1 / 39

BMI Environment Committee

BMI Environment Committee. Bill Upton May 6, 2008. Presentation Topics. Mission, Tasks, & Members of the Committee BISG/GPI Environmental Report Forest Carbon Loss: Real or Unreal PCW & CO 2 Emissions: The Data Behind the Data Where To Go For Information.

tauret
Télécharger la présentation

BMI Environment Committee

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BMI Environment Committee Bill Upton May 6, 2008

  2. Presentation Topics • Mission, Tasks, & Members of the Committee • BISG/GPI Environmental Report • Forest Carbon Loss: Real or Unreal • PCW & CO2 Emissions: The Data Behind the Data • Where To Go For Information

  3. Mission, Tasks, Committee Members

  4. Mission To act as an information resource for BMI members on environmental issues concerning the book industry

  5. Tasks Underway • At this conference: poll membership regarding topics of current interest • Provide links to information sources • In this presentation • On BMI website • Help Conference Committee find speakers on environmental topics • Create e-mail facility to answer member questions • Identify and communicate proven best practices

  6. Environment Committee Members • Co-chair: Jim Cannatella, International Paper • Co-chair: Julie Skibniewski, Appleton Coated • Other members: • Gary Armstrong, Quebecor World • Tracey Shanton, Glatfelter • Bill Upton, Malloy • Bruce Smith, BMI

  7. BISG/GPI Environmental Report Published March 2008 Topic 1: Forest Carbon Loss, Real or Unreal

  8. 7.6 million tons p. 24

  9. p. 24

  10. Calculating Forest Carbon Loss(BISG/GPI Report, p. 26) • U.S. book industry uses 1.6 million tons of paper • Recipe for 1.6 million tons of book paper requires 4.2 million tons of wood • Dry wood is ½ carbon • Wood used represents 2.1 million tons carbon • Mass of CO2 molecule is 3.67 times C atom • Wood used for book paper contains 7.6 million tons of CO2 equivalents (2.1 million x 3.67)

  11. Is BISG/GPI Report Correct? • When wood is harvested, the carbon it contains stays in the wood • It isn’t immediately released to the air as CO2 • The purpose of a carbon footprint is to figure out what happens to the atmosphere • Though the data in the BISG/GPI report are corrected for this fact, the inclusion of “Forest Carbon Loss” as an emission is conceptually incorrect. • Harvesting wood doesn’t cause a permanent loss of carbon in the forest, because: • Trees are a renewable resource, they grow back • This fact has not been accounted for in the BISG/GPI report

  12. Why Re-growth Is RelevantThe Example of Biofuels

  13. Re-growth Must Be Counted • Harvesting trees for making paper is a process similar to the biofuel example, because trees are a renewable resource • However, the BISG/GPI report depicts paper making as a process similar to the fossil fuel example, as though trees were not renewable • This is incorrect

  14. Recent Concerns About Biofuels • Criticism: greater demand for biofuel crops leads to clearing forests to grow those crops • Clearing forests for annual crops: deforestation • Deforestation should be counted in biofuels analysis • Forestry is not deforestation • Forestry treated differently from deforestation under IPCC carbon accounting rules • No one is challenging the cyclical “carbon neutral” nature of biofuels

  15. Key Question To what extent do we replace the wood we harvest?

  16. U.S. Picture • We’re clearly growing back more wood than we harvest in the U.S. • Growing stock has increased 50% in the last 50 years • While we have harvested vast amounts of wood • Growing stock is live wood • The more live wood in our forests, the more carbon our forests contain • U.S. papers: 60% of U.S. book market (John Maine, RISI)

  17. Canadian Forest Service Data • Canadian picture closer to neutral than U.S. • 5 of last 16 years Canadian forests lost carbon • 11 of last 16 years Canadian forests gained carbon • On average, Canadian forests gained 50 million tonnes of carbon per year • Canada is growing back enough to replace both harvests and other tree mortality, plus a little bit more • Canadian papers: 23% of U.S. book market (John Maine, RISI)

  18. The Rest of the World • Chinese papers: 6% of U.S. book market • 1949 to late 70’s, forest carbon in China declined • Since late 70’s, forest carbon in China increasing 21 million tonnes per year (Science, June 2001) • China is now growing back more than it harvests • However, China may also draw wood from other countries that are losing forest carbon • All other countries: 11% of U.S. book market • Ratio of growth to harvest for “all other” unknown • Given heavy forest growth in U.S., and preponderance of fiber sourced from U.S. and Canada, clearly we are growing back more wood and carbon than we harvest in the “fiber basket” for the U.S. book market. (Market share data by country, John Maine, RISI)

