BY PAPER GRADE) IN THE UK ...... 31 FIGURE 10 PAPER AND BOARD CONSUMPTION IN THE UK FROM 1989 TO 2010 ...... 32 FIGURE 11 CONSUMPTION TRENDS BY PAPER GRADE FROM 2007 TO 2009 ...... 32 FIGURE 12 EXPORTS OF DOMESTICALLY PRODUCED PAPER PRODUCTS BETWEEN JANUARY AND DECEMBER 2009 ...... 33 FIGURE 13 TRENDS IN RECOVERED PAPER COLLECTION IN THE UK ...... 34 FIGURE 14 RECOVERED PAPER COLLECTED IN THE UK IN 2009 ...... 35 FIGURE 15 LOCAL AUTHORITY PAPER COLLECTIONS IN THE UK FOR 2008/2009 ...... 36 FIGURE 16 PAPER RECOVERED FROM THE UK MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM IN 2007/2008 ...... 36 FIGURE 17 COMPOSITION OF RESIDUAL MATERIALS IN UK MRFS ...... 39 FIGURE 18 COMPOSITION OF PAPER AND CARD BASED OUTPUTS ...... 40 FIGURE 19 TRENDS IN RECOVERED PAPER DOMESTIC USAGE AND EXPORTS FROM 1989 TO 2010 ...... 42 FIGURE 20 TRENDS IN UK RCF RECOVERY AND UTILISATION...... 42 FIGURE 21 MARKETS FOR UK RECOVERED PAPER ...... 43 FIGURE 22 UK EXPORTS OF RECOVERED PAPER TO CHINA FROM 2002 TO 2008 ...... 43 FIGURE 23 EXPORTS OF RECOVERED PAPER GRADES IN 2008 AND 2009 ...... 44 FIGURE 24 CHINA‟S IMPORTS OF RCF BY COUNTRY OF ORIGIN – DATA FOR 2009 ...... 44 FIGURE 25 IMPORTS OF RECOVERED PAPER GRADES IN 2008 AND 2009 ...... 45 FIGURE 26 RECOVERED PAPER PRICES FOR THE THREE MAIN RCF GRADES FROM 2007 ONWARDS ...... 46 FIGURE 27 RECOVERED PAPER PRICES FOR THE THREE MAIN GRADES OF RCF FROM FEBRUARY 2010 TO NOVEMBER FEBRUARY 2011 ...... 47 FIGURE 28 TREND IN UK PAPER CONSUMPTION ...... 48 FIGURE 29 PAPER PRODUCTION BY CEPI COUNTRY IN 2009 ...... 48 FIGURE 30 RECOVERED PAPER UTILISATION BY CEPI COUNTRY IN 2009 ...... 49 FIGURE 31 INPUTS, OUTPUTS AND IMPACTS OF THE PULP MANUFACTURING PROCESS ...... 50 FIGURE 32 NON-FIBROUS ADDITIVES USED IN THE UK PAPER INDUSTRY IN 2009 ...... 51 FIGURE 33 ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY FUEL FOR THE PAPER INDUSTRY IN 2009 (PRIMARY, TOE) ...... 54 FIGURE 34 ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY FUEL AND PAPER GRADE IN THE PAPER INDUSTRY – 2007 DATA ...... 55 FIGURE 35 WASTE TYPES AND PERCENTAGES PRODUCED BY THE PAPER INDUSTRY IN 2002 ...... 61 FIGURE 36 WASTE MANAGEMENT METHODS FOR WASTE FROM THE PAPER INDUSTRY IN 2002 ...... 62 FIGURE 37 A DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PAPER CYCLE ...... 64 FIGURE 38 EMISSION TRENDS IN THE EUROPEAN PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY, 1990 – 2008 ...... 65 FIGURE 39 SOURCES OF WOODPULP FOR CEPI COUNTRIES IN 2009...... 68 FIGURE 40 UK COMPANIES WITH COC CERTIFICATION...... 69 FIGURE 41 CONTRIBUTION OF SUPPLY CHAIN STAGES TO THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF MAGAZINES ...... 70 FIGURE 42 WATER AND AIR EMISSIONS FROM THE PRODUCTION OF PULP AND PAPER IN CEPI COUNTRIES .... 74 FIGURE 43 THE EFFECTS OF PAPER GRADE ON THE GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL OF THE DIFFERENT END-OF- LIFE OPTIONS ...... 82

List of Tables

TABLE 1 PAPER GRADES AND SOME OF THEIR CHARACTERISTICS ...... 19 TABLE 2 TYPICAL MUNICIPAL MRF COMPOSITION BY WEIGHT ...... 37 TABLE 3 FUELS CONSUMED AND EXPORTED BY THE UK PULP AND PAPER MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY IN 2008 AND 2009 ...... 52 TABLE 4 EXAMPLE HEAT AND POWER CONSUMPTIONS FROM VARIOUS EUROPEAN PULP AND PAPER MILLS .... 57 TABLE 5 TYPICAL WATER USE FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF PULP AND PAPER MILLS ...... 58 TABLE 6 WATER USE OF THE UK PAPER INDUSTRY IN 2009 AND 2010 ...... 59 TABLE 7 EXAMPLE EMISSIONS TO WATER FROM DIFFERENT TYPES OF EUROPEAN MILLS ASSUMING BATS .... 71 TABLE 8 EXAMPLE EMISSIONS TO WATER FROM EUROPEAN PAPERMAKING MILLS ASSUMING BATS ...... 72 TABLE 9 EXAMPLE EMISSIONS TO AIR FROM DIFFERENT TYPES OF EUROPEAN MILLS ASSUMING BATS ...... 72 TABLE 10 EXAMPLE EMISSIONS TO AIR FROM AUXILIARY BOILERS ASSUMING BATS ...... 73 TABLE 11 WATER AND AIR EMISSIONS FROM THE PRODUCTION OF PULP AND PAPER IN THE UK ...... 74

Glossary

Absorbable organic a measure of the amount of halogens (fluorine, chlorine, halogens (AOX) bromine, iodine) bound to organic substances.

Biodiversity biological diversity in nature at all levels of living organisms.

Black liquor it is produced by the Kraft process and is a combination of the lignin that is removed from the pulp, water and the chemicals used for pulping. It is concentrated and burnt in the mills‟ CHP plant.

Biochemical oxygen it expresses the amount of dissolved oxygen consumed by demand (BOD) micro-organisms as they decompose organic material. Usually it is measure over 5 days (BOD5) but can also be measured over 7 days (BOD7).

Chain of custody (CoC) a certification granted that allows credible tracking of material certification from sustainably managed forests, through all successive stages of the production process, to committed retailers and consumers. Certification is for operations that manufacture, process or trade in timber or non-timber forest products.

Chemical oxygen it measures the oxygen demand of all the organic matter in demand (COD) water.

Closed loop recycling a recycling system where a product is recycled into the same product, for example recycling glass bottles into glass bottles. In the case of paper, closed loop recycling is recycling paper products into paper products regardless of grade.

Combined heat and integrates the production of usable heat and power (electricity), power (CHP) or in one single, highly efficient process. CHP generates electricity cogeneration whilst also capturing usable heat that is produced in this process.

Confederation of a Brussels-based non-profit making organisation regrouping the European Paper European pulp and paper industry and championing this Industries (CEPI) industry‟s achievements and the benefits of its products. CEPI‟s mission is to promote its member‟s business sector by monitoring and analyzing activities and initiatives in the areas of industry, environment, energy, forestry, recycling, fiscal policies and competitiveness in general.

Confederation of Paper the leading organisation working on behalf of the UK paper- Industries (CPI) related industry. It represents the paper chain from the recovery of used paper through papermaking and conversion to distribution.

Deforestation the clearing of forests by logging and/or burning either naturally

or caused by man.

Forest Stewardship an independent, non-governmental, not-for-profit organization Council (FSC) established to promote the responsible management of the world‟s forests, through independent third party certification.

Gross Value Added GVA measures the contribution to the economy of each individual producer, industry or sector in the United Kingdom.

High paper grades also known as Printings and Writings (P&W). It is recovered paper that was mainly used to print and write on, for example office paper.

Illegal logging the harvesting, transport, processing, buying or selling of wood in violation of legislation.

Landfill tax escalator increases the cost of landfill of material by £8 per tonne per year for active waste from £32 per tonne in 2008 to £80 per tonne in 2014.

Life cycle all stages in the lifetime of a product from raw materials through to use and disposal. It includes production of raw materials, the production, processing, storage, transport of materials and use, recycled and disposal.

Legal logging the sourcing, harvesting and processing of wood in compliance with legislation in both the exporting and the importing countries.

Mixed paper a mixture of recovered paper grades.

News and PAMS a term that refers to a mixture of recovered newspapers and magazines.

Old corrugated a term that refers to used boxes or sheets of corrugated board. containers (OCC) Also generally referred to as Old Corrugated Casing, Old Corrugated Cardboard or simply Packaging.

Open loop recycling a recycling system where a product is recycled into a different type of product, usually involving a change in properties. For example, recycling paper into pellets for insulation or animal bedding.

Paper in this report the word „paper‟ is used to mean paper, paperboard and other paper and paperboard products

Paper industry in this report „paper industry‟ refers to the pulp and paper manufacturing industry. The printing and publishing industries are excluded from this definition.

Programme for the an international non-profit, non-governmental organisation Endorsement of Forest dedicated to promoting Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) 10

Certification (PEFC) through independent third-party certification.

Recovered fibre (RCF) paper and paper products recovered from the waste stream.

Reforestation the re-planting of an area that was previously deforested.

Standard Industrial a code that is used to classify business establishments and Classification of other standard units by the type of economic activity in which Economic Activities they are engaged. The system is identical to the EUROSTAT (SIC) System NACE at the four digit class level and the United Nations system ISIC at the two digit Divisional level

Sulphate or Kraft a chemical process for the production of pulp using sodium process sulphide and sodium hydroxide. It is the most commonly used chemical pulping process.

Sulphite process another chemical pulping process that uses an acid bisulphite solution to soften up the wood and remove the lignin.

Sustainable forest the management of forests in a way that meets our needs today management without jeopardising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Tissue paper a collective term for sanitary papers such as toilet paper, handkerchiefs, kitchen wipes, towels and cosmetic tissues.

Tonne of oil equivalent the amount of energy released by burning one tonne of crude (toe) oil. This is the equivalent of 41.2 GJ or 11.6 MWh.

Total suspended solids a measure of the matter dissolved or suspended in water and (TSS) wastewater. A measure of turbidity.

Virgin pulp pulp produced from virgin fibre, mostly softwood or hardwood.

Woodfree paper paper made from chemical pulp. It is described this way because the lignin is removed during the chemical pulping process.

1. Introduction The use of paper can be dated back thousands of years - from its first form as papyrus in ancient Egypt to its form that most resembles the paper we use today in China circa 100AD. Since then, paper has been integral to our cultural development and remains essential for modern life; it is an important medium used to increase levels of literacy, disseminate news and knowledge worldwide, protect goods and foodstuffs, and maintain general hygiene. Paper also provides a large number of jobs worldwide.

According to WWF (2007), around the world we use about 1 million tonnes of paper every day. In the UK, approximately 12 million tonnes of paper were consumed in 2009; more than two thirds of this paper was imported from abroad, either in the form of unconverted or converted paper products or packaging. Approximately 8 million tonnes of paper were recovered from the waste stream in 2009 and 2010; this represents most of the paper available for recovery in the UK, as much of the remainder is either in permanent use (e.g. books in libraries) or is unrecoverable (e.g. toilet paper). More than 50% of this recovered paper was exported for recycling abroad.

Growth in global paper consumption has driven a parallel expansion in production with an associated increase in demand for resource inputs (e.g. fibre, additives etc.). The processing of pulp and paper is an energy intensive process and, if not properly regulated, can release a wide range of polluting compounds into the environment. Furthermore, if disposed of to landfill, paper will decompose and release landfill gas, which is roughly 60% methane and 40% carbon dioxide, both of which are greenhouse gases.

That said, paper is made from renewable resources and the paper industry, particularly in Europe, has made great strides in minimising the environmental impacts of paper at each stage of its life cycle. However, as global consumption is likely to continue to increase with growing development, literacy, and global trade, it is becoming increasingly important to further minimise these impacts.

The Government and the paper industry must continue to work together, to rise to the challenge and find ways of making paper even more sustainable.

2. Project objectives, scope and background A sound evidence base is critical to better policy making. The purpose of this report is to draw together, via a literature review, available information on paper and its environmental impacts in order to help policy makers gain a better understanding of the UK paper sector and to help answer the following questions:

 What role can the sector play in helping the Government pursue its environmental objectives?

 What challenges need to be addressed by the sector to make paper even more sustainable?

 What are the opportunities for working with the sector?

2.1 Environmental priorities

A key priority for the coalition government is to support a strong and sustainable green economy, resilient to climate change. To this end, the Government will seek to develop and implement policies which:

 Promote a low-carbon and eco-friendly economy;

 Drive sustainable public sector practice across government; and

 Drive a “zero waste” agenda.

In relation to the final bullet above, in 2010, the coalition government announced a full review of England‟s waste policies (the Waste Review) to ensure that the Government is taking the right steps towards creating a „zero waste economy‟. As part of the Review, the government wished to explore the potential role of voluntary responsibility deals on waste among businesses, and identify those sectors and issues which should be the focus of such deals.

This report fed into the Waste Review by providing the evidence needed to help advise whether the paper industry should be the focus of a voluntary responsibility deal, and if so what the deal should focus on (e.g. sub-sectors, issues) in order to make the sector even more sustainable.

A key mechanism through which the Government drives towards a zero waste economy is UK implementation of the revised Waste Framework Directive. This will impact on the paper sector1 and will require:

 The waste hierarchy to become a priority order in law.

 A greater focus on waste prevention.

 Higher levels of recycling, especially in relation to key waste materials such as paper.

1 A list of other environmental policies affecting the paper industry can be found in Appendix A

 Separate collections for key waste materials, including paper, by 2015 where technically, environmentally and economically practicable – the intention is to have collection systems that deliver quality recyclables.

2.2 Project scope and structure

The report focuses on the environmental aspects of the paper industry‟s performance and, although equally important within the context of sustainability, the economic and social aspects are covered to a lesser extent.

In terms of defining the scope of the „paper industry‟, this report is predominantly concerned with:

 The production of pulp and paper. However, attention is also given to the upstream impacts associated with forestry, and the downstream impacts of printing, publishing and distribution.

 The paper industry within the borders of the UK. However, since most of the woodpulp used in the UK is imported, it was necessary to include some information that relates to overseas woodpulp production. European and international comparisons are also made and mostly serve to put the UK paper production into context.

The literature review focuses on:

 The paper making process (Chapter 3). It introduces the raw materials used in the papermaking process; describes the processes used to make paper; discusses the technical, financial and market implications associated with the use of recovered fibre.

 The profile of the UK paper industry (Chapter 4). It presents the UK paper industry and the flow of fibre through the UK system; discusses the collection and sorting of recovered paper, RCF exports and imports and the economics of the UK paper industry.

 Material flows around the UK paper system for the industry as a whole and by sub- sector, where possible (Chapter 5). This chapter discusses the inputs and outputs of the paper industry, including water, energy and waste, and where possible quantifies them.

 The environmental impacts associated with each stage of the life cycle of paper (Chapter 6), from forestry to end-of life, including emissions data to water and air from various paper making activities.

3. Making paper The paper life cycle is complex and made up of a number of individual but interrelated processes, each with specific inputs and outputs (Figure 1). This chapter aims to simplify the cycle by discussing the main paper making processes separately and by focussing in particular on the two main raw materials, virgin fibre and recovered paper.

Figure 1 A diagrammatic representation of the paper system

Source: Modified from WRAP 2006

3.1 Virgin fibre About 90% of the world‟s virgin pulp is sourced from wood, whereas 10% is made up of cotton, straw, bamboo and other fibres (Defra, 2006). Wood is made up of 50% cellulose fibres held together by 30% lignin. Both softwood and hardwood can be used to make paper; the differences in their cellulose fibre structure allow paper makers to produce products of varying characteristics.

In Europe, about 26% of the wood used to produce virgin fibre is a by-product of other industries and 40-50% comes from commercial thinning operations or is left over from felling for other uses such as furniture making (CEPI, n.d.). To make virgin paper, the cellulose fibres in wood must be separated into individual strands. The first step in the process is debarking and chipping of the wood where required. The woodchips are then pulped either chemically, mechanically, or through a combination of chemical and mechanical processes (Figure 2).

The chosen pulping process depends on the required characteristics of the final products. Chemical pulping separates lignin from cellulose fibre using the addition of chemicals, heat and pressure. The lignin is then removed from the mixture resulting in a relatively low yield of pulp of about 43% of the original raw material, although yields can be much higher depending on the grade of pulp being produced. The fibres in chemical pulp are long and strong and the final product maintains its white colour over time. Therefore, chemical pulp is most commonly used in the manufacture of Printings and Writings (P&W) and specialist packaging and papers where presentation, cleanliness and print quality are critical.

There are two types of chemical pulping: Kraft /sulphate or sulphite (acid process). The Kraft process is used more widely because it can be applied to all types of wood and results in stronger paper. 95-98% of the chemicals used in Kraft mills can be recovered and reused whereas the sulphite process allows for a lower chemical recovery rate (Defra, 2006). Because the lignin is removed from the pulp mixture, paper made from chemical pulp is often termed „woodfree‟. The liquid remaining after the pulping process is completed, called black liquor, can be used to produce a great part of the heat (in the form of steam) and energy that the process requires.

Mechanical pulping involves the grinding of wood to separate the cellulose fibres. Lignin remains in the pulp hence the mechanical process results in a high pulp yield of about 95% but requires more energy and results in shorter and weaker fibres than those produced by chemical pulping. As lignin degrades readily causing the paper products to turn yellow, mechanical pulp is used for the production of certain paper grades with a short lifespan, such as newsprint, or for paper that is hidden in product use, such as inner layers of multiple layer paper packaging grades.

There are a number of pulping process variations, employing parts of the mechanical and chemical pulping processes and resulting in intermediate strength pulp. Two of the most common ones are thermomechanical pulping (TMP) which involves steaming the woodpulp followed by grinding, and chemo-thermomechanical pulping (CTMP) which uses sulphur, followed by steam and then grinding.

Once pulp is made, it is laid on a thin screen and pressed to release the excess water, leaving behind a wet, thin layer of cellulose mesh which is subsequently dried to produce paper.

The principal energy sources for papermaking are natural gas and electricity, although other sources such as coal, oil and biomass are also used to generate energy on site. Pulp and paper mill energy efficiencies have improved greatly over recent years. For example, although electrical consumption in mechanical mills tends to be large, the process allows considerable heat recovery that is then used in paper production. Likewise, the by-products from chemical pulping can be used for the production of heat and electricity in combined heat and power (CHP) plants. Currently, there are nineteen operational CHP plants either in the pulp and paper manufacturing sector in the UK or servicing the sector and, although the majority currently run on gas, an increasing number use biomass. More information on the energy consumption and production of the UK paper sector is provided in Chapter 5.

Figure 2 The paper-making process

Source: CPI website

3.2 Recovered paper The predominant fibre for paper manufacturing, used either as an alternative or as a complement to virgin fibre, is fibre from recovered paper. This can either be pre-consumer paper, unprinted paper returned from the printers, offcuts from the conversion process and press room waste, or post-consumer paper products which is mostly paper that has been used for some specific purpose. Recovered paper products come in many different forms and shapes ranging from newspapers and magazines to office paper and cardboard therefore, recovered paper is split into different grades based on its characteristics.

Although formal standards for the characterisation of recovered paper have been developed2, the industry generally refers to four main grades of recovered fibre (RCF): News and PAMs which is made up of newsprint and magazines; old corrugated containers (OCC) comprising used boxes or sheets of corrugated cardboard and is also generally referred to

2 An example of such a standard is the widely used in Europe BS EN 643. See Appendix B for a list of RCF grades described in this standard.

as Packaging; high grades also known as Printings and Writings (P&W) made up of paper that was mainly used to print and write on such as office paper; and mixed grades which is a mixture of the grades of RCF listed above.

Typically, News and PAMs are used to produce new newsprint material whereas OCC and mixed papers are mostly used to produce new cardboard and packaging paper products (Table 1). High grades are mainly used for the production of new sanitary and office papers.

Newsprint and cardboard packaging papers are produced almost entirely from RCF in the UK (one mill produces paperboard from virgin mechanical pulp), although some amounts are still made from virgin fibre in other countries. On the other hand, tissue and household paper products have a lower overall RCF content of about 50% because input of virgin fibre is required to meet consumer expectations. The lowest RCF content is generally found in Printings and Writings (~10%) although there are many 100% recycled grades on the market. The generally low RCF content in P&W could at times be attributed to the printing industry‟s perceptions of the resulting characteristics of the paper product. This and other issues related to RCF content are discussed in more detail later in the report.

Depending on the effectiveness of the collection process and the make-up of the collected paper, RCF may contain a number of non-fibrous materials that must be removed prior to paper production. Typical materials are staples, glues and adhesives, plastics, ink and fillers and based on their size and chemical characteristics they can be removed in a series of cleaning and screening processes (Figure 3). The first step to the process is re-pulping the RCF, which involves the addition of water and the use of a hydrapulper to break down the paper and separate it into individual fibres. Pulp is then passed through a circular screen which removes contraries (unwanted pieces of material attached to the paper). The pulp is able to pass through the circular mesh of the screen whereas contraries are collected at the bottom of the screen. This process is usually able to remove all materials larger than 200 µm, although high levels of contamination can cause clogging of the bottom part of the screen decreasing the process efficiency. A process called cleaning then takes place to remove particles from 100 to 350 µm such as grit, sand and large ink particles. Here, the pulp enters a conically shaped centrifuge where it is spun forcing the water and fibres to the side walls, whereas the heavier rejects fall right through its centre (Fricker et al., 2007).

