Pulp and Paper Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study

Comparative analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from the pulp and paper industry of selected countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America A Report by the National Center For Suburban Studies at Hofstra University®

Sandra Jo Garren Robert Brinkmann

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Executive Summary The pulp and paper industry has responded to sustainability pressures through a variety of initiatives that include conducting energy and greenhouse gas inventories, developing alternative energy sources, setting reduction targets, participating in corporate social sustainability programs, purchasing pulpwood and paper derived from sustainable forests, and increasing the recycled content in paper products. Most publishers and other firms in the pulp and paper industry have begun the sustainability process; however, many are at different stages of development. For example, some firms have conducted sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, others have developed mitigation strategies, and others publish their progress in sustainability programs such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (GRI, 2012). Many of the pulp and paper mills are located in metro regions within or near suburbs and it is worth exploring best practices within the industry in order to make wise decisions for the long-term sustainability of regions.

When assessing the life cycle of paper, GHG reductions can be realized at each stage of the process. While numerous studies evaluate GHG reductions at each stage of the life cycle, few have evaluated GHG emissions with a cumulative approach that incorporates the entire life cycle including changes in carbon stocks from forested land, energy consumption from manufacturing, worldwide transportation of both pulp and paper products, and the emissions from landfilled paper.

This study examines GHG emissions in 16 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America and examines one publishing company (i.e., Macmillan Publishing Company) as a case study. The selected countries represent major pulpwood producers, paper producers, and paper consumers, and Macmillan Publishing Company represents an example of a multi-national firm operating in multiple countries.

To conduct the analysis, a GHG inventory for the manufacturing, transportation, and landfilling of paper for each country for 2010 was completed. In addition, carbon stock losses associated with pulpwood extracted for paper products were estimated. Then, GHG emissions were calculated for scenarios that minimized annual carbon releases from virgin forests, maximized renewable energy production in pulp and paper manufacturing, maximized recycled content in paper production, and minimized transportation of pulpwood and paper products to worldwide markets.

GHG emissions associated with the paper industry depends on the cumulative impacts from pulpwood extraction, energy use in pulp and paper manufacturing, changes in recycled content, and from waste management for non-recycled products. Six research questions were developed in this study and the results for each question are summarized in Table ES.1.

2|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table ES.1. Summary of research questions.

Question 1: What were the absolute GHG emissions of the pulp and paper industry from a life cycle perspective and for each stage in the process in 2010?

• For the study countries, the total GHG emissions were 1.7 billion metric tons of CO2e.

• China was by far the largest contributor, followed by the United States and the group of European countries included in this study.

• Energy in the pulp and paper process represented 82 percent of GHG emissions, followed by emissions from landfill and loss of carbon (each with about 8 percent). Transportation made the smallest contribution to overall GHG emissions.

Question 2: In which countries and to what extent are forests losing carbon stocks?

• Indonesia is losing the most carbon for the production of pulpwood (approximately 77 million metric tons CO2 annually).

• Brazil is close behind with approximately 62 million metric tons CO2 lost.

• Canada is also experiencing a loss of primary forests, but to a lesser extent with only 1.5 million metric tons.

• Indonesia, Brazil, and Canada have low percentages of planted forests (4, 1, and 3 percent, respectively) meaning that the pulpwood is obtained mostly from primary and other naturally regenerated forests.

• By eliminating the emissions from carbon losses, approximately 140 million metric tons can be reduced (which is about 8 percent of emissions from the baseline scenario).

Question 3: What is the impact of replacing fossil fuels with renewable energies in the pulp and paper manufacturing?

• Since energy consumption is the largest contributor to GHG emissions, the largest reductions can be realized from this category.

• A 32 percent reduction can be achieved if countries adopt renewable energy mixes similar to the mix of the European Union.

Question 4: What would be the relative impact of reducing the transportation of pulpwood, recycled paper, and paper products in the global market?