  19. Ontario Forest Research Institute Division of Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources • “Fact and Fantasy About Forest Carbon” (The Forestry Chronicle, March/April 2008) • “Forest management in Ontario, as governed by the Crown Forest Sustainability Act, increases total boreal forest carbon stock over the long term…” • Translation: harvesting trees under an FSC, SFI, or CSA program results in greater forest carbon storage than occurs in a forest left entirely alone. • Forests left entirely alone also experience major mortality events due to fires, blow-downs, and insects

  20. Metafore Environmental Non-governmental OrganizationCoordinating Organization of the Paper Working GroupCreators of the Environmental Paper Assessment Tool • “The Paper Consumer’s Guide to Climate Change” • “Far from reducing forest cover…the forest products industry, which manufactures paper, has provided an irresistible economic incentive to keep land forested.” (p.3)

  21. So What? • Readers of the BISG/GPI report will conclude it’s environmentally friendly to move to electronic books • Not true • E-books, made of plastics and metals, have larger carbon footprint than print books • “Would you like paper or plastic?” Paper still wins. • Transition to e-books should be based on operational advantages to the consumer • U.S. book industry isn’t causing “Forest Carbon Loss” • For more information see: http://www.malloy.com/carbonanalysis/

  22. BISG/GPI Environmental Report Published March 2008 Topic 2: Post Consumer Waste (PCW) and CO2 Emissions, The Data Behind the Data

  23. One Claim of the BISG/GPI Report • If U.S. book industry use of PCW goes from 5% to 30%, • We will save 1 billion lbs. of greenhouse gases per yr. (BISG/GPI Report, p.45) • Claim is based on output displayed by Paper Calculator • On website of Environmental Defense • GHG emissions: 1 ton uncoated freesheet • 0% recycled: 5,690 pounds • 100% recycled: 3,582 pounds • Calculation explained in White Paper No. 3 • Also, on website of Environmental Defense • Written by Paper Task Force in 1995, data updated 2002

  24. Closer Look at White Paper No. 3 • White Paper No. 3 written to compare disposal methods • Recycling vs. Landfill or Incineration • Compares 3 Life Cycles (WP No. 3, p.3) • Virgin fiber to paper to landfill • Virgin fiber to paper to incinerator • Recycled fiber to paper to recycled fiber • At end of life, White Paper No. 3 assumes: • All paper made from virgin fiber gets landfilled or incinerated • All paper made from recycled fiber gets recycled • GHG just one of 15 emissions evaluated by WP No. 3 Waste Mgmt. 80% 20%

  25. Closer Look at White Paper No. 3Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Stage for “Office Paper” Table C-3, p. 132 of White Paper No. 3 Numbers represent pounds of GHG per ton of paper

  26. Closer Look at White Paper No. 3Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Stage for “Office Paper” • In making uncoated freesheet, virgin fiber has lower GHG emissions because biomass is used as fuel for mill • For most of other 15 emissions, PCW is lower • For some other products (e.g. newsprint), PCW is lower • Newsprint offers other benefits: higher yield • New disclaimer on Paper Calculator • Results based on general data • Actual emissions vary from mill to mill • Mill results dependent on power supply: fossil fuel or other

  27. Closer Look at White Paper No. 3Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Stage for “Office Paper” • White Paper No. 3 explains calculations of Paper Calculator • Claim on p. 45 of BISG/GPI report based on Paper Calculator’s calculations for uncoated freesheet • For uncoated freesheet, White Paper No. 3 says: • Publisher’s decision to use PCW doesn’t reduce GHG emissions • Consumer’s decision to recycle paper at end of life reduces GHG emissions • If our concern as an industry is to minimize GHG emissions, we should focus on: • Recycling paper at end of life • Channeling recycled paper to uses where GHG savings are greatest in next life cycle

  28. Thomas Pollock of MetaforeProject Manager, Paper Working GroupInterview Appearing in Summer 2007 Issue of Axis Advisory • When people buy paper products… they’re focused on recycled content as a measure of good environmental performance… Why is this not adequate if a company wants to “do the right thing”? • Tom: To get a true measure of environmental performance you have to look at the life-cycle of a product. Considering just a few criteria doesn’t make it possible to do that. With paper products, this means understanding environmental performance at the forest level, mill level, how it gets to the consumer, etc.   • Recycled content is important - but it is not the whole picture. For example, climate change is a big issue and choosing a recycled product does not fully address climate change. CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions have to be taken into account. What is happening at the paper mill and what type of energy is used to make a paper product can be as important as what the product consists of in terms of environmental performance.