Table 1 Paper grades and some of their characteristics

Grade Raw Materials Common Uses/Products Additives

Newsprint Entirely RCF for UK China clay for bulk Newspapers. manufacture. Some virgin and opacity. based newsprint is imported to the UK where this is Dyes for colour (if necessary for specific necessary). purposes.

Printings and Mainly chemical and Mineral fillers for Books, periodicals, Writings mechanical pulp. Although increased opacity. stationery, there are many 100% catalogues, recycled grades on the Sizing agents for brochures. market, overall, across all water repellence. P&W, only about 10% of the Dyes for colour (if raw material used is RCF. necessary).

Packaging Mostly RCF in the UK. Glues, plastics, Corrugated case, Paper and Some virgin based aluminium etc. may folding cartons, Board packaging material is be added at the aseptic cartons, imported to the UK where conversion stage padded bags, multi- this is necessary for specific depending on the walled paper sacks. purposes. final product.

Household Mixture of chemical and Resins for Toilet paper, kitchen Tissues mechanical pulp and some increased wet rolls, disposable high grade RCF. Although strength. nappies, wipes. there are many 100% recycled grades on the market, overall, across all Tissues, only about 50% of the raw material used is RCF.

Other Paper Almost entirely virgin based. Sizing agents for Filter papers, and Board water repellence. cigarette papers, tea (Specialities) bags, currency and Resins for security papers. increased wet strength.

Dyes for colour (if necessary).

Source: Information sourced mostly from WRAP, 2007; Biffaward, 2003 and CPI, Pers. Comm.

Figure 3 Processes for the removal of unwanted material from RCF according to their size

Source: Fricker et al., 2007

The reprocessing of RCF often requires a de-inking step because ink particles larger than 40 µm produce visible specs on the final product whereas particles smaller than 40 µm, although individually invisible to the naked eye, give a greyish appearance to the paper. In effect, the de-inking process begins simultaneously to the pulping process with the addition of chemicals such as dispersants – which draw the ink away from the paper and into the water, or surfactants (soaps) – which attach the hydrophobic ink particles to the water particles. The chemicals used depend on the chosen de-inking process; wash de-inking requires the use of dispersants whereas flotation de-inking requires the use of soaps.

Flotation usually takes place after the cleaning process to remove particles with diameter between 50 µm and 150 µm. The pulp slurry moves to a tank where small air bubbles are blown through it from the bottom up and as they rise they attach to the ink-soap molecules forming a frothy layer at the top of the tank. This is then promptly removed leaving behind clean pulp (IPTS, 2010). If removal of even smaller particles is required (<10µm) washing can then take place. The basic principle of washing is to create a suspension by diluting and mixing the pulp in clean water and then filtering or pressing the liquor out of the suspension. Washing usually takes place in various stages, where washing machines or operations are set up in series and wash water is passed through them in a counter-clockwise manner. This means that clean water passes through the cleanest pulp first and then gradually makes its way to the dirtiest pulp at the beginning of the wash series, ensuring that the smallest possible amount of water is used (Sillanpää, 2005). As the industry is always looking to make water and energy savings many companies have developed proprietary washing equipment that is increasingly more efficient. 20

3.3 Bleaching and OBAs When paper with increased brightness is required, particularly for the production of certain paper grades such as P&W, it may be necessary to bleach the pulp. There are three ways of bleaching: Elemental Chlorine bleaching (which uses chlorine and hypochlorite), Elemental Chlorine Free bleaching (which uses chlorine dioxide, oxygen and hydrogen peroxide) and Totally Chlorine Free bleaching (which uses oxygen and hydrogen peroxide or sodium hydrosulphite). Elemental chlorine is no longer used in the UK or Europe but has been replaced by hydrogen peroxide, oxygen and in some cases ozone.

Another way of improving paper brightness is through the use of optical brightening agents (OBAs), also called fluorescent whitening agents (FWAs), either in addition to bleaching or on their own. These are chemicals of small molecular sizes that absorb UV light and emit it as a bluish light making paper look brighter and whiter. Because they are so small they can pass through the paper pores where they get absorbed by pulp fibres, diffuse throughout the paper structure and become attached through hydrogen bonding (Zhang et al., 2007). OBAs are mainly used for the production of high grade papers, where improved brightness is required, so they are mainly found in papers from virgin fibres. Because of the way they interact with paper fibres, OBAs work most efficiently with chemically produced paper, since the lignin contained in mechanically produced paper leaves fewer pore openings for OBAs to penetrate into the paper structure. Additionally, mechanical paper contains more impurities than chemical paper, further inhibiting the bonding of OBAs (Zhang et al., 2007).

Studies over the years have shown that OBAs do not pose a hazard to the environment and their environmental impact in terms of carbon footprint is very small compared to the overall footprint of papermaking. Under EU REACH regulations3 OBAs, like many other chemicals, need to be registered, when produced or imported in Europe, ensuring that they are safe to use (Jackson, 2009).

3.4 Additives There are additional chemicals that might be added to the pulp or paper, the exact types and quantities of which depend on the desired characteristics of the final product. These mostly fall into the following categories: sizing agents, dry strength agents, wet strength agents, dyes, fillers, retention aids and effluent chemicals (WRAP, n.d.1). Each group of chemicals is used for a specific function, for example, china clay, chalk and titanium dioxide are used to achieve opacity; starch, gelatine, latex, rosin and alum are used to increase water repellence and reduce ink blotting, and salt can be used to increase the paper‟s antistatic properties. Table 1 and Appendix C give some examples of how these are used.

3.5 Problems with the use of RCF In an ideal world all waste paper would be recovered and used to make new paper products. However, the reality is that there are technical and market considerations that often restrict the use of RCF, requiring the use of virgin fibre instead.

3 REACH is the European Community Regulation on chemicals and their safe use (EC 1907/2006). It deals with the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemical substances. The regulation entered into force on 1 June 2007.

3.5.1 Technical issues Recovered paper cannot be recycled indefinitely because the re-pulping process inevitably leads to the shortening of fibres. There is a minimum length requirement for recycling of used paper to be feasible and after six to seven recycling cycles the fibres in RCF become too short and end up in the process waste stream. This leads to a fibre loss of approximately 10-15% and is a key reason why virgin fibre needs to flow into the paper loop to maintain production levels. Virgin paper production and paper recycling are fully dependant on each other for paper production to remain sustainable. They cannot be looked at in isolation. The loss of fibre during the recycling process can also be compensated through the use of higher grades of RCF to increase the average fibre length of the final product (DTI, n.d.). This is reflected in the newsprint recycling process where magazines (made predominantly from virgin fibre) are used as a source of high grade fibre during newsprint production. Furthermore, the binders contained in magazines help with the deinking process. Therefore, it is important to strike the right balance between RCF and virgin fibre use.

Perhaps the most important obstacle to the use of greater quantities of RCF is the fact that paper is easily contaminated. Pre-consumer paper contamination is potentially caused by the integral additives that are used to make the paper and paper products. Post-consumer contaminants include food, grease and non-paper debris such as glass shards mixed with paper during the collection and recovery phase. Water contamination of post-consumer paper is also important as it breaks down the paper fibres and makes the material heavy and less stable.

Glass contamination is a major problem for the industry because glass tends to break into a fine abrasive dust that causes increased wear and tear to the pulp mill machinery. Integral paper additives (i.e. pre-consumer) as well as grease and food can interfere with the bonding between paper fibres and therefore impact on the strength and presentation of the final product. They can also affect its cleanliness and brightness, which means that further processing will be required to bring the final product up to standard. Larger post-consumer contaminants such as metals, plastic, wood and string are easily removed from the recycling process as they are rejected during the screening and cleaning processes of papermaking. Some mills have a means of sorting and selling these materials (e.g. through their own material recovery facilities), but where this is not the case such materials become a waste stream that must be effectively managed. This does not only incur extra costs to the mill but also leads to a loss to other material recycling streams with the associated environmental impact.

Whether the original paper was produced using chemical or mechanical pulping also affects the properties of the RCF. When chemical pulping is used the lignin is dissolved away leaving behind exposed, water-absorbing cellulose fibres. Conversely, mechanical pulp is unable to absorb as much water. When chemical pulp dries the fibres collapse irreversibly giving chemically produced paper its characteristic high strength. However, this process interferes with the bonding of fibres when the paper is re-pulped and as a result RCF made from mostly chemically produced paper can be weaker (MacGuire, 2001).

Advancements in printing technology mean that newsprint is now required to run at very high speeds with minimised break incidents. Consequently paper of a much higher strength and quality is required meaning that higher quality RCF, such as used magazines, must be 22

utilised. This can pose a problem when some (new) types of inks have been used to print on the RCF (whether this is recovered magazines or newsprint) – in particular water based flexo inks, toner based inks and UV-cured inks (Fricker et al., 2007).

The main problem with water-based flexo inks is that they are very small, in the range of 0.2- 1.0 µm, and hydrophilic which means that they cannot be agglomerated. The only way to remove them, using standard techniques, is through washing but this gives rise to the problem of removing them from the water. Toner based and UV-cured inks also cause problems because they are heat-fused to the paper. When the ink particles detach from the RCF they form flexible platelets which can pass through the screens. Furthermore, cleaning through centrifugal separation cannot always remove them because their densities are close to that of water. This can result in large particles reaching the flotation stage, but if they are above 150 µm flotation is ineffective. One solution is to remove them through mechanical dispersion, which means kneading the pulp gently so as to break down the platelets into smaller sizes, but this can lead to the shortening and loss of valuable paper fibre. More innovative techniques for the removal of problematic inks, such as the use of ultrasound (Fricker et al., 2007), are now being investigated, but with ever increasing use of these inks the problem also increases.

Recently concern was raised in the press over the migration of mineral oils from cardboard food packaging to the foods stored in them (such as rice, pasta and cereal) (The Telegraph, 2011). The problem arises when RCF is used in the production of food packaging. The sources of the mineral oils are mainly the printing ink for newspapers used in recycled paperboard packaging and partly the inks used to print on the packaging itself. This information is based on two studies published in 2010 by the Official Food Control Authority of the Canton of Zurich (Pira International, 2011). The studies identified high levels of migration of mineral oils from packaging to food regardless of whether or not an inner bag was used to contain the food. This raises concerns because of toxicological information that shows that mineral oils bio-accumulate in the liver, heart valves and lymph nodes causing inflammation whereas their aromatic fraction is linked to carcinogenicity (Pira International, 2011).

However, both the Swiss authorities and the UK Food Safety Agency (FSA) agree that there is no risk to consumers who eat a balanced diet, meaning the industry has enough time to identify environmentally and economically viable solutions to this problem (Pira International, 2011). Although consumers might think that the most straight forward solution is the use of only virgin fibre for the production of food packaging, such practice will have negative implications for both the environment and the market. A viable possible solution involves the use of a barrier between the food and the packaging that will prevent mineral oil migration. The FSA is monitoring the situation and is carrying out research to investigate further (Pira International, 2011). The European Food Standard Agency is also carrying out a risk assessment on this issue and a report is expected in September 2011 (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

It is a common misconception that shredding poses a technical difficulty to the recycling of RCF because it decreases the average fibre length of the paper leading to weaker products. However, shredded paper is included in the BS EN 643 standard as a suitable source of RCF. In fact, often it is waste management companies that do not accept shredded paper because of concerns regarding health and safety (i.e. shredded paper getting caught in 23

machinery), although an increasing number of waste management companies do collect it. A similar misconception regards the recycling of books but yet again these can be recycled according to BS EN 643 particularly if they are paperbacks. The main problem here is that collectors might not find it economic to remove the covers of hardbacks and hence prefer not to include them in their collection services.

Finally, liquid packaging board containers were previously considered non-recyclable. Though these types of container are still not recyclable through most standard paper making operations, significant improvements have been made in recycling liquid packaging board in Europe with a number of specialist mills accepting them as feedstock. The acceptability of this type of product in a recycling collection system depends on the collectors and their paper reprocessing markets.

3.5.2 Financial and market implications Paper is an internationally traded commodity and so markets for paper recycling play an important role in the collection of RCF, but European RCF supply is inelastic since it is largely governed by European and National legislation. Over the past few years the amount of RCF collected in the UK has been increasing steadily whereas the number of paper mills has been decreasing, meaning that UK mills now absorb less than 50% of the domestically collected RCF. In fact, the majority of the UK RCF is exported for recycling abroad, mostly to the Far East and particularly to China. Since end-markets are concentrated, in terms of destination, the UK is vulnerable to external shocks. Therefore, a decline in demand from the Asian markets, and particularly China, would cause a drop in RCF prices such as the one experienced in 2008.

In addition to China, the UK exports RCF to other Asian economies, mainly India and Indonesia. The UK exported 380,000 tonnes of RCF to India in 2009 (WRAP, 2010c) and 420,000 tonnes to Indonesia (WRAP, 2010d). These are relatively small amounts compared to the exports to China (about 2.6 Mt in 2010) because RCF collected in India and Indonesia is cheaper than that exported by the UK. It is estimated that over the next 5 to 10 years paper consumption and production will increase in both India and Indonesia and that most of their RCF demand will be met from increased domestic collections. Nonetheless, there is likely to be a modest increase in demand for UK RCF and a greater increase if the difference in cost between domestic and UK RCF decreases (WRAP, 2010c and 2010d). Therefore, these more price-sensitive markets offer good alternatives to UK RCF end-markets in case demand from China, and thus overall prices, should fall.

In summary, UK RCF trade faces two main categories of risk from the point of view of ensuring end-markets for it: a volume risk meaning that the global market will not be able to absorb the surplus RCF that is collected in the UK and a price risk meaning that RCF prices might become too low, regardless of demand (WRAP, 2007a). The recession resulted in a large drop in RCF prices in late 2008 (see Section 4.9) as demand from Asian economies decreased causing a stockpiling of RCF (WRAP, 2010b). Although, the market recovered by mid 2009, mainly due to the continuing demand for paper from the booming Asian economies, the situation highlighted the importance of having a diverse portfolio of end- markets. Establishing solid overseas trading relationships and increasing the quality of recovered paper will also help ensure that UK exports are competitive.

4. The UK paper industry There are currently 52 active mills in the UK and approximately 75% of the fibre they use is recovered from recycled paper. Virgin fibre is predominantly produced outside the UK, and imported for use in the production of speciality products including tissue. UK production of virgin fibre is around 20% of the total virgin fibre used and is limited to two sites making mechanical pulp from low grade conifer timber; both sites converting all of their production to paper on site (though there is one small site processing abaca predominantly for use in teabag paper), and one very small chemical pulp mill (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

Many UK mills utilising RCF for newsprint, sanitary and office paper production have deinking processes integrated to the paper mill and some of these can sell de-inked pulp to the market if producing excess material. The remaining UK mills purchase different combinations of market pulp and recovered paper which they turn directly into paper. Paper is then passed on to printers, publishers and distributors to reach the consumers as finished products. From then on the recovery part of the industry begins with the local authorities, private waste companies and specialist recovered paper merchants collecting pre and post- consumer paper from households and industries/commerce to feed back into the paper recycling system. Depending on the collection system used by local authorities, material recovery facilities (MRFs) may be utilised to sort paper from other recyclables, such as plastic, metal and glass, when they are collected together. The recovered paper then finds its way, as RCF, back to the pulp and paper mills. Throughout the cycle, important roles are played by the traders of pulp, paper, paper products and RCF as well as by wholesalers and trade organisations.

Figure 4 shows the flow of material within the UK paper industry in 2009 and will form the basis for the discussion in this chapter. CPI has recently published annual industry statistics for 2010 and, where possible, this information will also be used to take a closer look at how the UK paper industry – and individual sectors within it – has evolved over the past few years. This will be followed by a discussion of the economics of the paper industry and the UK‟s place within the European and international paper market.

Figure 4 Material flows through the UK paper system in 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

4.1 Virgin fibre as a raw material Woodpulp is a comparatively small proportion of fibrous input in the UK paper industry and most of the woodpulp used is imported. The increasing use of recovered paper for new paper production has led to a decline in the amounts of woodpulp used in the UK paper industry over recent years (Figure 5). 2009 saw a marked year-on-year decrease in the amount of woodpulp used of about 25%, which is most likely linked to the overall decrease in production of higher paper grades (explained later in this chapter). Roughly the same amount of woodpulp was imported in 2010 as in 2009 although there was a slight decrease (of 0.1 Mt) in the amount of domestic woodpulp used in paper manufacturing.

Figure 5 Trends in woodpulp usage for UK paper manufacturing

Source: CPI, 2011

The 0.3 Mt of domestic woodpulp entering the cycle in 2009 were processed at the UK‟s two relatively small integrated woodpulp mills, both making thermo-mechanical woodpulp from domestic wood trimmings. One of the mills uses the pulp to make carton board whereas the other makes lightweight coated mechanical reels.

As Figure 4 shows, 53% of the woodpulp imported into the UK in 2009 came from EU countries, 26% from Latin America, 15% from North America and the remaining 6% from the rest of the world. Imported woodpulp coming into the UK is re-pulped into slurry at user mills before being processed into products. Based on January-June 2010 data, 54% of imported woodpulp was used to produce Tissue parent reels, 24% to produce P&W, 17% to produce packaging (excluding corrugated case materials which do not use imported woodpulp) and finally 5% went into the production of Specialities, such as banknotes and cigarette paper (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

4.2 RCF as a raw material In 2009 and 2010, 3.8 Mt of recovered paper were used in the UK for the production of new paper products whereas the majority of the UK‟s recovered paper (4.4 Mt) was exported for recycling elsewhere (see Section 4.7). In 2009, the domestically used recovered paper (3.8 Mt) was used together with some virgin fibre to produce 1.6 Mt of packaging, 1.2 Mt of newsprint, 0.7 Mt tissue, 0.6 Mt P&W and 0.2 Mt Specialities.

Because of the varying characteristics of different RCF grades, each grade is more suitable for conversion to different finished products. For example, in CEPI (Confederation of European Paper Industry) countries4 (including the UK), recovered newspaper and magazines are mainly used to manufacture newsprint and other graphic paper whereas corrugated and mixed grades are used mainly for the production of packaging such as case materials and carton boards (Figure 6).

Figure 6 Recovered paper utilisation by sector in CEPI countries 2009

Source: CEPI, 2009a

The trends in the UK are similar to those in Europe, with newsprint and board (or case materials as they are described in Figure 6) made almost entirely from recovered paper. In fact, mills that make newsprint and board are the main users of RCF. Another similar trend is the use of high grades and low recycled content (only about 50-60% of RCF) to produce tissue products (Household and Sanitary), as tissue manufacturing is governed by consumer perceptions and expectations (WRAP, 2010b). Similar to wider European practice, the lowest RCF utilisation rate in the UK is found in the production of P&W (or Graphics Paper)

4 CEPI has 19 member countries – 17 EU members plus Norway and Switzerland. More information is available from www.cepi.org

(WRAP, 2005). However, production of P&W is miniscule in the UK in comparison to other paper grades.

A WRAP study found that the low use of RCF in the magazine industry (~1-3%) is mainly because of publishers‟ and printers‟ historical experience with the use of recycled paper (WRAP, 2005). Some of the publishers and printers interviewed by WRAP stated that they had tried recycled paper in the past but were not happy with the final product. However, in recent years there have been great advancements in the production of paper from RCF and recovered paper today can very closely resemble paper from virgin fibres. Although it is not yet possible to use recycled paper for all types of publications, WRAP found that it would be particularly suitable for certain magazine categories, either because of the way their printing takes place or because of the added benefits that the texture and look of the recycled paper would give to the final product. However, care should be taken when suggesting an increase in the RCF content of P&W. As discussed earlier in the report, high grades of recovered paper such as magazines are used as a source of higher quality fibre to offset lower quality fibre from the recycled content of old newspapers. Therefore, replacing the virgin fibre in these grades with RCF could have knock on effects on the use of recovered paper in the newsprint sector.

4.3 Paper production As Figure 7 shows, there has been a significant decrease in UK paper production since 2006, which is inherently linked to a decrease in capacity in the UK over the last ten years, when the number of mills (and their employees) has been halved (Figure 8). Between 2001 and the present day, there was a loss of 36 mills of varying sizes, resulting in a loss of over 40% of sector capacity. The main reason for these closures was increasing costs, particularly energy, and to a lesser extent market pressures.

2009 was particularly difficult for paper manufacturing in the UK with four mills (5 paper machines) and two further paper machines closing down (7 machines in total), removing about 0.75 Mt of capacity. One paper machine restarted in 2009 after closure in 2008 to make light weight corrugated paper instead of P&W paper. In 2009, the paper industry produced 4.3 Mt of paper and board, the lowest amount in the last 10 years. Production remained stable at 4.3 Mt for 2010 as well. Although the decrease in production between 2008 and 2009 was quite sharp at 14%, different paper sectors were affected in different ways (Figure 9). Whereas newsprint and tissue productions have remained relatively stable, there has been a gradual decrease in the amount of packaging and P&W being produced domestically. In addition to market and economic pressures resulting in a marked decrease in paper production tonnage in 2009, this could also be partially attributed to the light weighting of paper products, particularly in the paper packaging sector. Nonetheless, 2009 also saw the opening in the UK of a new “state of the art” newsprint mill in East Anglia, and a new corrugated case material mill is currently under construction in Manchester and scheduled to start up in 2012. These two mills in combination will add 800,000 tonnes of production capacity to the UK compensating for some of the loss in production due to mill closures over the last few years.