• GHG emissions from transportation are the lowest of the three cumulatively; however, GHG reductions can be realized by reducing trips by locally-sourcing pulp and recycled fiber.

Question 5: What would be the overall reduction of GHG emissions by increasing the rate of paper recycling?

• By increasing recycling rates, approximately 13 percent reductions of GHG can be realized by avoiding methane emissions in landfills. Additionally, carbon stocks would remain in forests and would thus create an additional carbon stock savings.

Question 6: Based on the results of this study, what recommendations should be given to individual organizations involved in the pulp and paper industry?

• Purchase pulp from sustainably-managed forests that do not convert primary forests to plantation forests.

• Switch fuels from fossil fuels to renewable energies • Improve energy efficiency in pulp and paper mills • Increase the recycled content of paper • Locally-source pulpwood and recycled paper • Purchase paper from local markets • Support through membership and participation organizations that are advancing sustainability principles (e.g., FSC, SFI, GRI, GPI) • Lobby governments to stop deforestation practices (which would eliminate cheap wood being obtained from primary forests)

Publishing companies, like Macmillan Publishing Company, could realize GHG reductions by adopting an integrated strategy that incorporates the recommendations presented in Question 6.

3|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Macmillan is already leading the industry by siting facilities near hydroelectric plants, which addresses the largest source of GHG emissions. They also have taken steps to improve energy efficiencies.

4|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 7 2.0 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ............................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Sustainability Efforts in the Publishing and Printing Industry ................................................... 10 2.2 Carbon Stock Losses from Pulpwood Extraction ...................................................................... 12 2.3 Energy Consumption in Pulp and Paper Mills........................................................................... 12 2.4 GHG emissions from Transportation ........................................................................................ 13 2.5 GHG emissions from Landfilled Paper ..................................................................................... 13 2.6 Summary of Previous Research and Research Questions .......................................................... 14 3.0 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Pulpwood Extraction ................................................................................................................. 15 3.2 Energy Use in Pulp and Paper Manufacturing........................................................................... 16 3.3 GHG Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood and Paper Products ............................. 17 3.4 GHG Emissions from Landfilled Paper..................................................................................... 17 4.0 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Baseline GHG Emissions .......................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 Carbon Flux from Pulpwood Extraction ............................................................................ 19 4.1.2 Energy use in Pulp and Paper Manufacturing.................................................................... 19 4.1.3 GHG Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood and Paper Products ...................... 24 4.1.4 GHG Emissions from Landfilled Paper Products .............................................................. 24 4.1.5 Aggregated Baseline Scenario ........................................................................................... 24 4.2 Scenario Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 32 5.0 CASE STUDY: MACMILLAN PUBLISHING COMPANY ....................................................... 33 6.0 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................... 35 7.0 REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................................. 38

List of Figures 1 2 3

Percent Distribution of GHG Emissions by Category (2010) GHG Emissions by Country (2010) (in metric tons CO 2e) Percent Distribution by Category for each Country (2010)

List of Tables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Demographic Data (2010) Pulpwood and Paper Products Data (2010) Forest Data and Carbon Stock Calculations (2010) Pulpwood Production and Growing Stock Data (2010) Energy and CO2 Emissions from Pulp and Paper Production (2010) Energy Consumption and Industrial End-Use by Fuel (2008) (by percent) CO2 Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood Imports (2010) CO2 Emissions from the Transportation of Paper Product Imports (2010)

5|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

9 10 11 12 13

2012

CO2 Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood and Paper Product Imports (2010) CO2 Emissions from Landfilled Paper (2010) Baseline GHG Emissions by Sector and Country (2010) Scenario GHG Emissions by Sector and Country (2010) Summary of Research Questions

6|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

1.0 INTRODUCTION The pulp and paper industry has responded to pressures to become more sustainable in a variety of ways including: • • • • • •

Conducting energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories Setting energy and GHG reduction goals Initiating internal programs to reduce GHG emissions Participating in sustainability programs to monitor and measure progress Increasing recycled content of paper manufacturing Purchasing pulp from sustainably managed forests

