Paper cut

Mary Rayner examines the recycled paper trail

In 2003, the UK consumed over 4.6 million tonnes of printing and writing paper. But UK mills produced only 1.5 million tonnes, of which only 110,000 tonnes contained recycled fibre.(1) This means that a good proportion of paper found in offices and homes across the UK has been imported. Whilst there have been improvements in forestry management, and a reduction in the use of old-growth forests both at home and overseas, we still have a long way to go to make the paper industry sustainable.

Due to the large number of recycled or part recycled/part virgin paper brands available on the market, we have decided to omit virgin paper from this report. We have produced separate tables for copier and printer paper, notepads and for paper and stationery retailers.
In the first part of this report we examine the environmental and social impacts of forestry and the production of virgin paper, before making a comparison with recycled paper. We start with an examination of the environmental and social impacts of the paper industry.

Logging
To trace the origin of a piece of paper means going back right from the shop or distributor to the paper merchant, then to the mill before reaching the forest where it originated. Some companies, such as Metsaliitto, are ‘vertically integrated,’ with interests at each stage of the supply chain. Others however, such as the large stationery wholesalers Staples and Viking, deal solely as distributors.

The good news is that by purchasing 100% recycled or FSC-certified paper, you can be certain that your money is not fuelling concerns over illegal logging, especially of old-growth and ancient forests. Sadly though, there are still a number of companies operating in the UK which continue to peddle paper from these fast-declining reserves. Illegal logging can have devastating impacts, ranging from species extinction to soil erosion and the forced displacement of indigenous peoples.

In 2001, several campaign groups focussed their attention on Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) over its destruction of rainforest in Indonesia. A number of paper merchants and office wholesalers, including Spicers, Kingfield Heath and Robert Horne (now a PaperlinX subsidiary) were accused of purchasing paper from APP and repackaging it under their own brand names.(2) Public outrage caused the majority of these companies to beat a hasty retreat. However, still sourcing paper from APP are York & Ford (now owned by Paper 4 Print), Communisis BBF, WL Coller and David John. We have not covered these companies in this report as none of them are significant suppliers of recycled or FSC-certified paper. These are, however, the brands (recycled and non-recycled) to avoid:

Caxton (WL Coller)

Petersgate (WL Coller)

Recycled Cream (Communisis BBF)

However, the majority of APP paper is rebranded. To be sure of avoiding it, anyone buying virgin paper should opt for 100% recycled FSC-certified brands.
Forestry management problems are not exclusive to developing countries. See the case study on Finnish forestry in this article for more information on the social and environmental problems caused by logging in Europe.

As well as consumer and campaign group pressure, the attitude of government can influence imports of illegally harvested timber. The European Commission, backed by the UK government, has plans for a voluntary approach to timber import licensing, consisting of “partnership agreements” between timber-producing countries and the EU. Although campaigners agree that measures to prevent illegal timber entering the UK are badly needed, many feel that a mandatory ban, rather than a voluntary scheme, is the only way to make any significant impact.(3)

Both Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth campaign to stop the logging of tropical hardwoods and boreal forest (where a great deal of paper is sourced from) and to protect biodiversity in endangered rainforest areas. See contacts at the end of this article for more details.

Pulping
Water
Once a tree has been felled it must make its way to a mill for processing into paper. Paper making is an energy- and water-intensive process – the industry uses nearly 2% of the power consumed in the UK and 13% of all the water abstracted. It also produces more than 400,000 tonnes of waste per year, largely paper sludge, which often goes to landfill or is spread on farmland.(4)
The UK paper and board industry uses 180 million m3 of water and produces 163 million m3 of effluent every year.(5) Every tonne of paper recycled saves 17 trees and 7,000 gallons of water.(6)
Chemicals
There are a number of chemicals involved at this stage of the paper making process. Of them chlorine, used to bleach wood pulp white, is amongst the most damaging. Most mills, especially those operating in Europe and North America, now produce ‘Elemental Chlorine Free’ (ECF) papers by employing chlorine dioxide instead of chlorine gas, a much less environmentally damaging process. Even better, some mills use Totally Chlorine Free (TCF) technologies. Processed Chlorine Free (PCF) is used for recycled paper. Any brands carrying the Blue Angel mark are required to be TCF.