Figure 7 Overall paper and board manufacturing in the UK from 1989 to 2010

Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 8 Trends in paper and board mills and employees in the UK from 1989 to 2010

Note: The above figure shows 49 mills instead of 52 reported elsewhere in the report because it excludes two mills producing moulded paper products and a new mill in Manchester. Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 9 Trends in paper production (by paper grade) in the UK

Note: 2009 data up to September 2009 Source: WRAP, 2010b

4.4 Paper consumption Consumption of paper and board began to gradually decline in 2005 but 2008 and 2009 saw unprecedented drops in paper consumption, with a very sharp year-on-year decrease in 2009 of about 9%, bringing consumption to just 10.4 Mt (Figure 10). For the first time since the beginning of the recession, there was an increase in paper consumption in 2010, albeit very small (1.2% increase, from 10.4 Mt in 2009 to 10.6 Mt in 2010).

It should be noted that effectively, the total UK paper consumption in 2009 was 12.1 Mt as previously shown in Figure 4. The difference in these figures is attributed to the fact that the 10.4 Mt consumption quoted in Figure 10 only includes domestic sales of paper products (3.4 Mt in 2009) and the consumption of imported unconverted paper (7.0 Mt in 2009). Figure 4 on the other hand also includes consumption of paperboard packaging around imported commodities (1.2 Mt in 2009) and net inflow of converted and printed paperboard products (0.5 Mt in 2009), which give a total paper consumption in 2009 of 12.1 Mt. Although Figure 11 is based on the 10.4 Mt figure, it still usefully shows that all sectors were affected by the decline in consumption. This is likely to be linked to the economic difficulties and recession through this period. The tissue sector, where consumption has remained constant over the last few years, seems to be the only unaffected sector.

The recession, and to a lesser extent other structural changes such as e-substitution, was the main reason for the decline in consumption causing a decrease in paper pagination as well as a decrease in print media such as direct mail. Loss in advertising also affected the newsprint sector with some of the free press publications going out of business. This resulted in a decrease of 13% in newsprint consumption. However, the new East Anglia newsprint mill (Palm Paper Ltd) managed to keep UK production of newsprint material stable after the closure of a newsprint mill in Northern England. The decline in consumption and the increase in UK production also led to fewer exports of News and PAMs RCF through 2010. Due to the decrease in advertisements, P&W consumption also decreased sharply in 2009, by around 12% (WRAP, 2010b). The decreased consumption in Packaging could again be 31

related to the recession, with consumers buying buy fewer packaged goods, but also to light- weighting of base papers in this sector.

Figure 10 Paper and board consumption in the UK from 1989 to 2010

Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 11 Consumption trends by paper grade from 2007 to 2009

Note: 2009 data up to September 2009 Source: WRAP, 2010b

4.5 Imports and exports of new paper In 2009, UK paper production was 4.3 Mt, of which 0.9 Mt were exported and 3.4 Mt sold domestically. Approximately 0.6 Mt of the exported paper products were sold to countries of the EU-27 and around 0.17 Mt were sold to Asian countries. Smaller amounts were exported to North America (mainly the USA) and other countries. Figure 12 shows the grades in which these products were exported. The majority of products exported were packaging paper and board (38%) and newsprint (29%) followed by P&W (18%), other paper and board (14%) and finally sanitary and household (1%).

Figure 12 Exports of domestically produced paper products between January and December 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

As described above, consumption of paper in 2009 in the UK was 12.1 Mt but only 3.4 Mt of this was produced domestically. This means that 8.7 Mt of products were imported during the same period. CPI data shows that 1.2 Mt were imported as packaging around imported commodities, 0.5 Mt were imported as converted and printed paper products whereas 7.0 Mt were imported as unconverted paper (Figure 4). Most of this unconverted paper was imported from the EU-27 countries (78.5%) with the rest coming from other European countries (7%), North America (6%) and the rest of the world (8.5%).

In May 2011 the EU imposed anti-subsidy and anti-dumping tariffs on the import of coated fine paper5 from China6, following a complaint lodged by the Confederation of European Fine Paper Industries (CEPIFINE). The imposed anti-subsidy duties range from 4% to 12% whereas anti-dumping duties range from 8% to 35.1% depending on the producer (European Commission, 2011). Both of these duties are valid for 5 years at which point they are subject to renewal. This decision was welcomed by European paper producers as they felt it was required to create a level playing field for their products. Nonetheless, it inevitably caused some reaction from Chinese paper mills providing the European market with coated fine paper, and from European printers and publishers who were buying this product at lower prices than the domestic equivalent (Morris, 2011).

5 Coated fine paper is a high quality unconverted paper used for the production of magazines, catalogues and other similar publications.

6 Such tariffs are imposed when, an investigation by the European Commission finds that imports of a product from a non-EU country are subsidised or sold at prices lower than the market value and therefore injuring the EU industry producing the same product.

4.6 Collection and sorting of recovered paper Over the past fifteen years, and particularly after 2000, the amount of paper recovered from the UK waste stream has been increasing steadily reaching a maximum of 8.8 Mt in 2008. For the first time in over twenty years, 2009 saw a marked decrease in the amount of recovered fibre collected compared to the previous year. Nonetheless, the collection rate (amount collected/amount consumed) remained high. According to CPI, 8.2 Mt of paper were collected in the UK in 2009, accounting for about 68% of the 12.1 Mt of paper consumed during the same time (Figure 13). Most of this paper was collected as corrugated and kraft, and newspapers and magazines (Figure 14). Approximately 46% of the collected paper was used in domestic consumption (see Section 4.2) with the remaining 54% exported for reprocessing overseas (see Section 4.7).

Of the collected paper waste, about 40% (i.e. 3.3 Mt) was recovered from the municipal waste stream with the rest coming from commercial and industrial sources (WRAP, 2010b).

2010 saw a decline in the collection rate from 68% in 2009 to 65% - a decrease of approximately 150,000 tonnes. However, this drop is associated with a lag factor in the paper and board industry, where (higher) levels of collection become evident a few months after the increase in consumption. Future paper collection and recycling levels are expected to climb, reflecting the higher consumption levels (CPI, 2011).

Figure 13 Trends in recovered paper collection in the UK

Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 14 Recovered paper collected in the UK in 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

4.6.1 Collection from the municipal waste stream Collection of recyclables from the municipal waste stream is the responsibility of the individual Local Authorities (LAs). According to figures from WRAP, collection of paper is widely practised in the UK with 433 out of 434 LAs offering some sort of kerbside collection service for waste paper (Figure 15). There is no one specific way in which LAs collect recyclables, but each authority chooses a collection service that best meets its own and its community‟s needs. Most of the recyclable collection systems fall into one of three categories (WRAP definitions):

 Kerbside sort: The materials are separated at kerbside into a multi-compartment vehicle to such an extent that they can be sold directly to a reprocessor and require minimal sorting. The material streams sold can include paper and card together, and cans and plastic mixed together.

 Single stream co-mingled: All the material collected goes into the same compartment on a refuse collection vehicle (RCV) and requires sorting at a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF).

 Two stream co-mingled: One fraction of the material collected is mixed sufficiently that it requires sorting at a MRF. The other fraction (typically fibre) does not require sorting (and can be sold directly to a reprocessor) and is collected either on a split compartment RCV or on a separate vehicle.

Currently in the UK, about 60% of LAs offer collection of paper via kerbside sort or two- stream co-mingled services whereas the rest offer a single stream co-mingled service (WRAP, 2010b). This percentage includes authorities that collect card together with paper although a small number of authorities, particularly in England, choose to collect card together with the organic fraction. Some paper is also collected from civic amenity sites, whereas a small amount of paper waste is collected by LAs from commercial and industrial

streams as shown in Figure 16. However, recyclables from commercial and industrial (C&I) sources, including paper, are mostly collected by private waste companies or specialised recovered paper merchants.

Figure 15 Local authority paper collections in the UK for 2008/2009

Source: WRAP, 2010b

Figure 16 Paper recovered from the UK municipal waste stream in 2007/2008

Source: WRAP, 2010b

4.6.2 Collection from the C&I waste stream The 2010 C&I survey provides information on the amount of waste produced from commercial and industrial sources in England in 2009. The survey groups paper waste

together with glass, plastics, rubber, wood and textiles in a category called „non-metallic wastes‟. The total amount of non-metallic waste produced from C&I sources in England in 2009 was about 11.6 Mt (Defra, 2010d).

We can, nonetheless, estimate the amount of paper arising from C&I sources using the WRAP estimate that approximately 60% of all the collected paper waste in the UK comes from the C&I stream. CPI data show that 8.2 Mt of paper were recovered in 2009, therefore about 4.9 Mt have been recovered from the C&I stream (WRAP, 2010b).

4.6.3 Paper sorting at MRFs There are currently 139 sites permitted as MRFs in the UK (EA analysis of waste permits, Pers. Comm.). In 2008/09, over 9 million tonnes of household waste were collected by LAs for recycling. Of this, about a quarter (2.2 Mt) was sent to municipal MRFs for sorting (WasteDataFlow). The most common input material in terms of weight is paper (Table 2).

When material is sorted in a MRF, it passes on a conveyor belt through different hand- sorting or mechanical sorting stations until all the material streams are separated. What comes off the belt is residual material.

Table 2 Typical municipal MRF composition by weight

Material (with glass) % Material (without glass) %

News and PAMs 35 News and PAMs 38

OCC 9 OCC 12

Mixed paper 20 Mixed paper 23

White paper 2 White paper 3

Aluminium cans 1 Aluminium cans 1

Steel cans 3 Steel cans 3

HDPE bottles 3 HDPE bottles 4

PET bottles 3 PET bottles 4

Other plastics 2 Other plastics 2

Liquid packaging 1 Liquid packaging 2 board/foil/other board/foil/glass/other

Glass (if targeted) 13

Residual to energy 2 Residual to energy 2

Residual to landfill 6 Residual to landfill 6

Source: WRAP, Pers. Comm.

Paper can either be positively or negatively sorted. Positive sort is the active separation of target materials from the rest of the material on the conveyor belt. Where paper is positively sorted, separating the fibre streams (paper and card) from the container streams (glass, metals and plastics) is one of the first steps of the process. The fibre is then sorted into its various grades, the three main ones being old corrugated containers (OCC), News and PAMs and mixed paper, a process that is usually done manually in most of the smaller MRFs or using disc screens in the bigger ones. Newer techniques involve the use of optical scanners but these are expensive and are only economical for use in MRFs of high throughput. Negative sort is when all other material is sorted (either manually or mechanically) and residuals, together with any unsorted materials (for example paper in this case), are allowed to come off the end of the conveyor belt. Often, paper that is negatively sorted can become contaminated by the residuals that end up with it. Once paper is sorted, either positively or negatively, it is ready to be sent to reprocessors. In some cases, particularly when paper has to travel long distances, it is baled prior to transportation but many MRFs deliver paper loose to UK reprocessors (WRAP, n.d.3).

Some in the paper industry assert that MRF-sorted paper can suffer from higher levels of contamination, either by non-paper materials such as food, glass, plastics and metals, or by non-target fibre such as tissue products. However, others consider that material from MRFs can, and does, meet the quality requirement for the global paper and board industry when run through MRFs that have clear systems in place to manage the contamination, inputs and sorting processes. The key is to ensure quality is maintained throughout the system to achieve the desired end product which can compete on the international market.

Missed fibre A WRAP study investigated the quality of materials through UK MRFs (WRAP, 2009c). The study sampled input, output and residual materials from 13 single stream MRFs where recyclables are collected co-mingled (in this study called Type 1 MRFs) and 5 twin-stream MRFs where fibres are collected separately from containers (in this study called Type 2 MRFs) (WRAP, 2009c).

Type 2 MRFs seem to perform better when it comes to the composition of the residual materials. As Figure 17 shows, 14.8% of newspaper and magazines (News & Mags) end up in the residual stream in Type 1 MRFs compared to 11.1% for Type 2 MRFs. The study also shows that for the fibre stream, Type 2 MRFs show more consistent results. Regardless of the type of MRF, an average of 13.5% of newspaper and magazines end up in the residual stream possibly because small pieces can be missed on the conveyor belt. MRFs need to adjust conveyor belt speed to achieve the most efficient throughput and this can mean compromising the recovery of materials (particularly those of smaller sizes).

Figure 17 Composition of residual materials in UK MRFs

Source: WRAP, 2009c

Contamination WRAP‟s MRF study also investigated the contamination of output material streams from UK MRFs and has found that overall they achieve good sorting efficiencies of paper and board (WRAP, 2009c). As Figure 18 shows, when cardboard is targeted by the MRFs about 90% of the material sorted is made up of board (about 70% brown board and 20% grey and white board) and similarly when News and PAMs are targeted about 90% of the sorted material is made up of newspapers and magazines. Type 2 MRFs seem to produce higher quality card outputs whereas there seems to be similar contamination levels between Type 1 and 2 MRFs for News and PAMs. Nonetheless, News and PAMs qualities from Type 2 MRFs were more consistent. It is clear that mixed paper is more contaminated than News and PAMs but this is because it is often negatively sorted.

There are two types of MRF fibre contamination; contamination by non-targeted fibre such as tissue paper and contamination by non paper materials such as glass, plastics, metals and food. The most serious non-paper contaminants are glass, which can damage mill equipment, grease, which soaks into the paper and is hard to remove, and plastic film (WRAP, 2009b). Type 2 MRFs seem to have the lowest levels of contamination both from non-targeted fibres and from non-paper materials. Naturally, contamination levels depend on how clean the input material is and since for Type 2 MRFs some sorting has already taken place at the household the resulting sorted fibres will be less contaminated. Contamination also depends on the speed at which material is sorted, with MRFs with higher throughput speeds often having more contamination problems. Other factors such as technology employed and number of pickers can also affect contamination levels.

The results from the WRAP MRF study, although very informative, should be treated with caution. UK MRFs operate in many different ways meaning that direct comparison between those treating single stream co-mingled and twin stream co-mingled materials is not possible. What is important to note is that when high purity levels are required by the industry, MRFs seem able to achieve them when run well and within their capacity.

However, there seems to be some discord with regards to how MRF operators and reprocessors perceive the quality of material delivered by MRFs. Although most MRF

operators believe that the material they deliver „always‟ or „usually‟ meets the requirements of reprocessors, reprocessors seem to think that their expectations are only met „sometimes‟ (WRAP, 2009b). Few MRFs currently routinely monitor quality in a robust manner and there seems to be a need for a consistent way for measuring the quality of materials to ensure that both parties are satisfied.

Figure 18 Composition of paper and card based outputs

Note: Card = cardboard; MxPa = mixed paper; NP = News and PAMs; Non T Fbr = non targeted fibre; Oth R Pa = other recyclable paper; News&Mag = newspapers and magazines; G&W brd = grey and white board; Brwn brd = brown board Source: WRAP, 2009c

4.7 Loss of material There are two points where losses of material are possible in the paper cycle: between paper consumption and collection and between raw materials and production. Jointly these two points accounted for a loss of approximately 4.7 Mt of material in 2009 (and a similar loss in 2010). As Figure 4 shows, a total of 3.7 Mt of fibre was lost between consumption and collection, 2.3 Mt of which (about 19% of UK consumption) could be attributed to loss of tissue and sanitary paper and paper in long term use or storage such as books and wallpaper. The remaining 1.4 Mt is paper that is not collected and ends up in the residual stream, either directly at the household/business or at the MRFs as explained earlier. This accounts for approximately 11.5% of UK paper consumption. The remainder 1.0 Mt loss that occurs during the conversion of raw materials to products could be processing losses such as fines, sludge, moisture and unusable RCF including clays/fillers that the RCF contains (WRAP, 2007a).

While more detailed statistics are not available for the UK, there is some more detailed information available for Europe. It is estimated that approximately 28.5 Mt of paper per year are not recycled in the EU (IPTS, 2010). This accounts for circa 30% of the total EU paper consumption. Approximately 6.3 Mt of this paper (~22% of the tonnage not recycled) is unrecoverable i.e. paper that ends up in libraries, permanent records as well as paper not suitable for recycling such as tissue paper (as stated above, CPI estimate this to be 19% in the UK). Another 1.5-2.5 Mt (~5-9 %) is burnt as refuse derived fuel with an extra 5-6 Mt (~18-21%) being burnt in municipal solid waste incinerators. A small amount is used in one- use recycling processes for example composting (0.4 Mt) and insulation and filling (0.8 Mt). The main proportion however (about 15 Mt, i.e. about 15% of total European paper consumption) is still being sent to landfill, possibly because it is being missed by inadequate collections in some European countries.

4.8 Recovered paper exports and imports Most of the recovered paper collected in the UK is being exported, and only about 46% is used domestically. Between 2001 and 2008 there was an almost fivefold increase in the amount of RCF sent abroad for recycling (from just 1.0 Mt in 2001 to 4.8 Mt in 2008), linked to a steady decrease in the amount of RCF used domestically (Figure 19 and Figure 20). This was a result of the increase in recovery and the decrease in domestic reprocessing capacity. However, 2009 saw a decrease in the export of RCF of about 9%, to 4.4 Mt, linked to the fact that consumption and thus UK recovery levels were lower than previous years, meaning that UK reprocessors could absorb a greater percentage of the collected RCF.

2010 saw a slight decrease to the amount of exported RCF although the proportion exported remained high at around 54% of the domestically collected RCF. Although the main importer of UK RCF remained the Far East, and particularly China, these markets received a lower percentage than in 2009 as imports from Europe changed from 14% in 2009 to 22% in 2010 (CPI, 2011).

The UK‟s largest export market is China receiving approximately 61% (2.6 Mt) of the total UK exports, which amounts to 33.4% of all the paper recovered in the UK (Figure 21). The UK mainly exports OCC to China but also significant amounts of mixed grades and News and PAMs (Figure 22). Approximately half of the OCC recovered domestically is exported to China, and this is the reason why, even though domestic consumption of OCC and high grades decreased between 2008 and 2009 reflecting the closure of mills that used these grades, the market for OCC was not greatly affected (Figure 23). On the other hand, domestic consumption of News and PAMs remained stable mainly because of the demand from the new Palm Paper Ltd newsprint mill in East Anglia that became operational in August 2009. As a result of this, and the fact that consumption of newsprint and thus supply of News and PAMS was lower, News and PAMs exports decreased in 2009 (WRAP, 2010b).

China is the biggest buyer of UK RCF, receiving over 60% of the UK‟s exports. However, the UK only accounts for about 11% of China‟s RCF imports (Figure 24). Even though China is likely to continue to import RCF to meet its demands, the UK needs to ensure that the material it exports consistently meets quality standards at competitive prices. The risks associated with the high export volumes of UK RCF have been discussed earlier and therefore will not be repeated here. 41

Recovered paper is also exported to other Asian countries such as India and Indonesia (~0.7 Mt in 2010), to European Union countries (~ 1 Mt in 2010) and in much smaller amounts to the rest of the world (<0.05 Mt in 2010).

In addition to exporting recovered paper, the UK also imports it, albeit in very small amounts. In 2009 the imports of recovered paper amounted to less than 0.1 Mt and more than 95% of it was imported from European countries such as the Irish Republic, the Netherlands and France. Although the amount of imported RCF is very small compared to the total amount of recovered paper that flows through the system, it is interesting to note the differences in grades and amounts imported between 2008 and 2009 (Figure 25).

Figure 19 Trends in recovered paper domestic usage and exports from 1989 to 2010

Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 20 Trends in UK RCF recovery and utilisation

Source: CPI, 201 42

Figure 21 Markets for UK recovered paper

Source: CPI, 2011

Figure 22 UK exports of recovered paper to China from 2002 to 2008

Source: WRAP, 2009a

Figure 23 Exports of recovered paper grades in 2008 and 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm

Figure 24 China’s imports of RCF by country of origin – data for 2009

Source: WRAP, 2011

Figure 25 Imports of recovered paper grades in 2008 and 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

4.9 The economics of the UK paper industry Paper manufacturing has traditionally taken place in Europe and North America because these are the two global regions rich in forests. Recently, paper manufacturing has increasingly been moving to the countries of East Asia, particularly China, because of their low manufacturing costs and local growth in demand. However, since these countries have limited forest resources, they need to import raw materials leading to a growth in global trade of recovered fibre. China is the largest importer of recovered fibre but it is also one of the largest exporters of goods. Since a lot of these goods – and the packaging they come in – end up in Europe there has been an increase in the amount of indirect imports of fibre in European counties. Coupled with efficient collection systems, this has led to a greater availability of RCF for exporting (WRAP, 2007b).

In the UK, implementation of policies such as the Landfill Directive, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive, Landfill Tax Escalator and the Waste Framework Directive have encouraged LAs and businesses to collect and recycle paper (for a list and short description of policies influencing paper recovery please refer to Appendix A). Nonetheless, paper recycling can also be a profitable industry, and although it is heavily dependent on market forces, paper marketability can further increase recovery rates. Paper and pulp exports dominate the UK exports of wood products, accounting for £1.4 billion out of a total £1.5 billion of all wood product exports in 2009. As mentioned earlier the UK imports most of the virgin fibre used for domestic production. In 2009, the UK spent £4.1 billion on the import of pulp and paper when the total value of wood product imports was £5.8 billion (Forestry Commission, 2010).