Studies have been conducted to assess the potential reductions in GHG emissions in the pulp and paper industry, but they typically focus on one aspect of the process. However, when assessing the life cycle of paper, GHG reductions can be realized at each stage of the process and it is important to take life cycle approach when determining best practices within the industry. While numerous studies evaluate GHG reductions at each stage of the life cycle, few have evaluated GHG emissions from a cumulative approach that incorporates the entire life cycle including carbon fluxes from pulpwood extraction, energy consumption from manufacturing, worldwide trade of both pulp and paper products, and emissions from landfilled paper products.

In this study, we estimate and compare baseline GHG emissions from 16 specific countries that are organized into five regions (Table 1). These countries are the most important players in the life cycle of the pulp and paper industry in the pulpwood production, paper production, and consumption. As shown in Table 1, these countries contain a little more than half the world’s population and occupy a little less than half the total land area in the world. In terms of pulpwood production, the top countries are the United States, China, Canada, and Brazil. In 2010, China produced and consumed the most paper in the world, followed by the United States, Japan, and Germany. Per capita consumption is highest in Finland, United States, Germany, Sweden, and Japan.

In addition to estimating and comparing national GHG emissions from the industry, we also examine GHG measures from one book publishing company (i.e., Macmillan Publishing Company). Macmillan Publishing Company (Macmillan) is an international family-owned book publishing company which operates in over 80 countries (Macmillan, 2012a). Macmillan owns and operates mills in the United States, Canada, and Finland. Macmillan initiated a sustainability program in 2010 which included conducting a GHG inventory, offsetting GHG emissions through the purchase carbon offset credits, and by developing initiatives to reduce GHG emissions within its own operation. In this study, we detail and compare their GHG measures and identify areas of opportunity within the context of the global market.

7|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 1. Demographic and paper consumption and production data for the major world paper actors (2010).

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America Study Area Total World Total Percent of World

Ranks (by metric ton)1 Pulpwood Paper Paper for Paper Production2 Consumption3 2 1 1

Land Area (1,000 ha) 942,530

Population (1,000) 1,372,148

India

297,319

1,224,614

11

10

5

Indonesia

181,157

239,871

9

7

12

Japan

36,450

126,536

7

3

3

Republic of Korea

9,873

48,184

29

9

10

Finland

30,409

5,365

6

6

35

France

55,010

62,787

16

13

8

Germany

34,877

82,302

12

4

4

Italy

29,411

60,551

28

12

6

Sweden

41,033

9,380

5

8

26

United Kingdom

24,250

62,272

34

20

7

Canada

909,351

34,017

3

5

16

USA Russian Federation Brazil

916,193

310,384

1

2

2

1,638,139

142,958

8

14

15

832,512

194,946

4

11

9

74,880 6,053,394 13,010,509 46.5%

17,114 3,993,464 6,895,888 57.9%

10

32

40

Country China

Chile

1

Ranks include top 10 countries and the rankings for the remaining countries in other categories Includes all paper products (e.g., newsprint, printing and writing paper, and other paper products) Calculated by subtracting the exports by the total of production and imports, assuming all paper produced is consumed in the same year.

2 3

Following a summary of the current state of the pulp and paper industry through an academic literature review, we estimate baseline conditions for 2010. To determine areas of opportunities for the industry as a whole and for individual companies, we estimate GHG emissions for four specific scenarios and compare them to the baseline scenario. These four scenarios are as summarized as follows.

Scenario 1: Carbon Stock Forests in the boreal and tropical forests are losing carbon stocks due to land use conversion for agricultural, fuelwood, and pulpwood purposes. In this scenario, we bring carbon stock losses to zero by eliminating the extraction of pulpwood from countries that have negative carbon sequestration rates.