  29. Bottom Line • PCW content as one dimensional assessment of a paper’s environmental quality isn’t enough • The picture is more complex • Paper Working Group’s EPAT helps sort out some of the complexity • We need to help educate publishers and the public

  30. 1. Efficient Use & Conservation of Raw Materials Recovered Content Fiber Efficiency Water Use Energy Use 2. Minimization of Waste Recyclability & Compostability 3. Conservation of Natural Systems Source of Fiber Certified Forest Management Sensitive Forest Fiber 4. Clean Production Air Quality Mercury Water Quality Climate Stability Minimum Impact Mill Efforts Solid Waste Environmental Management System 5. Community & Human Well Being Labor & Human Rights Human Health & Safety Stakeholder Impacts 6. Credible Verification & Reporting Public Reporting Independent Verification 7. Economic Viability Paper Working Group’s Desired Outcomes and Indicators for Environmentally Preferable Paper (EPAT)

  31. Where To Go For Information

  32. Industry Reports • BISG/GPI “Environmental Trends and Climate Impacts, Findings from the U.S. Book Industry”, March 2008 • Copies can be purchased from: • Book Industry Study Group • http://www.bisg.org/publications/environmental_benchmarking.html • Green Press Initiative • https://www.greenpressinitiative.org/orderform.htm • “AAP Handbook on Book Paper and the Environment”, February 2008 • Available for free download on website of the Association of American Publishers • http://www.publishers.org/main/Conferences/documents/PAPERPAPERFINAL_000.pdf • “MPA 2007 Environment Handbook”, June 2007 • Available for free download on website of the Magazine Publishers of America • http://www.magazine.org/content/Files/EnvironmentHandbook072007.pdf#page=1&view=fit • This report covers many of the same topics covered in the AAP Handbook, and some others as well. For instance, it contains a thorough explanation of TCF, PCF, and ECF bleaching processes.

  33. ENGO Reports & Resources • Environmental Defense Fund • The Paper Calculator • http://www.edf.org/papercalculator/ • White Paper No. 3, “Lifecycle Environmental Comparison: Virgin Paper and Recycled Paper-Based Systems”, Originally published December 1995, data updated February2002,Prepared by Paper Task Force • Available for free download at: • http://www.edf.org/documents/1618_WP3.pdf • Environmental Paper Network • “The State of the Paper Industry, Monitoring the Indicators of Environmental Performance”, September 2007 • Available for free download at • http://www.environmentalpaper.org/stateofthepaperindustry/index.htm

  34. ENGO Reports & Resources • Metafore • “The Paper Consumer’s Guide to Climate Change” • To register and receive a free download, go to: • http://www.metafore.org/index.php?p=New_Paper_Consumer's_Guide&s=560 • Environmental Paper Assessment Tool (EPAT) • To register and use, go to: • https://www.epat.org/EPATHome.aspx?request=119 • For a matrix comparing the various forestry certification systems, go to: • http://www.certifiedwoodsearch.org/matrix/matrix.aspx

  35. Government Reports • National Forest Service, division of United States Department of Agriculture • 2007 Forest Inventory Analysis (RPA) • http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/program-features/rpa/docs/2007_RPA_FINAL_59-TABLES%20021208a.xls • Table 3: Forest Area in the United States • Table 10: Timberland Area in the United States • Table 20: Net Volume of Growing Stock in the United States • 2002 Forest Inventory Analysis (RPA) • http://ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/fiadb/rpa_tabler/gtr_nc241.pdf • This is not a complete update of FIA data. For the most recent complete data set, see the 2007 FIA. However, the first 10 pages of this file contain a good verbal summary of conditions in U.S. forests, and pages 12 – 17 contain a glossary of terms. The glossary is helpful in understanding things such as what portion of overall forests are considered “timberland” and how “net volume of growing stock” is measured. • National Report on Sustainable Forests – 2003 • http://www.fs.fed.us/research/sustain/documents/SustainableForests.pdf • This report provides an in-depth assessment of U.S. forests using the criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management of the Montreal Process.

  36. Government Reports • Canadian Forest Service • “Is Canada’s Forest a Carbon Sink or Source?” • http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/news/544 • Ontario Forest Research Institute, part of Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources • http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/OFRI/2ColumnSubPage/STEL02_165415.html#How_forest_management_can_help_slow_climate_change

More Related