The whole UK economy Gross Value Added in 2009 was £1,234,445 million according to the Office of National Statistics (Office of National Statistics, 2010b). According to the ONS‟s Annual Business Survey (Section C), the total Manufacturing GVA for 2009 was £133,237 million whereas the GVA at basic prices for the Manufacturing of paper and paper products (SIC code 17) was £2,698 million. It can therefore be deduced that the paper industry contributed about 0.2% to the UK‟s economy and approximately 2% to the UK‟s manufacturing economy (Office of National Statistics, 2010a).

Figure 26 illustrates the volatility of RCF prices – the recession led to a sudden drop in RCF demand causing a very big dip in prices in 2008. Prices rebounded as demand from China was re-established mainly because buyers took advantage of the low costs to refill their stocks and because China introduced some policy initiatives which benefited key end-users of RCF (WRAP, 2009a). The latest figures, which are averages for a full heavy goods vehicle7 load on an ex-works basis (i.e. the supplier pays for material to be collected from his premises), show that prices continue to remain high (Figure 27). High volumes of materials that are collected on a regular basis and well-presented materials usually attract a premium price (WRAP, 2010b).

Figure 26 Recovered paper prices for the three main RCF grades from 2007 onwards

Source: WRAP, 2010

7 Heavy goods vehicle (HGV) refers to goods vehicles over 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle weight.

Figure 27 Recovered paper prices for the three main grades of RCF from February 2010 to November February 2011

Source: WRAP, 2011b

4.10 The UK paper industry in the international market The global per capita consumption of paper is approximately 52 kg. However in the UK this figure is significantly higher at about 210 kg, although it has been gradually decreasing over the past 5-6 years (Figure 28) (Defra, 2006). In fact the UK ranks 5th when it comes to global consumption of paper but only 17th when it comes to its production (Magnaghi, 2009).

The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI) publishes an annual report on the activities of its 19 member countries according to which, in 2009, the UK was the 8th largest producer of paper in Europe. The largest paper producer in Europe is Germany which accounts for 23.6% of European paper production (Figure 29). Germany is also the largest consumer of RCF, accounting for 32.9% of European consumption. The second single largest consumer of RCF in Europe is France with 11.1% followed closely by Italy and Spain at 10.6% and 10.2% respectively. The UK ranks 5th accounting for 8.5% of total European RCF consumption (Figure 30).

Globally, the UK is among the countries with the highest rate of RCF collection, ranking 5th in 2008 behind USA, China, Japan and Germany. However, it ranked 13th with regards to RCF consumption – a non-surprising figure since more than half of the RCF collected in the UK is exported (Magnaghi, 2009).

Figure 28 Trend in UK paper consumption

Source: Defra, 2006

Figure 29 Paper production by CEPI country in 2009

Source: CEPI, 2009a

Figure 30 Recovered paper utilisation by CEPI country in 2009

Source: CEPI, 2009a

5. Material flows in the UK paper market In addition to raw materials, energy and water are required to make paper and in addition to paper products the industry also produces waste and emissions to air and water (Figure 31). This chapter will take a more detailed look at, and where possible quantify, the inputs and outputs from the paper industry.

Figure 31 Inputs, outputs and impacts of the pulp manufacturing process

Source: Defra, 2006

5.1 Inputs Raw materials such as virgin fibre, recovered fibre and additives, water and energy are the main inputs to the paper cycle.

5.1.1 Raw material CPI holds useful information on the production and consumption of paper products in the UK for the year 2009, which can be used to produce a picture of the flow of fibre in the UK paper industry (Figure 4). Approximately, 1.2 Mt of virgin fibre, 3.8 Mt of recovered fibre and 0.3 Mt of non-fibrous additives were used for paper production in 2009. Most of the virgin fibre was imported (0.9 Mt) whereas only 0.3 Mt was domestically produced. Additionally, 7.0 Mt of unconverted paper, 1.2 Mt of packaging around imported commodities and 0.5 Mt of converted and printed products flowed into the UK paper system from abroad in 2009.

CPI collects information on the non-fibrous additives added to the paper products under four main types: clays, calcium carbonate, starches and other, which includes binders, extenders,

pigments, titanium dioxide and others (Figure 32). Approximately 287 thousand tonnes of non-fibrous additives were used in the UK paper industry in 2009, most of these in the production of P&W (51%) and the production of packaging boards including OCC (47%). The remainder 2% of these additives was used for the production of paper in the Specialities sector.

Although it was not possible to obtain more detailed information on the additives used in the UK paper industry, Appendix C contains a list of the most common process and product aids and their application in the EU paper industry. The exact types and amounts used would depend on the pulping and papermaking process (i.e. whether Kraft, sulphide or RCF, bleached or unbleached, required characteristics and quality of product etc.).

Figure 32 Non-fibrous additives used in the UK paper industry in 2009

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

5.1.2 Energy

Pulp and paper production is inherently energy intensive with electricity and heat required to produce the pulp and then form and dry the paper sheet.

CPI holds data on the industry‟s energy use drawn from independently verified Climate Change Agreements (CCA) and the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Fuels consumed and exported by the UK pulp and paper manufacturing industry in 2008 and 2009

Fuel All purchased All exported to All gas All coal All oil All LPG Biomass Net Totals grid electricity grid electricity including all (toe) CHP gas

Unit kWh (not primary) kWh (not primary) kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh -

2008 2,507,182,207 1,054,839,791 17,714,940,919 1,015,749,832 56,216,102 16,289,416 1,109,491,323 - toe 215,579 90,700 1,523,211 87,339 4,834 1,401 95,399 1,927,762 toe 560,505 235,820 1,523,211 87,339 4,834 1,401 95,399 2,272,688 Primary

2009 2,340,201,402 731,238,177 15,086,711,957 765,589,206 40,037,091 - 1,601,481,641 - toe 201,221 62,875 1,297,224 65,829 3,443 - 137,702 1,705,419 toe 523,175 163,475 1,297,224 65,829 3,443 - 137,702 2,027,373 Primary

Note: Conversions used: 1 toe is equivalent to 11,630 kWh; ratio of primary to purchased electricity is 2.6. Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

The table illustrates that in 2008 the net consumption of delivered energy by the UK paper industry was 1,927 thousand toe (tonnes of oil equivalent) or 2,273 thousand toe when expressed in terms of primary electricity8. The industry‟s energy consumption was slightly lower in 2009, amounting to 1,705 thousand toe (or 2,027 thousand toe in terms of primary electricity). The 2009 CPI figures are in agreement with figures provided by the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) published annually by the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), which show that Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products consumed 1,783 thousand toe in 2009. Considering that UK industrial energy consumption in 2009 was approximately 26.7 million toe9 (46.9 million toe in terms of primary energy equivalents), and using the CPI 2009 consumption figure of 1,705 thousand toe, the paper industry accounts for approximately 6.4% of the UK industrial consumption and 0.8% of UK total energy consumption for 2009 (DECC, 2011b).

Nonetheless, the paper industry has significantly reduced its energy consumption over the last 20 years, and this is reflected in the 42% reduction in specific energy consumption (SEC)10 when comparing the industry‟s 2010 performance to its 1990 performance (CPI, Pers. Comm.). This improvement in specific energy consumption exceeded the original targets negotiated between the industry and DETR in 2000 and tightened further by Defra and DECC in 2008. The industry‟s improved performance has also delivered absolute reductions in its CO2 emissions. There are three main reasons for this improved performance, the first being the employment of rigorous energy efficiency measures over the period of the Climate Change Agreement under the leadership of CPI and its predecessor organisation, the Paper Federation, coupled with peer and reputational pressures from within the sector. The second reason is the closure of a number of older mills more likely to be less efficient in their use of energy. Finally, the deployment of biomass CHP plants, which did not only minimise the energy consumption of the industry but also replaced a number of older boilers often powered by coal, helping improve the industry‟s performance (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

Combined heat and power Combined heat and power (CHP), also known as cogeneration, is the simultaneous generation of usable heat and power (usually electricity) in a single process. The need for both heat and power in paper production means the sector is well suited to deploy CHP with its inherent higher efficiencies compared to stand alone electricity generation and steam boilers. Table 3 and Figure 33 illustrate that gas and electricity are the paper industry‟s main sources of energy. Table 3 shows the increasing importance of biomass and a reduced dependence on fossil fuels for paper making, linked to the increase in biomass CHP being used to provide energy for the paper industry. Currently there are 19 CHP plants in operation, either within the industry or servicing it, only one of which is partially fuelled by

8 Primary electricity refers to the electricity consumed on a site plus the electricity/energy consumed in the production and delivery of electricity.

9 The largest industrial energy consumer in 2009 was the chemicals sector (16% of total industrial energy), followed by the food, drink and tobacco sector (11%) and the mineral products sector (10%).

10 Specific Energy Consumption is the amount of energy consumed to produce 1 tonne of product.

coal and is due for closure and replacement by a large biomass CHP. By 2013, it is expected there will be 20 sector CHP plants, 7 fired completely or in part by biomass (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

The electricity generated by CHP in the UK in 2009 was 26,463 GWh (26,083 GWh in 2010), about 7% of the total generated electricity. This equates to circa 2.3 million toe11. UK CHP schemes also supplied 48,155 GWh of heat in 2009 (47,815 GWh in 2010) (DECC, 2011a). According to Table 3, approximately 731 GWh of electricity were exported to the grid in 2009 from the paper industry‟s CHP plants.

Figure 33 Energy consumption by fuel for the paper industry in 2009 (Primary, toe)

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

Energy consumption for different paper grades Updated information on the energy consumption of different paper grades is not available because there are not enough mills in some sectors to give statistically sound data. However, for the sake of illustration, data relating to 2007 have been included here with the caveat that these should only be considered indicative and should be treated with care.

The available information comes from an earlier version of DECC‟s „Energy consumption in the UK‟ report which gives a more detailed presentation of the energy use in the paper industry using 4-digit SIC codes. Figure 34 summarises this information for the following SIC codes: 2112 Manufacture of paper and cardboard, 2121 Manufacture of corrugated paper and paperboard and of containers of paper and paperboard, 2122 Manufacture of household and sanitary goods and of toilet requisites, 2123 Manufacture of paper stationary, 2124 Manufacture of wallpaper and 2125 Manufacture of other articles of paper and paperboard. SIC code 2111 Manufacture of pulp, paper and paperboard would also be important for this

11 Using the conversion factor 1 toe = 11,630 kWh = 0.01163 GWh.

type of analysis, but no energy usage was attributed to this in 2007 because of the way the survey took place. It is therefore assumed that manufacture of pulp is included in SIC code 2112. For the statistical reasons explained above, DECC was not able to repeat this detailed information gathering for four-digit SIC codes since 2007 (DECC, 2009). Nonetheless, it is clear that more than half of the industry‟s energy use is expended for the production of paper and paperboard which is to be expected as these are the main products of the industry. Corrugated paperboard and containers and sanitary and tissue products are also significant energy users (Figure 34).

Specific energy consumption data (energy per tonne of product) would have provided a better picture of the most energy intensive products however it was not possible to get details on the amounts of paper produced in each of these grades in 2007.

Figure 34 Energy consumption by fuel and paper grade in the paper industry – 2007 data

Source: Information sourced from DECC, 2009

Differences in energy consumption between paper mills Around three quarters of fibre used in UK paper mills are recovered from recycled paper. Virgin fibre is predominantly produced outside the UK and imported for use in the production of speciality products including tissue. UK production of virgin fibre accounts for about 20% of the total virgin fibre used and is limited to two sites making mechanical pulp from low grade conifer timber (all of which is used on site) and one very small chemical pulp mill (CPI, Pers. Comm.).

The gross energy demand for the production of paper from virgin fibre is generally higher than for the production of RCF, but the production of virgin pulps can result in a net gain of energy since process by-products are normally used to produce energy. Indeed a Kraft pulp mill will often be a net exporter of energy produced from utilising black liquor (a by-product of the Kraft process). Pulp mills are often located at the centre of forestry operations and utilise materials such as bark and thinning for energy generation. Accordingly, pulp production can often be classed as carbon neutral.

Processing paper and card for recycling can also consume large amounts of energy since the material must be re-pulped to free the fibres for recovery, requiring both heat and mechanical power, and often also requires deinking which is another energy intensive process (although it is not required in all mills). However, an increasing number of RCF mills utilise renewable sources of energy so these operations can also be carbon neutral.

The overall heat and energy consumption of a mill depends on the grade of paper being produced, on its required characteristics and on the raw material being utilised. Table 4 contains example data for heat and energy consumption from various European mills. The figures in this table come from the European Commission‟s Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry (BREF) which was published in 2001, so they are quite dated and it should be borne in mind that modern mills will very likely be more efficient. The BREF is currently under review and its newer version, once published, should provide more updated information. Nonetheless, these data are included here to give an indication of the differences between mills and to help illustrate that comparing pulp and papermaking processes, in terms of energy use, is not straight forward.

A co-dependency exists between virgin and recovered paper production. The use of virgin fibre is necessary, not only to produce various paper grades such as Specialities (e.g. medical, security papers, cigarette papers and banknotes) but also to replace the approximately 10-20% of fibre lost in a typical recovered paper mill. This is an inevitable loss resulting from the deterioration of fibres that have been recycled a number of times. At present, fibres can on average be recycled around seven times before becoming too short and unusable. Therefore, virgin fibre needs to flow into the system to refresh the fibre mix and allow the overall recycling cycle to continue.

In summary, the paper industry consumed 1,705 thousand toe (2,250 thousand toe primary) in 2009 and accounted for approximately 6.4% of the UK‟s industrial energy consumption. Natural gas and electricity are the most utilised fuels although the use of biomass as an energy source seems to be increasing, possibly due to its increased use in CHP plants that service the industry. These plants exported approximately 731 GWh of electricity to the grid in 2009. Although gross energy demand is higher for virgin fibre mills, both virgin and RCF mills can be net exporters of energy through the utilisation of by-products and renewable energy sources.

Table 4 Example heat and power consumptions from various European pulp and paper mills

Pulp and paper grade Process Electric Remarks on data heat power

Non-integrated production of bleached kraft pulp 14.4 GJ/t 760 kWh/t

- of which external supply 1.2 GJ/t 0

Unbleached kraft pulp production with integrated production of 16.4 GJ/t 959 kWh/t paperboard Average consumption for Swedish mills in 1995. - of which external supply 1.5 GJ/t 388 kWh/t

Bleached kraft pulp with integrated production of uncoated 17.5 GJ/t 1218 kWh/t fine paper

- of which external supply 3.5 GJ/t 706 kWh/t

Integrated thermo-mechanical mill 5.45 GJ/t 2974 kWh/t Consumption for an integrated mill with a production capacity Of which: of 500,000 t/a newsprint, in 1997. - pulp mill 0.15 GJ/t 2350 kWh/t Pulp mill data include wood handling, refining, washing and - paper mill 5.30 GJ/t 585 kWh/t screening, bleaching and the - effluent treatment 0 39 kWh/t power boiler. Paper mill data include stock preparation and paper machine.

Recovered paper mill 5.5 GJ/ADt 917 kWh/ADt Consumption for a Swedish mill with a production capacity Of which: of 500,000 t/a newsprint, in 1995. - pulp mill 0.2 GJ/ADt 300 kWh/ADt Pulp mill data include deinking, - paper mill 5.3 GJ/ADt 585 kWh/ADt washing and screening and bleaching. Paper mill data - effluent treatment 0 32 kWh/ADt include stock preparation and paper machine.

Non-integrated paper mill 8 GJ/t 674 kWh/t Data are for a non-integrated (or 1852 kW/t fine paper mill from 1997. primary)

Note: ADt stands for air dried tonne. Source: EC, 2001

5.1.3 Water Water is an important resource in the paper industry. It is used in the processing stage of papermaking (e.g. for pulping and as steam for drying the paper), but it is also used to cool down the mill equipment. Whilst water abstraction is high, the paper industry‟s water consumption is relatively low as most of the water that is abstracted is re-circulated within the mills before being cleaned up and discharged, according to Environmental Permitting Regulations standards. What is actually consumed by the industry is water that evaporates or water that is incorporated into the product. Moreover, detailed information on water consumption is site specific. For example, the water source for a given mill will depend on its geographical location whereas its specific water consumption would depend on the processes employed within that mill.

The Environment Agency‟s Pulp and Paper Guidance (EPR 6.01) provides some typical water use figures for pulp and paper mills using best available techniques and these appear in Table 5.

Table 5 Typical water use for different types of pulp and paper mills

Activity Water Flow m3/ADt

Mechanical pulp integrated with newsprint light 12 – 20 weight coated or supercalendered or 50% RCF/50% mechanical pulp

RCF not de-inked i/g cartonboard, testliner etc. <7

RCF de-inked i/g newsprint or printings / 8 – 15 writings covered fibre

RCF tissue 8 – 25

Fine paper coated or uncoated not integrated 10 – 15

Tissue non-integrated 10 – 25

Integrated neutral sulphite semi chemical 2.5 – 5

Other speciality integrated pulping mills and 15 – 50* speciality papers

Sulphate pulp unbleached for comparison 15 – 25

Sulphate pulp bleached for comparison 10 – 50

* The specific water consumption sometimes exceeds 100 m3/ADt Source: Environment Agency, 2009

The Environment Agency‟s Pollution Inventory Database for 2009 provides some information on the industry‟s water use based on data from 39 English mills (confidential information could not be provided for use in this report). The gross total water use for these mills was

55.5 million m3, with 59% (32.9 million m3) coming from the mains and the remaining 41% (22.6 million m3) through direct abstraction. Information on net water use was only available for 31 of these mills, and suggests a net water use of 14.7 million m3.

More recently, CPI undertook a survey of the paper industry to better understand its water consumption. Twenty-one mills responded to the questionnaire representing 73% of the industry in terms of tonnes of paper production (~3.1 Mt). The information was increased pro rata to represent 100% of the industry and the data appear in Table 6. The figures are quite similar for 2009 and 2010, albeit showing slightly lower water intake and consumption in 2010 despite paper production remaining relatively constant. The calculated actual water consumption from the industry is approximately 15% of the total water intake at about 12.5 million m3.

Table 6 Water use of the UK paper industry in 2009 and 2010

2009 2010 (‘000 m3) (‘000 m3)

Total production (tonnes) 4,292,619 4,299,996

Freshwater intake

- Abstracted by source and other 83,616 79,290 water received at the mill

- Water content in purchased 4,392 3,662 materials and products for pulp and paper production

Total water intake 88,008 82,952

Water used during manufacturing 60,884 58,617

Wastewater discharged 72,481 70,513

Water consumption

- Water lost during manufacturing 6,163 6,104

- Water content in manufactured 635 694 products

- Water content in waste 5,713 5,607

Total water consumption 12,511 12,405

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

5.2 Outputs In addition to paper products, for which details are available in previous sections, the paper industry also produces other outputs such as waste, water effluent and air emissions.

5.2.1 Waste There is limited information on waste produced by the paper industry in 2009. Total fibre and additive input into the paper cycle in 2009 was 5.3 Mt: 1.2 Mt woodpulp, 3.8 Mt recovered paper and 0.3 Mt non-fibrous additives. However, only 4.3 Mt of paper and board were produced during that same period. From this it can be deduced that there has been a production loss of 1.0 Mt of material. This agrees with information in the 2010 IPTS paper, that rejects from pulping account for about 18% of input raw material (by dry weight). As explained earlier losses of this sort could arise from RCF being unsuitable for paper production (i.e. fibres too short or dirty so unrecoverable) and from loss of fines and additives.

More complete information on paper industry waste is available from the Environment Agency‟s survey of commercial and industrial waste in England in 2002/03 (Defra, 2006b). The manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products accounted for 1.8 Mt of waste in 2002/03. This excludes waste from printing and publishing and since it is waste collected from industries under the title „Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products‟ it refers to pre-consumer waste12. Of the total 1.8 Mt, about 0.6 Mt (31%) were paper and card waste, presumably the fraction that would be bulked up and sent for recycling, and approximately another 0.6 Mt (32%) were sorting residues made up of mechanically separated rejects from pulping of waste paper and cardboard and wastes from sorting of paper and cardboard destined for recycling. Sludge made up 17% of the total waste from the industry whereas the remainder was made up of combustion wastes, paints and varnishes and others (Figure 35).

Sludge in the paper industry is produced through the primary and secondary/tertiary treatment of water effluents13. The clean water is either returned to the abstraction point or re-circulated through the process whereas the sludge is either burnt for energy or taken off- site and used in agriculture. In 2003 712,000 tonnes fresh weight (or 280,000 tonnes dry solids) of sludge were spread to 10,500 hectares of agricultural land in England and Wales although this was expected to decrease to 600,000 tonnes by 2008 because of paper waste being used in other processes such as energy recovery14 (Environment Agency, 2005). In fact, around 125,000 tonnes of paper sludge ash are produced annually by paper mills in the UK15. Approximately 70% of this (circa 87,500 tonnes) goes to end uses such as cement manufacturing and the remainder ends up in landfill. Through its Waste Protocols Project the

12 It was not possible to get similar figures from the 2010 C&I survey because information from the paper industry is collected as part of the ‘Textiles/Wood/Paper and Publishing’ sector. For more details on the 2010 C&I survey please see: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/environment/waste/wrfg03-indcom/

13 Primary treatment of effluents involves the removal of water to increase the fibre content of the paper waste. Secondary/tertiary treatments involves the physical and/or chemical treatment of the effluent to reduce the biological/oxygen demand of the water and to further increase the dry solid content of the sludge.