Polluting companies
A number of the companies involved at this stage of the supply chain have been implicated in pollution incidents at their mills.
Earlier this year, South African based Sappi was forced to shut down a pulping operation in its home country after the chlorine bleaching process was found to be causing toxic chemical pollution. The company admitted that “higher than advisable levels” of dioxins, furans and other organo-chlorinated compounds had been released and that some of the measurements were “about four to five times higher” than World Health Organisation guidelines. According to the Law Society, some of these compounds had the potential to cause cancer and endocrine system health problems in humans and animals.(7)

Subsidiaries of the Finnish Metsaliitto Co-operative have been the focus of concern over sulphur emissions. A study by a Finnish university found that sulphur levels around its Metsa-Botnia mill were 28% higher than those in corresponding background samples.(8)
A number of M-real’s (40% owned by Metsaliitto) closed down mills are in need of corrective action due to contamination of the soil in the form of chlorinated phenols, residual dioxin, oil, heavy metals and PCBs.(9)

Certification schemes
Unfortunately, paper cannot be recycled indefinitely. After about six cycles, the fibres break down to such an extent that sufficient quality cannot be maintained. Whilst there are still huge amounts of recyclable paper going to landfill, we would urge consumers to opt for 100% recycled paper, without any virgin content, to encourage demand. However, a number of the brands covered do contain a proportion of virgin fibre (see table on below for breakdown).

There are a plethora of forest certification schemes designed to encourage and ensure responsible forestry management. We take a critical look at a few of them:
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
Its mark is the most widely recognised and most widely supported by environmental campaign groups. Although more widely recognised as a symbol on wood products such as furniture, the FSC also works on paper. The FSC operates two different schemes, one resulting in a Forest Management Certificate and another resulting in a Chain of Custody Certificate. The former is designed for companies which operate solely in forestry, whereas the latter is for ‘integrated’ forestry companies which own forests and produce paper products. The Chain of Custody tracks fibre content right from the point of origin through to the product, with independent certification at every step along the process.

According to Nick Cliffe from the FSC, most paper requires some virgin content because of quality, but it is essential that this comes from an ethically certified forest. He says that the inclusion of a proportion of virgin fibre does have environmental benefits and that without responsible and economically viable forestry management, large areas of forest would be cut down for agriculture (particularly soya beans and cattle ranching).(10)

The FSC operates three different labels for paper. One is for paper which contains 100% FSC-certified virgin fibres, another which contains 100% recycled post consumer waste (as yet only available in the US) and another which contains a mixture of FSC certified and “non-controversial” virgin paper and post consumer waste.
The FSC has been congratulated by campaign groups for its transparency and independence.

Finnish Forestry Certification Scheme (FFCS)
The idea for a Finnish scheme began with NGO support and with the intention of being eventually adopted by the FSC. Environmental groups soon felt that most members were failing to show significant commitment to ecologically sound forestry and left. The forestry sector and forest owners then went on to develop their own standard called the Finnish Forest Certification System (FFCS). The FFCS was endorsed by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) in May 2000. Since then, the PEFC logo has been used on FFCS-certified products. Both the FFCS and the PEFC have also been criticised for their industry-dominated governance and non-transparent processes.(11) The FFCS is one of a number of schemes operating under the PEFC umbrella.

Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC)
Greenpeace have recently produced a report, ‘Missing Links’, saying it had identified “serious gaps” in the certification standards operated by the Malaysian Timber CC. Specific criticisms levelled at the Council were that:

MTCC procedures do not ensure certified products are legal.

The MTCC chain of custody system does not require independent tracking of wood from forest to first point of timber processing l A missing link that means all MTCC chain of custody claims have no credibility.

There are no requirements to ensure independent verification of the chain of custody of MTCC timber exported to the Europe or elsewhere.

There are no credible checks on the origin of uncertified material that is allowed to be mixed with certified material timber. This means that illegal timber can enter the chain of custody and be sold as MTCC-certified.

