Greetings,
In a recent article published by “Green BIZ” a story written by Heather Clancy states that the manufacturer of Huggies, Kleenex, and Kotex, Kimberly Clark, has reduced its use of fiber from “natural forests” in Canada and Latin America by 39 percent and wants that percentage increased to 50 percent by 2025. The goal, according to the article, is to claim “natural forest free” at some unspecified time in the future.
The following excerpts as quoted from the article state, “It’s (Kimberly’s) definition of natural forests includes old growth forests and those that naturally generate, usually those in boreal and temperate ranges.” “Canada and Alaska contain about 25 percent of the world’s remaining intact primary forests. Much of Kimberly-Clark’s fiber is from there, the Southeastern U.S., and from plantations in Brazil and Chile. There are significant biodiversity with northern forest logging, especially species such as caribou.” “The company has also committed to sourcing 90 percent of its fiber from “environmentally preferred sources.” Those include recycled paper, wood from eucalyptus plantations, or managed forests certified by the Forest Stewardship Council, and fiber from wheat straw, sugar cane, sorghum, and others.” “We’ve had many years now of exploring multiple alternatives that are more plant-based, so we feel pretty excited about the future,” said Lisa Morden, who was promoted to C-suite title in June by Kimberly-Clark.
After reading the last quote and remembering what we learned in school, for verification I looked up the definition of tree, which is noun and the dictionary states,
a woody perennial plant, typically having a single stem or trunk growing to a considerable height and bearing lateral branches at some distance from the ground.
Didn’t the company spokesperson say they are going to more plant-based alternatives and are they not already using, as defined in the dictionary, a plant called trees? A person must wonder if Ms. Morden has ever been to a logging site, has ever been educated as to what trees are, their renewability, or how a forest works. Much of what is harvested in the northern forests regenerates on its own and is certified by FSC or SFI. It appears as if they are promoting what they say they oppose, which is degradation of forest health. What is more interesting is that the United Staes does not have the illegal logging operations or deforestation to the degree like those in other parts of the world. U.S forests are sustainably managed, and we have never run out of trees. That being the case, why is Kimber-Clark not investing in a U.S. pulp mill? For those who remember, there was a time when the company was a large landowner in this region. Maybe it’s time for history to repeat itself to when their raw material came from sources under their control rather than spending thousands of dollars and time trying to track and control where it is coming from.
While Kimberly-Clark plans on getting its pulp from other sources, Norsek Skog is making plans to enter the pulp market with a new bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulp mill at its Saugbrugs mill in Halden, Norway. According to the article in PaperAge, the cost is between NOK 1.5 to 2 billion. In case you are wondering one NOK (Norwegian Krone) equals .094526 USD.or roughly $147 million. As quoted from the article “It is gratifying for equipment suppliers, lenders, wood and other raw materials suppliers, shareholders, and customers that we are investing in and establishing a plant for bleached chemi-thermomechanical pulp at Saugbrugs. But those who have the most reason to rejoice are our employees at Saugbrugs. The new revenue streams from mechanical pulp, along with the production of SC paper at Saugbrugs, will make the factory more profitable and robust, ensuring job security," Drangsland (CEO of Norske Skog) concluded.
Two things, with the first being, why is it $2 billion to build a U.S pulp mill and why is it that the supercalendered magazine paper, which is what the Norway mill will produce, is going well in Europe and not in the U.S? Isn’t the fact that supercalendered paper was not selling the reason the WI Rapids mill was closed? Ever have that nagging feeling that the facts are not adding up?
Regardless of what other countries are doing, the fact remains that there is great need for U.S. pulpwood markets not dependent on paper as the final product. As you will read in this issue of TPA, there is work being done to attract other wood product manufacturers to this region and CLT is one of them. Michigan Tech is a great example of research being done to utilize locally grown timber such as basswood and other hard-to-sell species. They have a great learning lab with equipment and testing is being done on a regular basis with hopes of attracting a CTL manufacturer to this area.
On a final note, you may remember reading the article in this column regarding Michigan DNR selling carbon credits to DTE for carbon offsets. DTE has now come up with a program called CleanVision and is asking their customers to join the program at one of four levels ranging from $4 to $16 on their monthly bill. It is voluntary of course. The voluntary contribution will undoubtedly help DTE regain the $14 million they paid for the credits in addition to the following statement taken from the DTE CleanVision program page.
“DTE is working in partnership with industry developers to participate in Improved Forest Management (IFM) projects that protect Michigan forests from being over-harvested by commercial loggers.”
According to the data, we’re growing two times more trees than are being harvested while meeting the everyday needs of society for food, clothing, and shelter. DTE’s website states that all the projects in which they are engaged are in Michigan. Has anyone seen overharvesting in Michigan lately? The only over-harvesting I’ve noticed is deforestation for placement of solar panels. Has DTE condemned that practice? What industry developers is DTE in partnership with to participate in “improved Forest Management”? Rest assured the question is being asked to find out who those partners are.
Obviously, much like the example in the first part of this article, there is a lack of understanding about forest management and how it is sustainably conducted. The alternative thought option is that this is all about money and playing on people’s emotions for financial gain. The bottom line is that carbon credit purchasers such as DTE are now pushing to stop forest management only to have their customers pay for the companies’ manufacturing for profit sins by asking its customers to feel bad about using energy. How deceitful is that? While their intentions may be good to have a cleaner environment, it is clear some of these folks have jumped on the “Greening” platform without knowing all the true facts about trees, forest management, and how things are regulated with checks and balances in the U.S. Anyone can learn if they are willing.
Until next month,
Henry
"I don't believe in the constitution because I'm American. I'm American because I believe in the constitution." - J.S.B. Morse