14 The Environment Agency, in collaboration with CPI, is looking to scope a project on cost benefits of landspread and energy from waste for sludges from the paper industry.

15 Paper sludge ash is the ash residue left over from burning paper sludge in a boiler for energy. It can be used in a number of applications such as agricultural liming agent, cement and block manufacture, a sewage sludge stabiliser and a desiccant for cattle bedding.

Environment Agency has estimated that it is possible to divert a further 30,000 tonnes (and potentially 45,000 tonnes) of paper sludge ash away from landfill (assuming that the paper industry would grow in the years to come). This would not only save significant amounts of virgin raw materials (i.e. for cement manufacturing) but could also stimulate new markets and could save businesses millions of pounds from landfill tax (Environment Agency, 2010).

The 2002/03 figures show that the majority of the waste produced by the industry was recycled (38%), and this probably refers to both the recycling of paper material in the paper manufacturing process but also the one-use recycling such as the use of sludge ash in cement manufacturing as described above (Figure 36). A further 6% of the waste was used for land recovery as described above for paper sludge and 4% was re-used. However, about a quarter of the waste was still sent to landfill.

Figure 35 Waste types and percentages produced by the paper industry in 2002

Source: Defra, 2006b

Figure 36 Waste management methods for waste from the paper industry in 2002

Source: Defra, 2006b

5.2.2 Water emissions Water discharge from pulp mills can vary from 20-250 m3 per tonne of pulp depending on the process used (Defra, 2006). However, when cooling water is discharged separately from process water, and assuming that paper mills use best available techniques, the flow of water discharged is significantly lower ranging from less than 7 m3/t product to up to 50 m3/t product (Environment Agency, 2009). The actual value depends on whether the mill is pulp or paper only or whether it is integrated and the type of process employed. The lowest flow seems to come from integrated RCF mills without deinking whereas the highest flow is associated with bleached kraft and sulphite mills. The CPI data presented in Table 6 show a wastewater discharge of 16.9 m3/t product for 2009 and 16.4 m3/t product for 2010.

Water effluents from paper making processes also contain a number of suspended or dissolved substances. Total suspended solids are in the range of 0.05 – 2.0 kg per tonne of product, again depending on the product and the process used. Other water related emissions are AOX, Total Nitrogen and Sulphur, BOD and COD. Table 7 and Table 8 in Chapter 6 provide more detailed data on water emissions. However, it should be noted that these data are taken from the BREF 2001 document and reflect emissions from mills using best available techniques. Additionally, some of these figures, for example water emissions from chemical pulp mills, are irrelevant since the UK does not have such sites.

The most recent recorded water emissions from the UK paper industry are shown in Table 11, according to which 1.48 kg/t of product BOD and 8.52 kg/t product COD were emitted by the industry in 2008. High BOD and COD values signify that the discharged water is polluted, and when it enters a watercourse it deprives oxygen from the living organisms that live in it. These emission figures from UK mills are within the limits set by the EPR. Appendix D contains more information on the EPR emission limits. 62

5.2.3 Air emissions As with water emissions, the paper making processes employed in a mill will dictate the air emissions from it. Emissions of dust, SO2 and NOx are typical air emissions of the paper making industry and Table 9 and Table 10 in Chapter 6 contain data from different pulp and paper making processes. Again, it should be noted that these data are taken from the BREF 2001 document and reflect emissions from European mills using best available techniques. The reader should note that some of these types of mills are not present in the UK.

The most recent data for UK mills are shown in Table 11, according to which SO2 was released at 0.18 kg/t product and NOx at 0.78 kg/t product in 2008. The need to minimise emissions of SO2 and NOx arises because these compounds can cause acid rain. Again, the emission figures from UK mills are within the limits set by the EPR. More information can be found in Appendix D.

The combustion of fuels to create the necessary energy that powers the paper industry also leads to gas emissions, and Table 10 in Chapter 6 provides data on air pollutants according to the fuel used.

Noise pollution is also possible and arises from the debarking, chipping and other engine operations in virgin paper mills and from the paper machines and refiners in paper mills. However, these are addressed by insulating the rooms where such operations take place. Trucks and other vehicles used to transfer materials from and to the mill can also cause noise pollution in the neighbourhood.

6. Environmental impacts of the paper life cycle From the cutting down of trees for the production of virgin fibre to the distribution of finished products and to the treatment of residual wastes, there are many points in the paper life cycle where environmental effects can occur (Figure 37). In the past twenty years the paper industry as a whole has made significant improvements to its processes and as a result its impact on the environment has decreased (Figure 38). For example, although production of pulp and paper has been increasing steadily, electricity and water consumption have been decreasing due to the use of more efficient processes and fuels and the increased use of CHP. Likewise, emissions of sulphur, chlorine and carbon have decreased and are likely to continue to decrease, with more stringent environmental protection regulations and improved containment technologies.

The environmental impacts of paper production can be quite variable depending on the raw materials used, their origin, and the processes employed to transform them into products. This chapter aims to summarise the environmental impacts of the paper industry by exploring the available research.

Figure 37 A diagrammatic representation of the environmental impacts of the paper cycle

Source: Defra, 2006

Figure 38 Emission trends in the European pulp and paper industry, 1990 – 2008

Source: CEPI, 2009b

6.1 Forestry At a global scale, virgin fibre was historically sourced through the uncontrolled felling of trees, until it became apparent that this practice was neither economically nor environmentally sustainable. Therefore, practices began to change and a lot of the world‟s wood supply now comes either from old forests where selective and controlled logging takes place, or from managed plantations. The latter case usually involves the clearing of an area of land and its subsequent population with one or few selected tree species. Unfortunately, in many parts of the world illegal logging still takes place with devastating social, economic and environmental effects. Since only certain types of trees are suitable for paper making, the paper industry is not a direct cause of illegal logging, but some of the virgin fibre used globally for paper production could be of illegal origins.

Although only a small amount of virgin fibre is used by the UK paper industry, mostly in the form of by-products from other timber-using industries, significant amounts of virgin fibre enter the UK paper cycle through imported paper products. Therefore, it would be remiss not to consider the environmental effects of forestry.

6.1.1 Illegal logging Illegal logging is the harvesting, transport, processing, buying or selling of wood in violation of legislation. The most destructive type is commercial illegal logging which often takes the form of organised crime with the companies behind it being linked to other criminal activities 65

such as corruption, violence and money laundering, with negative effects to the local population and environment. The nature of illegal logging makes it difficult to determine exactly when it is happening and to what extent (Hirschberger, 2008).

Illegal logging activities have grave socio-economic and environmental effects. Indigenous people depend on the forest for hunting, gathering and exploiting the wood as well as for sustainable development such as eco-tourism. Illegal logging deprives them of this valuable resource and as a result marginalises these populations. The environmental effects that follow include the cutting of protected species and thus the endangerment of trees and wildlife. At a local scale deforestation and degradation of forests have been deemed responsible for flooding (such as the flooding of Jakarta, Indonesia after the heavy monsoon rains in 2006), massive landslides caused by the lack of roots that used to hold the soil in place and extreme drought and forest fires all leading to loss of human life. However, illegal logging activities also have more global effects as it is estimated that 15-20% of global greenhouse gas emissions are caused by degradation and deforestation. Additionally, such activities cause a fall in the global price of wood in the range of 7-16%, undermining efforts to promote the use of legal and certified sources of wood (Hirschberger, 2008).

It is estimated that 20-40% of global wood production is illegally logged at a cost of 9.5 billion Euros to industry and forest owners. The WWF has tried to quantify the extent of import of illegally sourced wood and its products in Europe and estimates that in 2006 16-19% of all EU imports of wood was illegally sourced and imported either directly or through third country suppliers. For example, China sources most of its wood from countries that are known for such illegal activities and since China is the largest producer and distributor of wood products in Europe, European countries indirectly become importers of illegally logged wood (Hirschberger, 2008).

Significant efforts have been made by the EU to tackle this issue, beginning with the approval of the EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan in 2003. This plan uses Voluntary Partnership Agreements to identify timber and timber products in producer countries and license them for import in the EU in an attempt to discourage illegal logging. In October 2010, the European Parliament and the European Council approved legislation which prohibits the import of illegally sourced timber and timber products (Regulation No 995/2010). The Regulations, coming into force in March 2013, will require the traders of timber and timber products to use due diligence procedures to ensure that only legally harvested timber and timber products enter the EU. The due diligence procedure will require the identification of the country of origin of the product, the supplier and trader information, the quantity of the product and information showing the compliance of the timber with national legislation. Traders will also be required to use risk assessment to ensure that the products they trade are legally sourced.

6.1.2 Managed plantations and sustainable forestry Virgin fibre used for paper manufacture can either be sourced from natural forests or from managed plantations. There are just over 1 billion hectares of forest in MCPFE countries16, about 33 million hectares of which are plantation forests (MCPFE, 2007).

When managed plantations involve the reforestation of a previously deforested area, they can have a number of positive environmental effects such as reduction in soil erosion, increase in carbon sequestration and the provision of a habitat that will promote wildlife. Through a number of pre-harvesting activities, such as the clearing of old branches and decaying vegetation, managed plantations protect the area from future unwanted fires.

However, if the reforested area used to be an old forest, its subsequent use as a managed plantation would inevitably lead to a loss of biodiversity. Where the old forest would have been able to support a vast range of wildlife, the managed plantation would promote the growth of trees of high commercial value and discourage the growth of other tree species. As a result the new environment will only support a smaller number of plant and animal species. The effects of managed forestry are not easy to determine but need to be considered in terms of the previous land use of the area.

Although managed forestry can have a number of negative effects, sustainable forestry should not. In fact, sustainable forestry implies forestry practices that ensure that our needs (economic, environmental and social) are met without compromising the needs of future generations. Common practices of sustainable forestry include: selectively cutting down trees instead of deforesting large areas, leaving behind a certain percentage of vegetation, as well as replanting with native species to promote biodiversity. Constructing roads in an appropriate way, avoiding unnecessary use of heavy machinery and avoiding cutting down trees on steep slopes can decrease the risk of soil erosion and sedimentation in rivers and lakes. To minimise negative socio-economic effects consultation with indigenous people is one of the first steps to be taken.

Plantation forests in Europe, found mostly in France, Portugal and Spain, do not replace natural forests, but are rather planted so as to create new forests or replace previously existing ones. Furthermore, European managed forests follow the principles of sustainable forestry, often recognised through forest certification, conferring many benefits to the local environment and numerous economic and social benefits to the local community (CEPI, n.d.).

6.1.3 The UK situation In 2009, most of the imported woodpulp utilised by the UK paper industry came from Europe (53%) with smaller amounts imported from the Americas and the rest of the world. Within the CEPI area, more than 80% of the used woodpulp was sourced from CEPI countries, 8% from other EU countries, 5.5% from Russia and the remainder from the rest of the world (Figure 39). To understand the effects of the imported woodpulp on the sustainability of the UK paper industry, the sustainability of EU forestry needs to be explored. Information

16 Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe; this covers 46 European countries and includes the Russian Federation.

provided by CEPI shows that every year 33% more trees are grown in Europe than are felled causing the expansion of European forests (CEPI, n.d.). The latest MCPFE report on sustainable forest management in Europe states that European forest areas and wood volumes continue to increase, even though the volumes of wood harvested are also increasing.

Figure 39 Sources of woodpulp for CEPI countries in 2009.

Source: CEPI, 2009a  The European paper industry uses mostly wood that is not fit for purposes other than papermaking and energy production. Approximately 26% of the virgin fibre used is the by- product of other industrial processes (for example chips or sawdust from mills) and 40-50% comes from “commercial thinning” (where weaker trees are cut to create space in forests to allow trees to grow healthily) or it is left over from felling for other uses such as furniture making (CEPI, n.d.).

To ensure that only legal woodpulp is imported and utilised by the European paper industry, in 2005 CEPI developed a voluntary code of conduct that has been signed by all its members. As part of this code of conduct, the industry must ensure that the wood or wood products it uses originate from certified sustainably managed forests, or where this is not possible to ensure that traceability systems are in place to allow the industry to track the origins of the virgin fibre. Sustainable forest management certification is third party certification which assures the buyer that virgin fibre comes from environmentally, economically and socially responsibly managed forests. To become certified the sustainable forest management practices employed need to adhere to internationally established standards.

Currently, there are over 39 credible certification schemes in operation worldwide, each with its merits and drawbacks. In Europe the two most popular schemes are the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) scheme and the Program for the Endorsement for Forest Certification (PEFC). CEPI supports both of them, and other credible schemes, and maintains that such healthy competition between schemes can result in better forest management and continuous improvement (CEPI, 2008). Although only about 8-10% of the world‟s forests and about 25% of the world‟s industrial roundwood is certified as sustainably managed (CEPI, n.d.), 98% of all European forests is covered by a forest management plan or equivalent (MCPFE, 2007).

Verified chain-of-custody (CoC) systems are used to prove to the buyer of paper products that these have been produced using only sustainably managed wood or pulp. CoC is another tracking system that ensures that sustainably sourced wood is used at every step of the production process. Manufacturers using such material can then label their products as chain-of-custody certified (CEPI, n.d.). However, this requires manufacturers at every step of the process to pay a fee to become part of the scheme, which can result in increased costs. Therefore, at times some manufacturers opt-out, but this does not necessarily mean that their products are not produced with sustainably sourced wood or pulp.

Between 2007 and 2008 there was a reduction of 21% in illegally sourced wood products entering the UK (Lawson and MacFaul, 2010), and it is likely that reductions continued in the following years. Nonetheless, the UK still remains an importer of illegally sourced wood (WWF, 2010). To tackle this problem the UK Government has put in place a number of laws, regulations and policies, an example of these being the adoption of a timber procurement policy that requires central government, its executive agencies and non departmental public bodies to only procure timber and timber products originating from legal or sustainable sources (CPET, 2007). This coupled with the new European regulations on the banning of illegal timber and timber products should help significantly minimise the amount of illegally sourced wood entering the UK, either directly or indirectly. What is interesting to note is the increasing sensitivity of UK businesses to the issue of illegal logging as data show that progressively more businesses opt to use certified wood (Figure 40).

Figure 40 UK companies with CoC certification

Source: Lawson and MacFaul, 2010

6.2 Pulp production The most significant environmental impacts of the paper industry arise from the pulping and bleaching processes (Defra, 2006) because this is where most of the chemicals are used and most of the energy is expended. A significant amount of energy is also expended for drying the paper, although this is particularly the case for non integrated mills while integrated mills will generally keep the pulp wet. The PPA developed a carbon footprint calculator to help magazine publishers calculate the environmental impacts of their operations. As can be seen in Figure 41 production of pulp and paper contributes 55% to the total carbon emissions of a magazine.

Figure 41 Contribution of supply chain stages to the carbon footprint of magazines

55%

30% 8% 3% 4% 1%

PULP & TRANSPORT PRINTING COVERMOUNTS, SUPPLY POST- PAPER MILL- POLY, INSERTS, CONSUMER PACKAGING PRINTER LANDFILL

Source: PPA, Pers. Comm.

The paper industry uses large volumes of water in its operations although net water consumption is low since water is re-circulated within the mills before being treated either directly on-site or at a municipal treatment works, and then discharged back to the source. The most common parameters used to measure the contamination potential of water are Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Absorbable Organic Halogens (AOX), Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus.

Discharge of pollutants (types and concentrations) depends on the pulp/paper making process employed, the preventative measures used at each mill as well as the standards used at wastewater treatment plants. The BREF 2001 document contains some figures of emissions to water from different types of mills, assuming that best available techniques (BAT) are employed. These BATs vary between mill types but in general refer to things such as the use of totally chlorine free bleaching or elemental chlorine free bleaching, collection and reuse of cooling waters, water treatment and re-circulation and spillage avoidance. Since most, if not all, UK mills currently use such techniques it could be assumed that emissions from UK paper mills would be relatively similar to the figures in the BREF. Table 7 70

and Table 8 summarise the water emissions from kraft and sulphite pulp mill operations, from papermaking mills and from integrated mechanical and recovered paper mills.

Similar information is provided in the BREF about air emissions from mills that employ BATs (Table 9). For papermaking operations and for mechanical and recovered paper integrated mills the main emissions are assumed to occur from heat and electricity generation in auxiliary boilers, such as steam boilers and power plants. Therefore, these are covered by the information in Table 10.

It should be noted that these figures do not relate to UK mills but rather European mills using BATs in or prior to 2001. Therefore, these data are rather dated and should be considered indicative.

Table 7 Example emissions to water from different types of European mills assuming BATs

Activity Flow COD BOD TSS AOX Total N Total P m3/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt Kraft mill - 30-50 8-23 0.3-1.5 0.6-1.5 <0.25 0.1-0.25 0.01-0.03 bleached pulp

Kraft mill - 15-25 5-10 0.2-0.7 0.3-1.0 - 0.1-0.2 0.01-0.02 unbleached pulp

Sulphite mill – 40-55 20-30 1-2 1.0-2.0 - 0.15-0.5 0.02-0.05 bleached pulp (TCF)

Integrated 12-20 2.0-5.0 0.2-0.5 0.2-0.5 <0.01 0.04-0.1 0.004-0.01 mechanical pulp and paper mills

Integrated <7 0.5-1.5 <0.05-0.15 0.05-0.15 <0.005 0.02-0.05 0.002-0.005 RCF paper mills without deinking

Integrated 8-15 2-4 <0.05-0.2 0.1-0.3 <0.005 0.05-0.1 0.005-0.01 RCF paper mills with deinking

Integrated 8-25 2.0-4.0 <0.05-0.5 0.1-0.4 <0.005 0.05-0.25 0.005-0.015 RCF based tissue mills Notes: These emissions are yearly averages. Unless otherwise indicated (i.e. for integrated mills) the emissions are from the pulping operations only and the contribution of papermaking should be added to these values. The water flow is based on the assumption that cooling water is discharged separately from other clean water. ADt stands for air dried tonne. Source: EC, 2001.

Table 8 Example emissions to water from European papermaking mills assuming BATs

Parameters Uncoated fine Coated fine Tissue paper paper

BOD5 (kg/t of paper) 0.15-0.25 0.15-0.25 0.15-0.4

COD (kg/t of paper) 0.5-2 0.5-1.5 0.4-1.5

TSS (kg/t of paper) 0.2-0.4 0.2-0.4 0.2-0.4

AOX (kg/t of paper) <0.005 <0.005 <0.01

Total P (kg/t of paper) 0.003-0.01 0.003-0.01 0.003-0.015

Total N (kg/t of paper) 0.05-0.2 0.05-0.2 0.05-0.25

Flow (m3/t of paper) 10-15 10-15 10-25

Notes: These emissions are yearly averages from the papermaking operations only. In integrated mills the contribution of pulp making should be added to these values. The water flow is based on the assumption that cooling water is discharged separately from other clean water. Source: EC, 2001.

Table 9 Example emissions to air from different types of European mills assuming BATs

Activity SO2 NOx TRS Dust (as S) (NO and NO2 as NO2) (as S) kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt kg/ADt Kraft mills - 0.2-0.5 0.2-0.4 1.0-1.5 0.1-0.2 bleached and unbleached pulp Sulphite mills – 0.02-0.15 0.5-1.0 1.0-2.0 n/a bleached pulp Notes: These emissions are yearly averages from the pulping process only, so for integrated mills emissions from papermaking should be added. Emissions from auxiliary boilers are not included. Source: EC, 2001.

Table 10 Example emissions to air from auxiliary boilers assuming BATs

Released Coal Heavy fuel oil Gas oil Gas Biofuel substances (e.g. bark) mg S/MJ fuel 100-2001 100-2001 25-50 <5 <15 input (50-100)5 (50-100)5

2 2 2 2 2 mg NOx/MJ 80-110 80-110 45-60 30-60 60-100 fuel input (50-80 SNCR)3 (50-80 SNCR)3 (40-70 SNCR)3 mg dust/Nm3 10-304 10-404 10-30 <5 10-304

at 6% O2 at 3% O2 3% O2 3% O2 at 6% O2

Notes: 1. Sulphur emissions of oil or coal fired boilers depend on the availability of low-S oil and coal. Certain reduction of sulphur could be achieved with injection of calcium carbonate. 2. Only combustion technology is applied. 3. Secondary measures as SNCR are also applied; normally only larger installations. 4. Associated values when efficient electrostatic precipitators are used. 5. When a scrubber is used; only applied to larger installations.

Notes: The values refer to yearly averages and standard conditions. Specific releases are very site specific and depend on the type of fuels used, the size and type of the installation, whether it‟s an integrated or non-integrated mill etc. Source: EC, 2001.

Figure 42 shows the decreasing trend in emissions of the main water and air contaminants arising from pulp and papermaking processes in Europe. In fact, paper industries in Europe are responsible for some of the lowest air and water emissions in the world, whereas Asia is responsible for some of the highest (Defra, 2006).

This is supported by the recently published WWF‟s Paper Company Environmental Index which rates the environmental performance of five companies (that volunteered their information) based on (1) their use of recovered fibre or fibre from well managed forests, (2) energy use and CO2 emissions, water consumption and water pollution and (3) their corporate transparency. UK and South African producer Mondi ranks first followed by Finnish paper companies Stora Enso, UPM and M-real and finally the North American Domtar. WWF aims to publish this Index every year and to encourage other companies to volunteer this information in order to urge the industry as a whole to make further environmental improvements (ENDS Europe, 2010).