Contrary to international treaties and standards, the MTCC system does not address indigenous peoples' land rights.(12)

Government intervention
Due to weaknesses in public disclosure and stakeholder consultation, the Government has rejected the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) scheme for use in its policy on timber procurement. The North American Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) and the MTCC were also rejected. Only the FSC and the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) schemes received full approval, although Greenpeace has pointed out that the CSA scheme has met with “heavy criticism” from Canadian environmental groups.(13)

Spotlight on Finland Finland is full of forests, which cover a whopping 76% of the country. But things are changing fast. The country is also a huge paper exporter, supported by its industrial forestry industry. Greenpeacehas been campaigning on the impact of this industry on Finland’s old growth forests, which cover 5% of the country. Finland is the single largest source of paper imports into the UK,(1) so it’s likely that if you don’t use recycled paper at home or in your office, you could well be consuming Finnish trees. Finland is busy converting old-growth forests to commercial forests which are suitable for logging. Less than five per cent of the country is now old growth, and this last bit is struggling to support a huge range of plant and animal species.3 Already the flying squirrel, three-toed woodpecker, Siberian jay and many other plants and animals have suffered massive population loss in the new types of forest. This modern “forest management” has put 564 forest species on the ‘classified as threatened’ species list(2) and a further 416 are ‘classified as near-threatened.’(2) In fact, Greenpeace believe that the number of threatened species is probably much greater.(2) The North of Finland is also home to Northern Europe’s only indigenous people, the Sámi. Traditional reindeer herding forms a cultural basis for tens of thousands of indigenous people in Lapland.(4) The reindeer survive the harsh winters by eating lichen off the trees, and they need to be able to move from one pasture to another to find food.(3) According to the President of the Sámi Parliament, Pekka Aikio “living forests form a central part of Sámi culture. Old growth forests are of crucial importance for reindeer herding and should not be logged for pulp mills under any circumstances. In the Saami culture we have been taught to respect forests ever since our childhood.”(4) However, state owned company Metsahallitus (covered on the table as Metsaliitto Co-op) has been accused of logging in two reindeer herding areas, and building a road through another in February 2005, whilst community groups and NGOs called for a moratorium.3 The Finnish state also owns a quarter of the voting shares in Finnish-Swedish paper giant StoraEnso.(3) The company buys wood from reindeer grazing forests, and then sells the paper to the European consumer. The country is responsible for one quarter of the world’s printing and writing paper exports.(5) Jorma Lansman, a reindeer herder from the Muotkatunturi co-operative, said, “it doesn’t fit in anyone’s clear mind, when you think of how long and slow the trees have grown and then they’re cut and boiled for pulp, just like that.”’ (3) Greenpeace and the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation (FANC) agreed with Jorma and, along with the majority of the reindeer herding co-operatives in the Sámi area, mapped the important reindeer grazing forests in 2003.(3) The groups demanded that the mapped areas must not be industrially logged, but were largely ignored.(3) In May 2005, the NGOs and the Sámi finally managed to get Metsahallitus to agree to a temporary logging moratorium in the 90,000 hectares that were mapped and engage in formal negotiations with Sámi herders.(6) However, in June Metsahallitus terminated negotiations and said that the moratorium was over. FANC issued a statement on the surprise decision claiming it was one-sided and that they did not accept it.(9) Unfortunately, this stalemate could mean that logging could restart in August. Greenpeace are asking all publishers which source from the disputed land what steps they are taking to ensure they are not using old growth fibre. According to Belinda Fletcher, Forest Campaigner at Greenpeace: “the campaign had already been instrumental in convincing the Xerox Corporation (USA) to agree to stop buying copy paper sourced from the ancient forests in the Sàmi region.”(6) Publishers written to in the UK include BBC Worldwide, EMAP, IPC Magazines, National Magazine Company and Redwood Magazines. Patrick Venditti, Senior Forest Campaigner at Greenpeace, commented that “we have yet to receive confirmation from any of the above companies that they will not purchase fibre from the disputed areas.”(6) Ethical Consumers should keep an eye on the Greenpeace forest crime website to see if their support is required in the coming months. References 1 ‘Stationery, personal and office, Keynote 2004 2 ‘Certifying extinction: An Assessment of the Revised Standards of the Finnish Certification System,’ Greenpeace 09/04 3 ‘Lapland: State of Conflict,’ Greenpeace 03/05 4 ‘Finland Forests,’ Greenpeace viewed on 13/7/05 5 ‘Paper exports drive forest destruction,’ Greenpeace 2/5/03 6 Email from Greenpeace forest campaigner, 13/7/05 and 14/7/05 7 ‘Greenpeace exposes Finland’s hypocrisy on human rights,’ Greenpeace, 15/3/05 8 ‘FANC position on the end of the dialogue process on Finnish old-growth forests,’ FANC 14/6/05

