[GreenYes Archives] -
[Thread Index] -
[Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]
I see that Doug Koplow wrote a terrific response (no surprise) about the subsidy issues, so I will respond instead to the cost and content issues regarding paper recycling. First, I think the statement in question is pretty glib - there is so much complexity involved that to say "additional procedures to turn what is essentially trash into usable paper products" makes me wince. "Trash"??? How long have we been working to change this mindset?! However, while I don't know all the specifics of the mills involved in this deal, there are several factors that may create higher prices for the recycled paper: 1) The deinking pulp mill providing the recycled pulp is the only one so far certified to provide this level of FDA-approved pulp, so there is a limited supply, 2) The deinking pulp mill is a stand-alone mill (which is true for much of the high grade deinked pulp available in North America at this time). Since it is not integrated into the papermaking mill, as most virgin pulp mills are, its product both has to be shipped to the paper mill and also adds another layer of commerce to the deal, 3) If the papermaking mill has a virgin pulp mill that otherwise supplies all its fiber requirements, it will have to idle some of its virgin pulping capacity to replace it with recycled pulp. Since this is kraft pulp, that means that its virgin pulp is created by cooking down the tree, with only about half resulting in papermaking fiber. The rest of the tree material is sent off to another part of the mill to co-generate energy. If the mill instead has to idle some of its virgin pulping, it is also idling some of its co-generation capacity and then must buy outside fuel. These are economic issues that can be changed when recycling becomes more integrated into paper mills. Starbucks' dedication to incorporating recycled content into its cups is a great step towards that future. There's no question that source reduction via reusable cups is the best, but I'm not hopeful we're going to be getting there quickly. In the meantime, as long as there are disposable cups, making them with as much recycled content as possible is a good thing. How much is possible? I don't think that anyone yet knows. We have been told by at least one industry source that recycled fiber doesn't perform well beyond 30% postconsumer when it is in constant contact with aqueous fluids. I would think that a paper cup would need a high percentage of long fibers for strength, much higher than for office paper; recycled content is used to replace short fibers in paper, so that could limit it in this type of product. Keep in mind that making a paper cup for hot liquids is very demanding, with a lot of functionality and safety issues involved as well as cost. I don't think people should be disappointed with 10% postconsumer to start with. Rather, I think we should celebrate that Starbucks has pioneered recycled content in a product that had not had any before, and that this commitment, even at this level, means a lot of deinked recycled fiber will be used because of the number of cups involved. Recycled printing and writing mills (which use this same kind of pulp) have been closing over the past several years (more than a dozen since 2000) and have not been replaced because the paper industry has not seen enough demand to convince them to re-invest or to shift the recycled capacity to newer mills. A purchaser with the public profile and clout of Starbucks can change that message, which is good for all of us who care about recycling. We still have a lot of work to do to build the recycled paper system. We don't have the infrastructure to go from zero to 100 right away. As this product is embraced by customers, environmentalists, recyclers, and others, other cup manufacturers will be encouraged to follow and possibly go further - in postconsumer content, in types of products included, in technology and research - and that should encourage more investment and development of the necessary recycling infrastructure, which in turn will encourage more incorporation of recycled content. That's how I think eventually we'll get to a fully functioning recycling economy. If, instead, everybody picks this step apart and says it's not good enough - why would other cup-makers or purchasers follow suit? It takes an enormous amount of work and coordination to set up the systems to produce and distribute an advance like this. I say, let's applaud each step - just make sure they keep going and call on the rest of the industry to follow their lead. Susan Kinsella -- Susan Kinsella Executive Director Conservatree 100 Second Avenue San Francisco, CA 94118 Phone - 415/721-4230 Fax - 509/756-6987 E-mail - paper@no.address Websites - http://www.conservatree.org, http://www.paperlisteningstudy.org |
[GreenYes Archives] -
[Date Index] -
[Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]