Table 11 shows the data of emissions to water and air from UK mills from 1990 to 2008. As few mills collect information on AOX these data are not included in the table. Since 1990, the UK paper industry has significantly reduced its emissions both to air and to water, although emissions to air appear to be lower in 2008 than the equivalent CEPI averages. However, with regards to BOD and COD, emissions from UK mills seem to be higher than CEPI average emissions. As explained earlier in the report, emissions from UK mills must, and do meet the standards of EPR.

Figure 42 Water and air emissions from the production of pulp and paper in CEPI countries

Source: CEPI, 2009b

Table 11 Water and air emissions from the production of pulp and paper in the UK

Water Emissions 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 (kg/t product) BOD 3.97 2.10 1.51 1.54 1.29 1.46 1.48

COD 18.32 12.50 8.63 6.22 6.35 8.44 8.52

Water Emissions (kg/t product)

SO2 Emissions 1.35 0.66 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.18 0.18

NOx Emissions 1.80 1.13 0.76 0.84 0.84 0.78 0.78

Source: CPI, Pers. Comm.

6.3 Collection and transportation of recovered fibre Available research on the environmental impacts of recyclable collection shows varying effects depending on the collection service used, the subsequent processing of the material (i.e. whether directly at a MRF or passing through a transfer station first) and the specific details associated with the particular situation evaluated. A study by Hyder Consulting on behalf of Community Waste Ltd, comparing co-mingled and kerbside sort collections of recyclables (where paper and card made up 84% of the total), found that collection and sorting of co-mingled material at a MRF would produce 28% less CO2 emissions (at 21.6 kgCO2/tonne) than kerbside sort collections (at 30.0 kgCO2/tonne) (Mayhew, 2008). However, a similar study done by ADAS for Camden Council (assuming 69% paper) found contradictory results with the co-mingled collection producing 37.43 kgCO2/tonne and kerbside sort 21.11 kgCO2/tonne, a difference of about 44% (Metcalf, n.d.).

The difference in outcomes between the two studies relates to the specific conditions at each of the councils investigated; for example in the Hyder study the MRF efficiency was much higher than the efficiency of the MRF in the ADAS study. Nonetheless, these studies suggest that typical emissions would lie in the range of 20-40 kgCO2/tonne of material 74

collected. An estimate of the emissions arising from only the collection part is 0.331 kgCO2/km/tonne (from WRATE, based on a diesel RCV collecting 12 tonnes of waste).

As a result of the fact that collections of recovered material have increased greatly in the UK in recent years and have exceeded the quantities that can be processed domestically, about 50% of the recovered paper is sent abroad for recycling. The largest amounts are sent to China and this involves the transportation of recovered paper to ports, its shipment on container ships to China and its subsequent transportation to the reprocessors.

Although this practice promotes the recycling of material that would otherwise end up in domestic landfills it does not necessarily mean that it is a preferable option in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. WRAP has investigated this by calculating the CO2 implications of processing 1 tonne of recovered mixed paper in China and comparing these to the CO2 emissions resulting from landfilling the same amount domestically and replacing with 1 tonne of paper produced from virgin fibre in China. The study takes into account emissions from each of the three ways used to transport material to China: rail, truck and ship. The results, although only indicative due to the assumptions made17, demonstrate that recycling is preferable to landfill even if this means shipping the material to China. There are a few reasons behind this, one being the high emissions associated with the biodegradation of paper in landfills. Another reason is the emissions associated with the transportation of virgin fibre to China, as this would have to be sourced from further afield than the fibre used in the UK meaning additional transportation impacts. Finally, because of the trade imbalance between China and the UK (containers arrive to the UK from China full of products but return to China empty) the emissions associated with the transport of RCF to China could actually be considered negligible. As a form of validation of their results, the authors of the report looked at a number of lifecycle assessments (LCAs) and found that in the majority of cases the CO2 emitted for the transport of paper to China accounts for only a third of the total CO2 savings from recycling (WRAP, 2008).

There have been a lot of concerns about Chinese mills processing local wood (mainly straw) releasing untreated effluents into the country‟s rivers. In response to this the Chinese government forced a large number of small mills that could not afford to install effluent treatment plants to shut down and encouraged larger mills to install treatment plants to treat effluents from groups of mills (Stafford, 2007). The mills that were forced to shut down would probably fall in the category that Hawkins Wright call „Old China‟ paper industry: mills built before 1996, mostly small and treating domestic wood (Wright, 2004). In contrast, „New China‟ paper industry is made up of modern mills built after 1996, treating imported fibre, both woodpulp and recovered, with capacities exceeding 50,000 tonnes per year. Production from „New China‟ mills has been increasing rapidly in recent years whereas production from „Old China‟ mills has remained more or less constant. The UK recovered paper that enters

17 The assumptions made were: CO2 savings from recycling in China would be equivalent to the domestic ones, paper sent to China is a displacement to virgin material, only CO2 emissions arising from the combustion of fuel were calculated, other greenhouse gases or pollutants were not investigated and emissions from indirect transportation processes were not considered.

China is most probably reprocessed in newer, more technologically advanced mills, and is therefore associated with lower environmental impacts (WRAP, 2009a).

6.4 Disposal and treatment of residual waste A significant amount (about 1.4 Mt) of paper waste is contained within residual waste and is either disposed of to landfill or incinerated in Energy from Waste facilities. In more recent years, and as a result of the Landfill Directive, the way residual waste is landfilled has changed considerably. Landfills need to be engineered according to the specifications of the Landfill Directive depending on the type of waste they accept.

When biodegradable waste decays anaerobically in a landfill it releases methane, carbon dioxide and other gases, collectively called biogas, as well as liquids (called leachate) which may contain toxins, heavy metals and other harmful substances. Landfills must be constructed in a way that protects humans and the environment from these emissions. Therefore, an impermeable area is chosen to construct upon and an impermeable membrane is placed over the soil for further protection. The landfill is constructed in different cells each connected to a leachate drainage system and a biogas collection system. As each cell fills up it is covered with another impermeable membrane to prevent rain water from seeping in and finally covered with a layer of soil. The leachate that is collected from the site is either treated on-site or sent to a nearby wastewater treatment works. The biogas collected is cleaned and combusted to produce energy. Therefore, modern landfills are quite successful at containing emissions, although it is considerably easier to contain the liquid leachate than the biogas. In addition to the biogas that escapes from modern landfills, historical but still operational landfills, which had not been constructed according to the Landfill Directive requirements, allow significant amounts of biogas to be released to the atmosphere. In fact, in 2009, emissions from landfill accounted for about 3% of all direct UK emissions, and more than 35% of the UK‟s methane emissions (DECC, 2011c).

These emissions can be minimised if biodegradable waste, such as paper, is diverted from landfill. One instrument that has helped with this is the Landfill Tax Escalator. As the cost of landfill continues to increase there will be strong economic benefits from diverting biodegradables and other recyclables away from landfill.

A preferable option to landfill, particularly for high calorific value materials, is incineration with energy recovery. Incineration involves the burning of waste over a set amount of time at high temperatures until it is reduced to ash and heat. The ash, whose volume is significantly smaller than the volume of the original waste, is usually sent to landfill although its application in the construction industry is being investigated. The heat produced is usually converted to electricity or connected to a district heating network to heat up neighbouring houses. This is the case for two UK incinerators.

However, when it comes to determining the best end-of-lifetime treatment for waste paper the waste hierarchy must be respected and particular emphasis must be placed on waste prevention and recycling (Defra, 2011b). Although incineration of paper would produce energy it would also result in the loss of a valuable resource leading to the need for a greater amount of virgin fibre with consequences as explained earlier. Additionally, the diversion of paper from incineration would free incineration capacity for other materials that would otherwise end up in landfill. Therefore, there are arguments against the use of landfill and 76

incineration for managing paper waste in the UK. In fact, as the next section demonstrates, recycling is considered to be the most sustainable waste management option in most situations.

Paper recycling inevitably creates sludge and process rejects. Paper sludge is currently being spread on land or used for energy production as described earlier, whereas rejects are being landfilled. Nonetheless, energy from waste is a preferable option for these rejects and the industry is starting to look at this.

6.5 Life cycle analysis – recycling vs. landfill and incineration In 2006 WRAP published a review of life cycle analysis (LCA) studies that compared the life cycle impacts of different end-of-life options for materials, including waste paper, and in 2010 it published an update to the review. The 2006 review compared 9 studies and evaluated 63 different scenarios for paper and card, whereas the 2010 update looked at a further 5 selected studies, comprised of a total of 45 scenarios.

The reports evaluated three different end-of-life routes: recycling, incineration and landfill. The overall conclusion from the 2006 report was that there are greenhouse gas emissions savings from recycling compared to either landfill or incineration, or the prevailing mix of landfill and incineration (20-30% incineration and 70-80% landfill). Landfill was always the worst option (WRAP, 2006). The 2010 report confirmed that recycling is preferable to landfill but the comparison between recycling and incineration proved to be more complex (WRAP, 2010a).

The different end-of-life options were evaluated against a set of environmental criteria. A comparison of the options for each environmental criterion follows.

6.5.1 Energy demand The results from the 2006 LCA review suggest that there is an overall energy saving of 50% from recycling paper rather than incinerating it and replacing it with virgin fibre – twice as much energy is consumed from virgin paper production followed by incineration, compared to paper recycling. This is because recycling maintains the heat value of paper, making it available for release at a later stage through EfW. Furthermore, its process energy was considered (in the reviewed LCAs) to be relatively low compared to the process energy required to pulp virgin wood. Incineration on the other hand only releases the heat value stored in paper. The 2010 review confirms these results. In both reports landfill was the worst option with regards to energy consumption.

6.5.2 Other energy related impacts Acidification, nutrient enrichment (called eutrophication in the 2010 review) and photochemical ozone formation were considered by both reviews and a preference for recycling over other options is shown.

Emissions of SO2 and NO2 are mostly responsible for the acidification caused by paper production. SO2 emissions are related to the burning of fossil fuels so there is some negative impact caused by recycling but a lot of paper products contain sulphur compounds and SO2 is released during incineration. Both papers found that recycling is better than incineration whereas landfill ranks last. 77

Nutrient enrichment/eutrophication is caused by NOx emissions and although NOx are released during combustion of fossil fuels, more NOx compounds are released during incineration. The 2006 review found that LCA studies showed a preference for recycling. However, the 2010 review showed that landfill seemed to be the best option with respect to eutrophication, although only one study investigated this.

Emissions of hydrocarbons are responsible for the paper‟s photochemical ozone formation. Incineration causes more such emissions than recycling therefore both reviews showed recycling to be preferable over incineration, with landfill again ranking last.

6.5.3 Resource consumption Resource consumption refers mainly to the energy used to manufacture paper from virgin fibre or RCF as well as the amount of virgin fibre required to replace loss of RCF during recycling. Therefore the assumptions made in the LCAs with regards to the fuels used and the energy production from recycling alternatives are very important for this criterion. The differences in the assumptions explain why the LCAs did not show a clear preference for one treatment option but rather showed mixed results, with some studies showing a preference for incineration and the slight majority showing a preference for recycling.

In the studies where recycling was preferred, it was assumed that landfill or incineration of waste paper and its replacement with paper from virgin fibre would require more energy than recycling the RCF (even with production of electricity from incineration and methane from landfill). On the other hand, incineration with energy recovery was preferred in the cases where:

 Energy produced by incineration would replace the use of fossil fuels for production of paper either from RCF or virgin fibre.

 The country of production from virgin sources uses energy which is less carbon intensive than the mix substituted for energy recovery. For example, one study assumed that production from virgin sources took place in Sweden where the energy used came mostly from wood or hydropower, which are very low in carbon intensity. However recycling or incineration would take place in Italy where the energy provided by the grid was produced by a mix of fossil fuels and renewable (81% fossil fuels and 19% renewable). Therefore, incineration in Italy would produce energy that would replace a much more carbon intensive source (energy from the grid).

 There would be recycling of low value products such as corrugated cardboard (i.e. downgrading of the paper) as this would require a large input of virgin fibre. However, this is a gross generalisation as it depends on the loss rate during recycling and so is not a valid statement for all low value paper products. Additionally, the possibility of replacing the lost fibre resulting from the recycling of low value products with recovered paper of a higher quality is not considered but it is rather assumed that all losses would have to be compensated through the addition of virgin fibre.

Landfill was preferred to recycling only in one study but this was mostly attributed to the high landfill methane extraction efficiencies and the low paper grade (which could only be down- cycled) assumed in the study.

The outcomes with regards to resource efficiency are very heavily biased by the assumed electricity mix used in the country of production of paper and in the country of the end-of-life option. A less carbon intensive electricity mix, coupled with recovered paper of a higher quality and more efficient recycling technologies would result in a preference for recycling (more details in Section 6.5.8).

Very few studies dealt with other resource efficiency issues such as land use change and the alternative use of wood because these are complex issues and the assumptions that would have to be made could vary greatly and would have a significant effect on the outcomes. Therefore, it is suggested that a closer look needs to be taken at individual cases when dealing with resource efficiency implications.

6.5.4 Waste Waste was only considered in the 2006 report. The main contributors of waste are slag and ashes from the production of electricity in power plants (both for RCF and virgin fibre) and from the incineration of waste paper. Unsurprisingly, the studies reviewed show a preference for recycling over landfill. A preference was also shown for recycling over incineration since more waste is produced during incineration of paper (and replacement with virgin paper) than from recycling.

6.5.5 Water consumption This criterion was only examined by two studies in the 2010 review but they both showed a preference for recycling. Landfill was the second preferred choice followed by incineration. The fact that incineration ranked last is because of the large amounts of water that are used to cool down the equipment in an incineration plant. But, new emerging technologies involving water recirculation can minimise the water used and might make incineration more preferable to landfill in the future.

6.5.6 Toxicity Of the studies evaluated in the 2006 review, only two considered toxicity impacts but both showed a clear preference for recycling. The 2010 review confirmed these results again showing that landfill is the worst option whereas recycling is preferable.

6.5.7 COD and land use Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in effluent wastewater and land use were the other two criteria considered in the studies reviewed in the 2006 report, and there was a preference for recycling with respect to both of them. The LCAs assumed that the COD in wastewater arising from virgin paper mills would be higher than the wastewater COD from RCF mills. Likewise, more land would be required for production of paper from virgin fibre (in the form of forests or plantations) rather than for RCF reprocessing.

6.5.8 Climate change Results for this criterion were more balanced with about half the studies showing preference for recycling and half for incineration. When considering recycling versus landfill, landfill showed greater climate change impacts because of the large methane emissions associated with the biodegradation of paper. The studies were inconclusive with regards to the

preference for recycling or incineration. Once again, the energy mix assumed for the production of virgin fibre or RCF was a decisive factor for this criterion. Recycling was preferred when the same energy mix was used for production from virgin fibre or from RCF. On the other hand, incineration seemed to be the preferred option when paper from virgin fibre was assumed to be produced in countries with carbon-free energy sources but recycling or incineration would take place in countries with carbon intensive energy sources.

Therefore, less CO2 would be released from the production of virgin fibre and incineration would also displace energy produced from fossil fuels. Incineration was also preferred (although marginally) when paper production from both virgin and RCF sources would occur in a country with a CO2-free electricity mix. The reasoning for this was that neither recycling nor production from virgin fibres would contribute greatly to global warming whereas incineration would be an extra source of energy.

Clearly, the electricity mix assumed in each of the LCAs has a significant impact on the outcome of the study. Other assumptions such as technological efficiencies, inclusion of carbon sequestration and release of capacity also seemed to have important effects. For example, in the 2006 report, large CO2 savings from recycling are observed when it is assumed that recycling paper can release incineration capacity that can be utilised to reduce landfill of burnable wastes or that using wood for the production of virgin fibre deprives society the opportunity of using it in the energy sector. Conversely, incineration can result in

CO2 savings when it is assumed that there is no use for released incineration capacity and no opportunity cost from using wood for virgin fibre production. Additionally, when it is assumed that wood can be used as an energy source replacing carbon intensive fossil fuels, recycling is also preferred over landfill and incineration, as it would free up the wood that would be used for the production of paper from virgin fibre.

Differences between paper grades There were differences with regards to climate change depending on the grade of paper, and these relate to the process used for the production of different grades of paper and consequently to the main energy source for each process (Figure 43). The studies assume that all the paper grades investigated are made from virgin fibre and do not contain RCF. However, most of these paper grades, such as newspaper and cardboard, are in fact made almost entirely from RCF in the UK, and this should be borne in mind when considering these results.

Electricity is the main energy source for thermomechanical (TMP) and chemico- thermomechanical (CTMP) processes whereas the Kraft process uses mainly thermal energy (i.e. steam) produced from wood. Newsprint consists mainly of newspapers assumed to be made using TMP and magazines assumed to be produced mainly by TMP/CTMP and some Kraft. Therefore, a lot of electricity is necessary to produce newsprint from virgin fibres. It is assumed that the amount of energy required for recycling is lower than that required for production from virgin fibres, so there is a preference for recycling.

On the other hand, cardboard is assumed to be made solely of Kraft pulp which means that energy is sourced mainly from wood. Since wood is considered carbon neutral there is a preference for incineration (which would also generate electricity to displace the need for fossil fuels) followed by production of cardboard from virgin fibres. For mixed paper, which is

a mixture of paper grades and thus processes, there is about equal preference for recycling and incineration.

The information here should be considered with the caveat that there are essential differences in the assumptions made in each study. When considering the outcomes of these reviews, the UK context must always be kept in mind. At the moment, the UK energy mix is mostly based on fossil fuels, whereas some LCAs assumed that the pulp and paper was produced in countries that use renewable sources of energy. This assumption made incineration, and in some extreme cases landfill, appear preferable to recycling from an energy perspective. However, likely future trends in the UK, such as the use of a lower carbon intensive energy mix and improved recycling technologies (including improved quality of collected product) will favour the recycling of paper over its incineration, and over its disposal in landfill.

6.5.9 Remarks It is clear from both reviews that the assumptions made are critical to the outcomes of the LCAs and this can make it very difficult to compare the results from different studies and reach a conclusion. Therefore, the discussion in Section 6.5 should be considered with care.

When considering possible end-of-life options for a material stream, different criteria (such as resource consumption) cannot be looked at in isolation but rather a holistic approach should be taken and the option that seems to give the most benefits overall needs to be chosen. In this case recycling is clearly the preferred option.

6.6 Other impacts The LCA studies discussed in Section 6.5 touched lightly on the biodiversity and wood as a resource impact of the paper industry. As mentioned earlier in the report the impacts of the paper industry on biodiversity are not easy to determine but if sustainable forest management is used to grow the timber used by the industry the impacts on biodiversity should be controllable and minimal. Likewise, sustainable forest management should also help ensure that wood is available as a resource for this and for future generations. Whereas global per capita paper consumption is 54.48 kg/yr, there is a large difference between paper consumption in developed countries (172.38 kg/capita/year) and developing countries (23.55 kg/capita/year) (World Resources Programme, 2001). Paper consumption is coupled to economic growth and it is bound to increase. Therefore, sustainable forest management, recovery and recycling of paper, and ensuring that virgin fibre enters the paper cycle only when necessary, are key to striking the right balance between paper consumption and preservation of resources.

Although it is not this report‟s aim to quantify them, it should be noted that the paper industry can have many positive social and economic benefits when it is managed correctly, such as provision of jobs and a valuable contribution to a country‟s GDP.

Figure 43 The effects of paper grade on the global warming potential of the different end-of-life options

Source: WRAP, 2006

7. Summary and concluding remarks Over the years, UK paper recovery has been increasing whereas the amount of recovered fibre (RCF) that is reprocessed domestically has been gradually decreasing, due to a decline in domestic reprocessing capacity and increasing demand for material from the Asian markets. After a period of prolonged year-on-year increase, UK paper consumption began to gradually decline in 2005 and saw an unprecedented drop in 2008 and 2009 mainly because of the recession, which caused a decrease in paper pagination and a decrease in print media such as direct mail and advertising in the press.

The key data on paper consumption and production for 2009 are as follows:

 UK paper production was 4.3 Mt, 0.9 Mt of which were exported and 3.4 Mt sold domestically.

 Total UK paper consumption was 12.1 Mt, of which 8.7 Mt were imported, either as unconverted paper (7.0 Mt) mostly from EU countries, as packaging around imported commodities (1.2 Mt) or as converted and printed paper products (0.5 Mt).

 3.8 Mt of recovered paper were used together with some virgin fibre to produce 1.6 Mt of packaging, 1.2 Mt of newsprint, 0.7 Mt tissue, 0.6 Mt printings and writings and 0.2 Mt Specialities.

 Paper collection rate was 68%; 8.2 Mt of paper were collected, mostly in the form of corrugated and kraft and newspapers and magazines. Approximately 46% of this was used as recovered fibre in domestic production with the remaining 54% exported for reprocessing overseas, mainly to the Far East and particularly to China.

In 2010 there was an increase in paper consumption of about 0.2 Mt from 2009 figures, while there was a decline in paper recovery rate to 65%. CPI estimates that this lower recovery rate is due to a lag factor and that as we move into 2011 the recovery rate is likely to increase to reflect the higher consumption in 2010. 2010 also saw increased demand for UK RCF from the European markets from 14% to 22%.