GM trees
Large forestry corporations have hailed the introduction of genetically modified trees, particularly eucalyptus, for their fast-growing capabilities. Industrial-style, monoculture eucalyptus plantations have been criticised by environmentalists for threatening biodiversity and consuming large amounts of water. In the past six years, activists have destroyed 12 GM tree trials, in Britain, Canada and the US.(14)

Even the UN has looked to GM trees as a possible means of combating climate change. Trials have been carried out on trees which have been genetically modified to absorb more carbon. While carbon absorption increased, scientists also noted a dramatic increase in water consumption.(15)

Both Mondi (Anglo American) and Sappi have been involved in developing GM trees.(16) The FSC label is a guarantee that paper has not been made from GM trees.

Workers’ rights
Mill owner Sappi was subject to protest from members of the South African Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing, Wood and Allied Workers Union (CEPPWAWU) against what it termed ‘anti-union practices’. According to the union, the company was being condemned for aggressive attempts to weaken workers’ rights in both South Africa and the USA. The International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers’ Unions (ICEM) also reported that union members in two of Sappi’s US paper mills had been without a new labour agreement for over a year, and that Sappi managers at those locations had proposed to drastically cut workers’ income, health care and retiree health benefits.(17)

Borders stands accused of having a long history of anti-union activities in shops seeking to organise collectively. It is alleged that company management had used ‘bullying, emotional manipulation and retaliation’ against employees wishing to unionise, including the ‘summary dismissal’ of one union organiser from a store in Ann Arbor, the company’s base. This move was said to have resulted in the company being ordered by the courts to pay back wages to the fired worker. At other stores, employees were told that wishing to unionise was an act of bad faith towards their colleagues, especially those in personnel roles, and that to vote for collective bargaining would cause personal distress.(18)

In 2005 Office Depot paid out $3.3million to settle a lawsuit which claimed that it had misclassified workers as assistant managers to avoid paying them overtime on additional hours worked. The suit was said to have been brought by hundreds of workers who had been subject to this practice.(19)

Recycled paper
In 2002/03, paper and card accounted for over a third of all household waste collected for recycling, with 1.1 million tonnes being collected in England. This means however that around 5 million tonnes of household paper and card is not recycled and is largely going to landfill.(20)

Compared with virgin paper, the use of recycled paper reduces water consumption by nearly 60% and energy use by 40%. Air and water pollution are decreased by 74% and 35% respectively.(21) We take a closer look at the environmental credentials of recycled paper.

Pre- and post-consumer waste
Not all recycled paper is the same. A brand made from post-consumer waste will help reduce impacts more than one made from pre-consumer waste, which in turn is preferable to ‘mill broke’. So what do these terms mean?

Post-consumer waste: this is paper which must have travelled all the way from a paper mill, been used by a consumer and then put in the recycling bin, or more basically, “fibre that has been used for its final and intended purpose.”(22) The NAPM recycled mark ensures that a product must contain at least 75% post-consumer waste. The Blue Angel’s criteria mean that it must contain a minimum of 51% printed and domestic/office waste.

Pre-consumer waste: this can have come from a variety of sources including trimmings or overs from a paper-cutting operation or from a printer. Whilst there are huge amounts of post-consumer waste thrown into landfill, recycled paper made from pre-consumer waste does little to reduce the volume of paper which simply gets thrown away.

Mill broke: comprised of trimmings and faulty paper produced during the papermaking process. This has never been used as paper so is not, and should not be, classified as recycled paper.(23)

Recycled marks
Blue Angel
The Blue Angel is recognised by the leading green stationery providers as the most stringent labelling system for recycled paper. It not only requires a minimum of 51% printed and domestic/office waste, but also requires companies to report on the energy used in the manufacturing process. Brands carrying the Blue Angel mark are indicated on the table below.