As the UK moves out of the recession, it is likely that increase in advertisement in the press and direct media, increase in paper pagination and greater affluence will lead to an increase in paper consumption. On the other hand, actions such as the advertising freeze in central government, continuing research in light-weighting of copier paper and growth in e- substitution are likely to cause a decrease in paper consumption. Therefore, it is difficult to predict the UK‟s paper consumption trend in the months and years to come.

Since the UK exports more than half of its RCF it must maintain high quality of collected materials to be able to successfully compete in the international market. An increasing number of UK local authorities opt to collect paper co-mingled with other recyclables and subsequently have it sorted at MRFs and, although well run MRFs can produce good quality paper, further work to address some of the contamination problems associated with co- mingled collections and sorting at less well-run MRFs could help increase the quality of UK RCF. The revised Waste Framework Directive, which requires the implementation of separate collections capable of meeting the necessary quality standards for the relevant

recycling sectors, by the year 2015, where technically, environmentally and economically practicable, will help drive this.

Despite the fact that domestic RCF reprocessing has declined over the years, recycled content of domestically produced paper has increased. Newsprint and packaging grades are almost entirely made from RCF, tissue paper and other types of hygiene paper products use about 50% RCF and 50% virgin fibre, whereas high grades of products have the lowest RCF content, sometimes as low as 1% to 3% (for magazines). Although there is room for increasing the recycled content of paper products, the use of virgin fibre cannot be eliminated from the paper loop altogether as it is necessary for replacing the fibre lost during the recycling process. There is a minimum length requirement for recycling of used paper and after six to seven recycling cycles the fibres in RCF become too short and end up in the process waste stream leading to a fibre loss of approximately 10% to 15%. Therefore, virgin fibre or high quality RCF needs to flow back into the paper loop to maintain production levels.

Increasing the recycled content of high grades could exclude them as a feedstock for producing newsprint and packaging grades, leading to the use of more virgin fibre. Tissue and hygiene paper on the other hand cannot be recovered or recycled and any virgin fibre used in their production is lost after its first use. Therefore an opportunity exists to increase the recycled content of these papers if the barrier of consumer perception and behaviour can be overcome.

Global paper consumption is bound to increase in the future, placing ever greater demands on the world‟s timber resources and increasing demand for energy and water. If not managed properly, meeting this demand could increase the global environmental footprint of paper (e.g. risk of illegal logging, replacement of natural forests/habitats with plantations, emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants to air and water). The UK is a significant producer and consumer of paper and so needs to play its part in minimising these risks through encouraging sustainable forest management practices, adopting best available techniques in relation to emissions control and energy and water efficiency, increasing the collection and recycling of waste paper, ensuring virgin fibre enters the paper cycle only when necessary, and providing the UK paper industry with greater access to carbon-neutral sources of energy.

Overall, the UK paper industry has taken important steps during recent years to reduce its environmental impacts and increase the sustainability of its practices. This is reflected in the efficient use of recovered paper, in light-weighting of paper products, in the sector‟s reduced emissions to water and air, in the continuing increase in energy efficiency measures and in the use of alternative energy sources such as biomass. It should be noted that the industry, regulated by EPR, utilises practices that involve Best Available Techniques (BAT) ensuring that raw material and resources are used efficiently and that impacts to the environment are minimised.

Key data on the industry‟s energy and water use as well as emissions are as follows:

 The energy consumption of the UK paper industry in 2009 was 1,705 thousand toe and accounted for approximately 6.4% of the UK‟s industrial energy consumption and about 0.8% of the total UK energy consumption.

 The principal energy sources for papermaking in the UK are natural gas and electricity, although other sources such as coal, oil and biomass are also used to generate energy on site.

 Currently, there are nineteen operational CHP plants either in the pulp and paper manufacturing sector in the UK or servicing the sector and, although the majority currently run on gas, an increasing number use biomass.

 Around 60% of the industry‟s water intake is from the mains whereas the remaining 40% is from direct abstraction.

 The industry‟s net water consumption is about 12.5 million m3 per year which accounts for about 15% of its total water intake.

 UK mills are regulated by the Environment Agency and are therefore required to meet emission limits according to the EPR. The latest emissions data are for 2008 and show

emissions to air of SO2 to be 0.18 kg/t product and of NOx to be 0.78 kg/t product. These were slightly lower than average emissions from European mills. Emissions to water, although within EPR limits were higher than the average emissions from European mills at 1.48 kg/t product BOD and 8.52 kg/t product COD.

 Available data suggest that about 1/3 of the sector‟s waste is card and paper that is usually sent for recycling, 1/3 is rejects from sorting and pulping and 1/3 is sludge. The industry‟s waste in 2002/03 amounted to 1.8 Mt.

There are some areas of further research that could help improve the sustainability of the UK paper industry:

 Advancements in the printing industry often involve the use of hard to remove inks which can lead to increased use of energy and water for cleaning of the RCF pulp and also to a likely loss of valuable fibre. Research is being carried out to identify easier ways to remove these inks during the recycling process, but it could be worthwhile promoting the use of more traditional and less environmentally challenging inks.

 There is very little information on the environmental impacts of recycling paper in overseas mills, for example in China, therefore conclusions cannot be drawn on whether it is better to recycle domestically or export the UK‟s surplus RCF. Further research is required to compare the environmental as well as social and economic impacts of these two options, although it should always be kept in mind that recycling this valuable resource, whether domestically or abroad, is preferable to other end-of-life options.

References

Biffaward. (2003). Mass balace study for the UK paper and board industry. Retrieved from www.massbalance.org: http://www.massbalance.org/downloads/projectfiles/1412-00344.pdf

CEPI. (2008, February). Certification of sustainable forest management. Retrieved December 3, 2010, from http://www.cepi.org/Objects/1/Files/IssueSheet%20CertifSFM.pdf.

CEPI. (2009a). Key statistics 2009 European pulp and paper industry. Retrieved from www.cepi.org: http://www.cepi.org/Objects/1/files/KeyStats09_V01.pdf

CEPI. (2009b). Sustainability report 2009. Retrieved from www.cepi.org: http://www.cepi.org/docshare/docs/3/DLAEEHEBCPGDHEHEDLIHPPKM5LKG9JHE4TVD7CO9VIGD/CE PI/docs/DLS/CEPI-Report09_LayHWeb_VO2-20091113-00001-01-E.pdf

CEPI. (n.d.). Forest factsheet. Retrieved December 3, 2010, from http://www.twosides.info/Content/facts/pdf_49.pdf.

CPET. (2007). UK Government Policy. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from www.cpet.org.uk: http://www.cpet.org.uk/uk-government-timber-procurement-policy

CPI. (2010). Annual review 2009. Retrieved from www.paper.org.uk: http://content.yudu.com/A1novo/AnnualReview09/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=

CPI. (2011). Paper the good news story. Retrieved from www.paper.org.uk: http://content.yudu.com/A1rxfn/AnnualReview10/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=

DECC. (2009). Digest of UK energy statistics 2009. Retrieved from www.decc.gov.uk: http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Statistics/publications/dukes/1_20100208131106_e_@@_duk es09.pdf

DECC. (2011a). Digest of United Kingdom's energy statistics (DUKES). Retrieved from www.decc.gov.uk: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/dukes/dukes.aspx

DECC. (2011b). Energy consumption in the United Kingdom. Retrieved August 2010, from www.decc.gov.uk: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/ecuk/ecuk.aspx

DECC. (2011c). UK climate change sustainable development indicator:2009 greenhouse gas emissions, final figures. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from www.decc.gov.uk: http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Statistics/climate_change/1214-stat-rel-uk-ghg-emissions- 2009-final.pdf

Defra. (2006a). SCP evidence base: sustainable commodities case studies. Case study on coniferous lumber, coniferous/non-coniferous pulp and paper (Written by Scott Wilson). Retrieved from www.defra.gov.uk: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=EV02019_6087_FRA.pdf

Defra. (2006b, February). e-digest of environmental statistics. Retrieved July 26, 2011, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/environment/waste/wrfg03-indcom/ 86

Defra. (2007, May). Waste Strategy for England 2007-2011. Retrieved August 2010, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/documents/waste07- strategy.pdf

Defra. (2010a, March 18). Consultation on the introduction of restrictions on the landfilling of certain wastes. Retrieved August 2010, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/landfill-restrictions/index.htm

Defra. (2010b). Recycling Activities in SMEs: A survey (Written by GHK). Retrieved from www.defra.gov.uk: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=More&Location=None&ProjectID=1 6965&FromSearch=Y&Publisher=1&SearchText=wr1402&SortString=ProjectCode&SortOrder=Asc&P aging=10#Description

Defra. (2010c, June 15). Waste review announced. Retrieved September 2010, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://intranet/news/online-news/2010/waste-0615.asp

Defra. (2010d, December). Commercial and industrial waste survey 2009. Retrieved May 5, 2011, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/waste/documents/commercial- industrial-waste101216.pdf

Defra. (2011b, June). Guidance on applying the waste hierarchy. Retrieved July 26, 2011, from www.defra.gov.uk: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/2011/06/15/pb13530-waste-hierarchy- guidance/

Defra. (2011a, July 5). www.defra.gov.uk. Retrieved July 26, 2011, from Commercial and industrial waste generation and management: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/environment/waste/wrfg03-indcom/

DTI. (n.d.). Paper Recycling (Written by ERM). Retrieved July 2010, from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/tna/+/http://www.dti.gov.uk/sustainability/downloads/p aper.pdf/

Edwards, C., Neilson, M., & Walsh, A. (2009). Direct Marketing Material waste prevention. Report on industry performance Full Year 2009. Retrieved from www.dma.org.uk: http://www.dma.org.uk/_attachments/resources/5852_S4.pdf

ENDS Europe. (2010, July 14). WWF rates paper companies' green performance. Retrieved from http://www.endseurope.com/24350?referrer=bulletin&DCMP=EMC-ENDS-EUROPE-DAILY

Environment Agency. (2005, September). Landspreading on agricultural land: nature and impact of paper wastes applied in England & Wales. Retrieved August 2010, from www.environment- agency.org.uk: http://www.erff.org.uk/databases/DatabaseSearchBin.aspx?outputid=444692&type=pdf

Environment Agency. (2009, December). Pollution inventory reporting - Paper and pulp guidance note. Retrieved August 2010, from www.environment-agency.gov.uk: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/Paper_and_pulp_Dec09_final.pdf

Environment Agency. (2010a, June 14). Paper sludge ash. Retrieved August 2010, from www.environment-agency.gov.uk: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/business/topics/waste/114433.aspx

Environment Agency. (2010b, March). Pollution inventory substances. Retrieved August 2010, from www.environment-agency.gov.uk: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/business/topics/pollution/35761.aspx

Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme. (1996). Water use in UK paper and board manufacture. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/tna/+/http://www.dti.gov.uk/sustainability/downloads/p aper.pdf/ ePolitix.com. (2009, February 18). Peter Seggie - Confederation of Paper Industries. Retrieved August 2010, from www.epolitix.com: http://www.epolitix.com/interviews/interview- detail/newsarticle/peter-seggie-confederation-of-paper-industries/

European Commission. (2001, December). Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Retrieved December 2010, from http://eippcb.jrc.es/reference/: ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/eippcb/doc/ppm_bref_1201.pdf

European Commission. (2008, November 19). Directive 2008/98/EC of the European parliament and of the Council on waste and repealing certain Directives. Official Journal of the European Union . Retrieved from http://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:312:0003:0030:EN:PDF.

European Commission. (2010). REGULATION (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market. Official Journal of the European Union , 23-34.

European Commission. (2011, May 14). EU imposes first ever anti-subsidy tariffs against imports from China. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from http://trade.ec.europa.eu: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=708

Forestry Commission. (2010). UK Wood Production and Trade (provisional figures) - 2010 edition. Retrieved from Forestry Commission Great Britain: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-84nblb

Fricker, A., Thompson, R., & Manning, A. (2007). Novel solutions to new problems in paper deinking. Pigment & Resin Technology , 36 (3), 141-152.

Hirschberger, P. (2008, July). Illegal wood for the European market - an analysis of the EU import and export of illegal wood and related products. Retrieved August 2010, from http://wwf.panda.org/: http://assets.panda.org/downloads/illegal_wood_for_the_european_market_july_2008.pdf 88

IPTS. (2010). Technical report for End of Waste criteria for waste paper. JRC.

Jackson, A. (2009, May). Optical brightening agents: past, present and future. Pulp and Paper Intenational , 32-34.

Lawson, S., & MacFaul, L. (2010, July). Illegal logging and related trade - Indicators of the global response - Country report cards. Retrieved August 2010, from www.illegal-logging.info: http://www.illegal-logging.info/uploads/CHillegalloggingreportcardpackhighres.pdf

MacGuire, F. (2001, June). Paper Recycling: Exposing the Myths. Retrieved November 2010, from www.foe.co.uk: http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/paper_recycling.html

Magnaghi, G. (2009). The world recovered paper market in 2008. Retrieved from www.bir.org: http://www.bir.org/assets/Documents/industry/MagnaghiWorldReport2008.pdf

Mayhew, J. (2008, July 29). Carbon assessment of commingled and source segregated kerbside recyclables collection. Hyder Consulting.

MCPFE. (2007). The state of Europe's forests 2007. (p. The MCPFE report on sustainable forest management in Europe). Warsaw: MCPFE.

Metcalf, P. (n.d.). Energy audit of the kerbside recycling services. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from www.camden.gov.uk: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/policies-reports-and- data/energy-audit-of-the-kerbside-recycling-services.en

Morris, H. (2011, May 16). Chinese anti-dumping duties imposed after EU's CFP probe concludes. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from www.printweek.com: http://www.printweek.com/Printing/article/1070208/chinese-anti-dumping-duties-imposed-eus- cfp-probe-concludes/

Office of National Statistics. (2010a, November 16). Annual business survey (ABS) data. Retrieved January 10, 2010, from www.statistics.gov.uk/abs: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=15361

Office of National Statistics. (2010b, December 8). Regional, sub-regional and local gross value added 2009. Retrieved January 19, 2011, from www.statistics.gov.uk: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/gva1210.pdf

Pira International. (2011, March 10). Pira International on: mineral oil contamination of food packed in recycled paper and board. Retrieved May 5, 2011, from www.pira-international.com: http://www.pira-international.com/testing/mineral-oil-contamination-of-food-packed-in-recycled- paper-and-board.aspx

PPA. (2009). Managing the recycling rate of UK magazines - Period covered 2004-2008.

Sillanpää, M. (2005). Studies on washing in kraft pulp bleaching. Retrieved May 04, 2011, from http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514278771/isbn9514278771.pdf

Stafford, B. (2007, July). Environmenta aspects of China's papermaking fiber supply. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from www.forest-trends.org: http://www.forest- trends.org/documents/files/doc_521.pdf

The Telegraph. (2011, March 8). Cereal box health warning after recycled cardboard study. pp. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8367881/Cereal-box-health-warning-after- recycled-cardboard-study.html.

Waste Management News. (2010, June 4). UK largest contributor to EU waste emissions. Retrieved September 2010, from www.letsrecycle.com: http://www.letsrecycle.com/do/ecco.py/view_item?listid=37&listcatid=5567&listitemid=55478

White, G., Hembery, R., Jenkins, A., & Richards, B. (2007, January). Illegal logging Cut it out! - The UK's role in the trade in illegal timber and wood products. Retrieved September 2010, from www.wwf.org.uk: http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/illegal_logging_exec_summary.pdf

World Resources Programme. (2001, June). No end to paperwork. Retrieved May 11, 2011, from www.earthtrends.wri.org: http://earthtrends.wri.org/features/view_feature.php?theme=6&fid=19

WRAP. (2005). Review of opportunities and potential barriers to using recycled content magazine paper (Written by Pira International). Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/OppPotBarriersMagazinePaper.07a59aad.3196.pdf

WRAP. (2006). Environmental benefits of recycling. An international review of life cycle comparisons for key materials in the UK recycling sector. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Recycling_LCA_Report_Sept_2006_-_Final.39dee8f3.2838.pdf

WRAP. (2007a, April). Assessment of the UK export market for recovered paper. Retrieved 2010, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/International_Markets_Paper.8b1de418.3951.pdf

WRAP. (2007b, July). Realising the value of recovered paper. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Paper_report.8a0ac391.4072.pdf

WRAP. (2008). CO2 impacts of transportingg the UK's recovered paper and plastic bottles to China. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/CO2_Impact_of_Export_Report_v8_1Aug08.aed804c4.5760.pd f

WRAP. (2009a). The chinese markets for recovered paper and plastics. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/China_MSR.37ff1839.6971.pdf

WRAP. (2009b). MRF output material quality thresholds. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/MRF_Output_Material_Quality_Thresholds_Report.fc2ebf63.8 210.pdf

WRAP. (2009c). MRF quality assessment study. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/MRF_Quality_Assessment_Study.78408c4c.8307.pdf

WRAP. (2010a). Environmental benefits of recycling - 2010 update. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/wrap_corporate/publications/benefitsrecycling.html

WRAP. (2010b). Realising the value of recovered paper: An update. Retrieved from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/WRAP_Paper_market_situation_report_Feb2010.d28d4c9d.84 40.pdf

WRAP. (2010c). Recovered paper market: India. Retrieved July 19, 2011, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/India_Market_Snapshot_Feb_2010- Nov_2010_correction.4ce18d51.9989.pdf

WRAP. (2010d). Recovered paper market: Indonesia. Retrieved July 19, 2011, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Indonesia_Market_Snapshot_- _FINAL.4af574b1.8522.pdf

WRAP. (2011a, Spring). The Chinese market for recovered paper and plastics - an update. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/China_MSR_2011.c96f6152.10601.pdf

WRAP. (2011b). Market knowledge portal. Retrieved May 2011, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/recycling_industry/market_information/market_knowledge_portal/materi als_markets/paper.html#introduction

WRAP. (n.d.1). Chemical use in the production of recycled paper. Retrieved July 2010, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/5._Chemical_use_A4.349a77c2.2714.pdf

WRAP. (n.d.2). Office paper collection. Retrieved July 2010, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/4._Office_Paper_A4.15dc89db.2715.pdf

WRAP. (n.d.3). Recovering value from MRFs. Retrieved July 2010, from www.wrap.org.uk: http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/WRAP_2661_ROTATE_V11.1bae0603.3644.pdf

Wright, R. (2004, September). Defining the China market for pulp, paper and board. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from www.forest.trends.org: http://forest- trends.org/~foresttr/documents/files/doc_1155.pdf

WWF. (2010, July 7). The EU finally says no to illegal timber. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from www.wwf.org.uk: http://www.wwf.org.uk/wwf_articles.cfm?unewsid=4057

Zhang, H., Hu, H., He, Z., Ni, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2007). Retention of optical brightening agents (OBA) and their brightening efficiency on HYP-containing paper sheets. Journal of Wood Chemistry and Technology (27), 153-167.

Appendix A – Environmental policy landscape There are a number of environmental policies and instruments in use that impact on the paper industry. Although not a comprehensive list, below is a short description of some of the most relevant ones.

Forestry

EU FLEGT and the illegal timber ban

The EU adopted the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan in 2005 as a means of preventing illegally sourced wood and wood products from entering the EU. The plan uses Voluntary Partnership Agreements to identify timber and timber products in producer countries and license them for import in the EU. The Agreements include commitments and actions from both parties to stop illegal timber trade.

In October 2010, the European Parliament and the European Council approved a regulation which prohibits the import of illegally sourced timber and timber products (Regulation No 995/2010). The Regulations, coming into force in March 2013, will require the traders of timber and timber products to use due diligence procedures to ensure that only legally harvested timber and timber products enter the EU. The due diligence procedure will require the identification of country of origin of the product, the supplier and trader information, the quantity of the product, and information showing the compliance of the timber with national legislation. Traders will also be required to use risk assessment to ensure that they trade legally sourced products.

Chain-of-Custody Certification

The two largest international organisations offering chain-of-custody certifications are the PEFC and the FSC. The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) is an international non-profit, non-governmental organisation dedicated to promoting Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) through independent third-party chain-of-custody certification. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), present in over 50 countries, is an independent not-for-profit organisation whose aim is to promote responsible forest management. It has its own voluntary certification system to support responsible forest management. FSC chain-of-custody certification ensures that the products in question have been sourced responsibly from their forest origins through the supply chain.

Both of these certification schemes are mainly market driven. As consumers are becoming increasingly conscious of the strain of our demands on the environment, they select products that are certified from these, or other similarly active, organisations giving certified products an edge in the market.

The revised Waste Framework Directive

The Waste Framework Directive (WFD) established legislation on the handling of waste in EU member states. This includes requiring EU members to have in place a waste management plan, clarifying the definitions of waste recovery and disposal and requiring the need for permits for waste management. The rWFD came into effect in December 2010, and its main revisions concerned the clarification of what is waste and non-waste and the 92

development of measures for waste prevention and management including setting waste prevention targets.

UK implementation of the revised Waste Framework Directive will impact on the paper sector and will require:

 The waste hierarchy to become a priority order in law.

 A greater focus on waste prevention.

 Higher levels of paper recycling.

 Separate collections for paper by 2015 where technically, environmentally and economically viable – the intention is to have collection systems that deliver quality recyclables.

IPPC and BREF

The Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), which came into effect in 1999, was aimed at minimising pollution from industrial sources in the EU by requiring that industries in the member states would be subject to environmental permits that would take into account operations from the entire plants covering emissions to air, water and land, energy efficiency, waste generation, noise, prevention of accidents, use of raw materials and site restoration after closing. To help the environmental permitting authorities in each EU member state, reference documents (BREFs) are produced for each sector subject to IPPC, which describe the Best Available Techniques for their operations and typical emissions from them. This information is used by each permitting authority to set emission limit values that must be respected by the permitted operations.