NAPM recycled mark
The National Association of Paper Manufacturers (NAPM) mark has been going for around 15 years. According to its director, Tim Bowler, the 75% post consumer waste requirement was initially quite challenging for most companies, but is now being met more easily. Although his comments about the benefits of genetically modified fast growing trees were rather alarming, the NAPM mark does ensure companies cannot make spurious claims about the recycled content of their brands. The NAPM states that: “Paper and board sought to be accorded the NAPM Recycled paper mark must be manufactured from a minimum of 75% genuine paper and board waste fibre, no part of which should contain mill produced waste.” (www.napm.org.uk, 18/7/05) Only waste from a specific commercial order, trimmings from a printer or domestic and office waste qualifies for the 75% content. Brands carrying the NAPM mark are indicated on the table below.

Brand (recycled mark*)	% recycled	% of which post consumer waste	remaining %
	100	100
	100	100
Cyclus Office (BA, NAPM)	100	100
Evercopy (BA)	100	100
Evolve (BA**, NAPM)	100	100
Green Stationary pad	100	100
Heritage Laser (NAPM)	100	100
Pukka pads	100	100
	100	100
	100	100
	100	100
	100	100
	100	100
Nautilus (BA, NAPM)	100	50	No data
Cambridge	100	85	15% pre-consumer
Revive (NAPM)	100	80	20% pre-consumer
Cambridge	100	75	25% pre-consumer
Paperpack pad	100	75	25% pre-consumer
Existence (NAPM)	100	75	No data
Croxley Heritage (NAPM)	80	100	20% virgin (of which around 50% is FSC pulp)
Conservation Doc-It (NAPM)	75	100	25% TCF virgin pulp
NAPM = National Association of Paper Manufacturers recycled mark **only Evolve Office BA (not Evolve Office) has the Blue Angel label

Alternatives
So, what are the alternatives to using paper made from trees?
Paper made from a mixture of post consumer waste and, yes, elephant dung is available from The Green Stationery Company (www.greenstat.co.uk) and Ecotopia (www.ecotopia.co.uk). The dung is collected by the elephant handlers in Sri Lanka and provides an extra source of income for the locals to care for the elephants.

Hemp paper and banana & coffee paper is also available from Green Stationery. The Hemp paper is made from 75% UK-grown hemp and 25% straw. The banana paper is 100% recycled with 5% minimum waste from coffee and banana fields in Costa Rica, this paper gives an extra income to 3rd World commodity farmers and reduces river pollution from dumped agricultural waste fibres. It is made in the UK.

You might want to have a go at making your own paper. Visit www.pioneerthinking.com/makingpaper for a basic ‘how to’ guide.

References

1 ENDS Report 364, May 2005, p 36
2 Paper Tigers, Hidden Dragons, Friends of the Earth, 2001
3 ENDS Report 365, p45, 6/05
4 ENDS Report 359, p7, 12/04
5 www.envirowise.gov.uk/envirowisev3.nsf/key/DBRY4PHFKK, 18/7/05
6 Which?Extra, Recycling, 2002
7 KwaZulu-Natal Law Society Library www.lawlibrary.co.za: Earth, Air and Water/Chemical poisons found in KZN river, 16/02/05
8 Oulu University Library www.kirjasto.oulu.fi: http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514268709/html/, 2000
9 M-real Corporate Responsibility Report, 2004
10 Conversation with Nick Cliffe from the Forest Stewardship Council, 18/7/05
11 Greenpeace report “Certifying Extinction: an assessment of the FFCS, 10/04
12 ‘Missing Links’, 17/5/05, Greenpeace
13 ENDS Report 358, p 32, 11/04
14 Resistance is fertile: protests against GM trees, Lang,C, WRM Bulletin 88, 11/04
15 ‘GE Trees: No solution to climate change’, Lang, C, published in Gen-ethischer Informationsdienst, 3/05
16 www.chrislang.blogspot.com, 20/7/05
17 International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers Unions www.icem.org: ICEM update 1/3/04
18 www.bordersunion.org/node/1039, 12/7/05
19 Odepotunion.tripod.com, 7/05
20 www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/InformationSheets/Paper.htm, 18/7/05
21 Keynote, 10/96
22 www.sustainable-development.gov.uk Green guide for buyers – Paper (action sheet) 18/7/05
23 www.greenconsumerguide.com/domesticll.php?CLASSIFICATION=105&PARENT=92, 15/7/05