Recently the IPPC has been superseded by the Industrial Emissions Directive which recasts seven directives related to industrial emissions into one comprehensive legislative instrument. Furthermore, the BREF document for Paper and Pulp manufacturing is currently being revised.

Landfill Tax

The Landfill Tax was introduced in 1996 as a means of making the landfill of waste more costly than other waste treatment technologies in an attempt to minimise the amount of waste ending up in landfill. The tax was coupled with the Landfill Tax Escalator which increases the cost of landfill of material by £8 per tonne per year for active waste from £32 per tonne in 2008 to £80 per tonne in 2014. This means that LAs have a financial benefit from diverting recyclable materials such as paper, away from landfill and into reprocessing or even energy recovery operations.

CCA

The Climate Change Levy (CCL) was introduced in the UK for energy intensive industries as one of the measures designed to help the UK meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction commitment. As a further financial incentive for minimising emissions Climate Change Agreements (CCA) between the government and a number of sectors were signed. 93

According to these agreements the sectors would report every two years on their energy efficiency and if they meet the agreed energy efficiency targets they would receive an 80% discount to their CCL. CCA agreements will be renegotiated and will continue to 2021 although the Treasury has decided that from April 2011 CCL discounts will fall to 65% (CPI, 2011).

The paper industry is one of the forty UK sectors that have signed CCAs. Because it has been able to meet its CCA targets along the way it has so far saved £150 million from its CCL taxes (CPI, 2011).

Voluntary Agreements

In 2001 Defra entered into a voluntary agreement with the Newspaper Publishers Association to increase the recycled content of newsprint. The industry exceeded the targets at each milestone, achieving recycled contents of 63.5% in 2001, 68.3% in 2003 and over 80% in 2006.

Defra then targeted the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) in 2003 in an attempt to raise recycling levels of direct marketing material (DMM)18. In addition to the targets presented in Table A1 the DMA also committed to promote the Mailing Preference Service, promote better targeting of direct mailings and to promote the use of recycling material in direct mail products and to decrease the use of products that would make recycling difficult, for example glues.

Progress on the targets was presented to Defra through annual reports. The latest report by the DMA (and Royal Mail) shows that the industry has exceeded its 2013 target by recycling 76.5% of direct marketing material (Figure A1). This figure, which only takes into account kerbside collections of DMM, increases to 79.5% when recycling at central locations is also taken into consideration. This latest report represents the most robust one since 2,263 households in 40 local authorities, representative of different levels of provision, were sampled (Edwards et al., 2009).

The latest agreement in the paper sector was made between Defra and the Periodical Publishers Association (PPA) in 2005 in order to reduce the volumes of magazines going to landfill. The latest PPA report shows that the targets were exceeded in 2008, when 74.8% of magazines were recycled. Previous PPA surveys included sampling of News and PAMs from the UK‟s largest newsprint mill in North Wales. For the purposes of this report though, the PIRA project team included sampling from the two largest UK newsprint mills as well as at a Mixed Paper depot of Europe‟s largest recycler. This resulted in a more accurate representation of the recycling rates. In addition to the recycling targets PPA also encourages all its members to carry the Waste and Resources Action Programme‟s (WRAP) „Recycle Now‟ logo as well as to reduce the number of unsold volumes (PPA, 2008).

18 Direct marketing material refers to addressed direct mail, unaddressed door drops and inserts in magazines and newspapers.

Table A1 Voluntary agreements to increase recycling of waste paper

Industry Sector Year of Targets Targets met? Current/ Agreement Latest Recycling Rate Newspaper 2001 To increase recycled content of Yes, in 2006 76% Publishers newsprint to: Association - 60% by the end of 2001 - 65% by the end of 2003 - 70% by the end of 2006 Direct Marketing 2003 To increase recycling of direct Yes, in 2009 76.5% Association marketing material to: - 30% by the end of 2005 - 55% by the end of 2009 - 70% by the end of 2013 Periodical 2005 To increase recycling of Yes, in 2008 74.8% Publishers magazines to: Association - 50% by the end of 2007 - 60% by the end of 2010 - 70% by the end of 2013

Figure A1 Direct marketing material recycling rates from 2003 to 2009

Source: Edwards et al., 2009

Appendix B - EN 643 Grades of paper This European Standard specifies five main grades of paper (Groups 1-5) and 67 sub- grades. Below are the grades and sub-grades (together with a short description) as they appear in the December 2001 revision of the standard.

Group 1 – Ordinary Grades

1.01 Mixed paper and board, unsorted, but unusable materials removed

A mixture of various grades of paper and board, without restriction on short fibre content.

1.02 Mixed papers and boards (sorted)

A mixture of various qualities of paper and board, containing a maximum of 40% of newspapers and magazines.

1.03 Grey board

Printed and unprinted white lined and unlined grey board or mixed board, free from corrugated material.

1.04 Supermarket corrugated paper and board

Used paper and board packaging, containing a minimum of 70% of corrugated board, the rest being solid board and wrapping papers.

1.05 Old corrugated containers

Used boxes and sheets of corrugated board of various qualities.

1.06 Unsold magazines

Unsold magazines, with or without glue.

1.06.1 Unsold magazines without glue

Unsold magazines without glue.

1.07 Telephone books

New and used telephone books, with unlimited content of pages coloured in the mass, with or without glue. Shavings allowed.

1.08 Mixed newspapers and magazines 1

A mixture of newspapers and magazines, containing a minimum of 50% of newspapers, with or without glue.

1.09 Mixed newspapers and magazines 2

A mixture of newspapers and magazines, containing a minimum of 60% of newspapers, with or without glue.

1.10 Mixed magazines and newspapers

A mixture of newspapers and magazines, containing a minimum of 60% of magazines, with or without glue.

1.11 Sorted graphic paper for deinking

Sorted graphic paper from households, newspapers and magazines, each at a minimum of 40%. The percentage of non-deinkable paper and board should be reduced over time to a maximum of 1.5%. The actual percentage is to be negotiated between buyer and seller.

Group 2 – Medium Grades

2.01 Newspapers

Newspapers containing a maximum of 5% of newspapers and advertisements coloured in the mass.

2.02 Unsold newspapers

Unsold daily newspapers, free from additional inserts or illustrated material coloured in the mass, strings allowed.

2.02.01 Unsold newspapers, no flexo-graphic printing allowed

Unsold daily newspapers, free from additional inserts or illustrated material coloured in the mass, strings allowed. No flexo-graphic printed material allowed.

2.03 Lightly printed white shavings

Lightly printed white shavings, mainly mechanical pulp based paper.

2.03.01 Lightly printed white shavings without glue

Lightly printed white shavings, mainly mechanical pulp based paper, without glue.

2.04 Heavily printed white shavings

Heavily printed white shavings, mainly mechanical pulp based paper.

2.04.01 Heavily printed white shavings without glue

Heavily printed white shavings, mainly mechanical pulp based paper, without glue.

2.05 Sorted office paper

Sorted office paper.

2.06 Coloured letters

Correspondence, in mixed papers coloured in the mass, with or without print, of printing or writing paper. Free from carbon paper and hard covers. 97

2.07 White woodfree books

Books, including misprints of books, without hard covers, mainly of woodfree white paper, black printed only. Containing a maximum of 10% of coated paper.

2.08 Coloured woodfree magazines

Coated or uncoated magazines, white or coloured in the mass free from non-flexible covers, bindings, non-dispersible inks and adhesives, poster paper, labels and label trim. May include heavily printed circulars and coloured in the mass shavings. Containing a maximum of 10% mechanical pulp based papers.

2.09 Carbonless copy paper

Carbonless copy paper.

2.10 Bleached woodfree PE-coated board

Bleached woodfree PE-coated board from board manufacturers and converters.

2.11 Other PE-coated board

Other PR-coated board. May contain unbleached board and paper from board manufacturers and converters.

2.12 Mechanical pulp based computer print-out

Continuous computer print out, mechanical pulp based, sorted by colours, may include recycled fibres.

Group 3 – High Grades

3.01 Mixed lightly coloured woodfree printer shavings

Mixed shavings of printing and writing papers, lightly coloured in the mass, containing a minimum of 50% of woodfree paper.

3.02 Mixed lightly coloured woodfree printer shavings

Mixed shavings of printing and writing papers, lightly coloured in the mass, containing a minimum of 90% of woodfree paper.

3.03 Woodfree binders

White woodfree lightly printed shavings with glue, free from paper coloured in the mass. May contain a maximum of 10% of mechanical pulp based paper.

3.04 Tear white shavings

White woodfree lightly printed shavings without glue, free from wet-strength paper and paper coloured in the mass.

3.05 White woodfree letters

Sorted white woodfree writing papers, originating from office records, free from cash books, carbon paper and non-water soluble adhesives.

3.06 White business forms

White woodfree printed business forms.

3.07 White woodfree computer print-out

White woodfree computer print-out, free from carbonless paper and glue.

3.08 Printed bleached sulphate board

Heavily printed sheets of bleached sulphate board, without glue, polycoated or waxed materials.

3.09 Lightly printed bleached sulphate board

Lightly printed sheets of bleached sulphate board, without glue, polycoated or waxed materials.

3.10 Multi printing

Woodfree, coated, lightly printed, free from wet-strength paper or paper coloured in the mass.

3.11 White heavily printed multiply board

New cuttings of heavily printed white multiply board, containing woodfree, mechanical or thermo-mechanical pulp piles, but without grey piles.

3.12 White lightly printed multiply board

New cuttings of lightly printed white multiply board, containing woodfree, mechanical or thermo-mechanical pulp piles, but without grey piles.

3.13 White unprinted multiply board

New cuttings of unprinted white multiply board, containing woodfree, mechanical or thermomechanical pulp piles, but without grey piles.

3.14 White newsprint

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted newsprint, free from magazine paper.

3.15 White mechanical pulp based coated and uncoated paper

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted coated and uncoated mechanical pulp based paper.

3.15.01 White mechanical pulp based paper containing coated paper

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted mechanical pulp based coated paper. 99

3.16 White woodfree coated paper, without glue

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted woodfree coated paper, without glue.

3.17 White shavings

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted paper, free from newsprint and magazine paper containing a minimum of 60% of woodfree paper; may contain a maximum of 10% of coated paper. Without glue.

3.18 White woodfree shavings

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted woodfree paper, may contain a maximum of 5% of coated paper. Without glue.

3.18.01 White woodfree uncoated shavings

Shavings and sheets of white unprinted woodfree paper, free from coated paper. Without glue.

3.19 Unprinted bleached sulphate board

Unprinted sheets of bleached sulphate board, without glue, polycoated or waxed materials.

Group 4 – Kraft Grades

4.01 New shavings of corrugated board

Shavings of corrugated board, with liners or kraft or testliner.

4.01.01 Unused corrugated kraft

Unused boxes, sheets and shavings of corrugated board, with kraft liners only, the fluting made of chemical or thermo-chemical pulp.

4.01.02 Unused corrugated material

Unused boxes, sheets and shavings of corrugated board, with liners of kraft or testliner.

4.02 Used corrugated kraft 1

Used boxes of corrugated board, with kraft liners only, the fluting made of chemical or thermo-chemical pulp.

4.03 Used corrugated kraft 2

Used boxes of corrugated board, with liners of kraft or testliners but having at least on liner made of kraft.

4.04 Used kraft sacks

Clean used kraft sacks. Wet-strength and non wet-strength. 100

4.04.01 Used kraft sacks with polycoated papers

Clean used kraft sacks. Wet-strength and non wet-strength. May include polycoated papers.

4.05 Unused kraft sacks

Unused kraft sacks. Wet-strength and non wet-strength.

4.05.01 Unused kraft sacks with polycoated papers

Unused kraft sacks. Wet-strength and non wet-strength, may include polycoated papers.

4.06 Used kraft

Used kraft paper and board of a natural or white shade.

4.07 New kraft

Shavings and other new kraft paper and board of a natural shade.

4.08 New carrier kraft

New carrier kraft, may include wet-strength paper.

Group 5 – Special Grades

5.01 Mixed recovered paper and board

Unsorted paper and board, separated at source.

5.02 Mixed packaging

A mixture of various qualities of used paper and board packaging, free from newspapers and magazines.

5.03 Liquid board packaging

Used liquid packaging aboard including PE-coated liquid packaging board (with or without aluminium content), containing a minimum of 50% by weight of fibres, and the balance being aluminium or coatings.

5.04 Wrapper kraft

Poly-lined, sprayed, or laminated used kraft. Must not contain bitumen or wax coatings.

5.05 Wet labels

Used wet labels from wet-strength papers, containing a maximum of 1% glass content, and a maximum of 50% moisture, without other unusable materials.

5.06 Unprinted white wet-strength woodfree papers

101

Unprinted white wet-strength woodfree papers.

5.07 Unprinted white wet-strength woodfree papers

Printed white wet-strength woodfree papers.

102

Appendix C – Main process and product aids in the paper industry The table below has been modified from a table in the BREF of the pulp and paper industry (EC, 2001) and does not include the basic chemicals used in papermaking such as acids and bases. The BREF contains more detailed information on the amounts and types of chemicals and additives used in each pulp and/or papermaking process and can be consulted if further detail is required. To note however, that the BREF document is currently under review and once the new version is published it will provide the most up-to-date information.

Table C1 Pulp and paper manufacturing product and process aids

Product Aids Purpose Examples

Fillers - Improve printability properties, Kaolin or clay, talc, lime, opacity and brightness and gypsum, titanium dioxide smoothness and gloss - Replace (saving) fibres

Sizing agents - Improve surface quality Modified starch, modified natural - Make paper hydrophobic resins, wax emulsions, synthetic products like alkyl ketene dimmers and maleic acid anhydride copolymers

Fixing agents - Improve adsorption of additives Alum [Al2(SO4)3] to fibres

Dry strength agents - Improve strength properties in Modified starch dry conditions

Wet strength agents - Improve strength properties in Urea formaldehyde polymer, wet conditions melamine-formaldehyde polymer, epichlorohydrincondensates

Dyes - Give paper a certain colour Azo compounds, quarternary and/or brightness ammonium compounds

Optical brighteners - Give paper a white impression Chemicals based on 4,4-diamino stilbene-2,2-disulfonic acid

Coating chemicals - Give paper certain surface Pigments, binders, wet strength properties agents, dispersion and lubrication agents, Defoaming agents, Slimicides

Process aids Purpose Examples

Retention aids - Retention of fibres, fines and Alum, sodium aluminate, fillers polyaluminiumchloride, starch - Increase production by products, gums, anionic improving dewatering polyacrylamides, nonionic polyacrylamides, cationic 103

- Decrease emission of pollutants polymers

Deinking and - Release ink from fibres NaOH, Fatty acids, H2O2, bleaching chemicals - Bleaching hydrosulphite, FAS, complexing - Keep ink particles in dispersion agents, sodium silicate, tensides

Complexing agents - Removing metal ions by DTPA or EDTA forming metallic complexes to prevent decomposition of bleaching chemicals

Tensides - Cleaning of felts, wires and Acidic and alkalic surfactants machinery - Cleaning of water circuit system - Dispersions of substances

Defoaming agents - Prevention and destroying of Fatty acids ethoxylates, poly- foam oxiethylene, fatty acid derivates, higher alcohols, phosphoric acid esters, vegetable oil products

Biocides (Slimicides) - Prevention growth of Organic bromine, sulphur or microorganisms nitrogen compounds, quarternary ammonium compounds

104

Appendix D – Emissions description and limits The following tables contain information on emission limits as well as a short description on which processes are responsible for particular emissions and why there is a need to control them. All the information in the tables is from the Environment Agency‟s Pulp and Paper Guidance Note 2010.

Table D1 Indicative BAT standards for emissions of BOD, COD, nutrients and suspended solids to water and sewer

Activity Water BOD COD mg/l N Total P Total Suspended Flow kg/ADt (calc.) kg/ADt kg/ADt Solids mg/l m3/ADt (calc.)

Mechanical pulp integrated with newsprint light 12 – 20 0.2 – 0.5 100 – 400 0.04 – 0.1 0.004 – 0.01 10 – 40 weight coated or supercalendered or 50% RCF/50% mechanical pulp

RCF not de-inked i/g cartonboard, testliner etc. <7 0.05 – 0.15 70 – 210 0.02 – 0.05 0.002–0.005 7 – 20

RCF de-inked i/g newsprint or printings / 8 – 15 0.04 – 0.2 130 – 500 0.05 – 0.1 0.005 - 0.01 14 – 37 writings covered fibre

RCF tissue 8 – 25 0.05 – 0.4 80 – 500 0.05 – 0.25 0.005–0.015 4 – 50

Fine paper coated or uncoated not integrated 10 – 15 0.15 – 0.25 40 – 200 0.05 – 0.2 0.003-0.01 13 – 40

Tissue non-integrated 10 – 25 0.14 – 0.4 20 – 200 0.05 – 0.25 0.003-0.015 8 – 40

Integrated neutral sulphite semi chemical 2.5 – 5

Other speciality integrated pulping mills and 15 – 50 0.15 – 1.3 0.15 – 0.4 0.01 – 0.04 6 – 75 speciality papers

Sulphate pulp unbleached for comparison 15 – 25 0.2 – 0.7 200 – 630 0.1 – 0.2 0.005-0.2 12 – 75

Sulphate pulp bleached for comparison 10 – 50 0.3 – 1.5 0.1 - 0.25 0.01 – 0.03 12 - 50

105

Table D2 Indicative BAT standards for emissions to water and sewers (does not include point releases from combustion/incineration)

Benchmark Activity Comment Why is it controlled?

BOD 10 – 20 g/l (flow Existing plants should strive for this Expresses the amount of dissolved oxygen weighted monthly standard but should meet the larger consumed by micro-organisms as they average) range values in Table D1 decompose organic material. The higher it is the more polluted the water and the less oxygen is available for aquatic organisms

COD As per Table D1 Only set as a limit where the impact Measures the oxygen demand of all the of COD is significant as a toxicity organic matter in water. The higher it is the surrogate more polluted the water and the less oxygen is available for aquatic organisms

Suspended As per Table D1 Reductions in suspended solids are Increase the opacity of the water, cover the Solids likely to be driven by the need to tops of rivers and lakes and can absorb reduce BOD/COD due to pollutants heavy metals and fatty acids which can adhering to the solids bioaccumulate.

Phosphates and As per Table D1 Most N and P comes from dosing in Can cause eutrophication/soil acidification Nitrates the ETP – the aim is to ensure minimum residual nutrients whilst maintaining ETP operation

Pentachlorophe 1 μg/l Bleaching or incoming IPC standard Toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative and nol recovered paper can transform into other toxic

AOX 10g/ADt Mills using wet strength Not normally necessary to set AOX A measure of the amount of halogens (absorbable 1 mg/l @10m3/ADt agents levels except where there is a (fluorine, chlorine, bromine, iodine) bound to organic 0.4mg/l @25m3/ADt programme to reduce them by in- organic substances halogen) process techniques

106

Mercury 0.1 μg/l Timber, inks and dyes and Parity with other UK industrial Toxic List I substance most significant in de-inking sector benchmarks

Cadmium 0.6 μg/l Timber, inks and dyes and Parity with other UK industrial Toxic List I substance most significant in de-inking sector benchmarks

Table D 3 Indicative BAT standards for emissions to air (does not include point releases from combustion/incineration or fugitive emissions from material storage)

Emission Benchmark Level Activity Comment Why is it controlled?

Chloroform 5 mg/m3 Bleaching/ broke recovery Parity with UK chemical sector A suspected carcinogen but non-persistent and non-bioaccumulative

Chlorine 5 mg/m3 Bleaching/ broke recovery Parity with UK chemical sector

Chlorine dioxide 1 mg/m3 Bleaching/ broke recovery Parity with UK chemical sector

Particulate Matter 50 mg/m3 Point release from paper Can cause respiratory finishing activities. problems 50 mg/m3 Point release from mechanical pulping

Oxides of nitrogen 60-80 mgNOx/MJ fuel input From energy recovery of bark or Mass value is a BREF value - Toxic. Can cause acid sludge calculated, with no control. Value rain reduces to 40-60 with SNCR.

Concentration is based on Waste 3 200 mg/m (as NO2 at 11% Incineration Directive oxygen dry gas) where Waste Incineration Directive applies.

Oxides of sulphur 5 – 10 mgS/MJ fuel input From energy recovery of bark or Mass value is a BREF value - Toxic. Can cause acid

107

(as SO2) sludge calculated, with no control. rain

Formaldehyde Where emissions >100g/h limit Papermaking wet strength Parity with other UK industrial Irritant of 20 mg/m3 as formaldehyde agents sector benchmarks for a Class A VOC

Volatile wood Where emissions >1kg in 24- Mechanical pulping compounds (acetic hours limit of 50 mg/m3 acid, fatty acids, formic acid, resin acids, turpentine)

Dioxins 1 ng/m3 Liquor burning Parity with other UK industrial Highly toxic, persistent sector benchmarks and bioaccumulative

PAHs 0.1 mg/m3 Liquor burning Parity with other UK industrial Effects depend on PAH sector benchmarks and length of exposure but generally toxic

VOCs 20 mg/m3 Liquor burning Parity with other UK industrial Contribute to climate sector benchmarks change. Aromatic VOCs are carcinogenic

108