Scenario 2: Energy Consumption The pulp and paper industry is known to be an energy intensive industry which consumes a mixture of energy from biomass, stationary fuels, and purchased electricity. In this scenario, we

8|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

reduce GHG emissions in pulp and paper manufacturing by shifting the fuel mix to lower GHG intensive sources (i.e., replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy).

Scenario 3: Transportation Pulpwood, recycled paper, and paper products are traded on global markets and GHG emissions are associated with the shipment of these commodities. In this scenario, we reduce GHG emissions from transportation by reducing the international trade simulating a shift in local trade.

Scenario 4: Recycling v. Landfill Pulp is used to make paper products and is derived from both forests and recycled paper. If paper is not reused, it is disposed in either landfill or incinerated. In this scenario, we reduce GHG emissions from landfilled paper products by increasing the recycling rate across all countries.

9|P age

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

2.0 PREVIOUS RESEARCH Paper products are used around the world with total production of over 400 million metric tons in 2010 (FAO, 2012). Annually, 30 million trees are removed from forests specifically for the production of paper products (Tian and Martin, 2012). Pulpwood is often shipped to countries far away (e.g., Brazil to China) to pulp and paper mills to make paper, and in turn paper products are shipped to consumers throughout the world. Used paper is recycled in most countries and used to make new paper; however, used paper must ultimately be landfilled or incinerated.

Due to the environmental concerns, the pulp and paper industry has been examined and studied to identify the impacts of the industry. In 1995, Duke University (1995) compiled a taskforce of over 100 experts to determine the environmental impacts of the industry. The study documents the current state of the industry in the United States, examines major environmental concerns, and identifies mitigation opportunities (Duke, 1995). The environmental concerns include degradation of virgin forests; environmental pollution (i.e., air, water, and toxic releases) from pulp and paper manufacturing; natural resource depletion (i.e., water and energy consumption); and low recycling rates that lead to increased landfill and incineration releases.

Other multiple stakeholder studies have been conducted that mirror these concerns, but have also included concerns over the ecological and carbon footprints from the industry. The Book Industry Study Group (BISG) (BISG, 2008) conducted a survey in 2007 from printing companies, paper mills, and book publishers to analyze the carbon footprint of the industry (BISG, 2008). Land use changes resulted in 62.7 percent of the total carbon impact, 26.6 percent from paper production, 8.2 percent from landfill releases, 12.7 percent from distribution and retail, 6.6 percent from publishers, and -16.8% from carbon storage in books and energy recovery. BISG highlighted the impacts on key forests, identifying the sustainability of forests as a risk to the industry. Forests of the world are not secure and rapidly disappearing (especially in places with newly developed virgin forest resources such as in Brazil).

A more recent study conducted by Tian and Martin (2012) indicates that the pulp and paper industry has three main environmental issues (i.e., pulp sources from forests, inks that are high in metals and petroleum, and high carbon footprints associated with energy intensive pulpwood and transportation). This report focuses on greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and carbon losses from forests to provide pulp to the paper industry.

What follows is a review of sustainability initiatives and a summary of current activities by specific companies in the pulp and paper industry (2.1). We then summarize the current state of knowledge related to specific stages of pulp and paper industry [e.g., pulpwood extraction (2.2), energy consumption in pulp and paper mills (2.3), global transportation of paper products (2.4), and landfilling and recycling of used paper (2.5)].

2.1

Sustainability Efforts in the Publishing and Printing Industry

Book publishing companies are employing sustainability principles which incorporate corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, and corporate measurement and reporting (Tian and Martin 2012). According to Tian and Martin (2012), a change in business as usual (BAU) is 10 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

imminent due to the vulnerabilities that beset the industry (namely, rising costs, competition, supply chain problems, and technological changes). They identify seven sustainability principles for the industry that include corporate governance, shareholder relations, industrial leadership, value of products and services, employment practices, community involvement and social wellbeing, and protection of the environment.

Book publishers and paper manufacturers are assisted in applying these principles by participating in programs such as the Green Press Initiative (GPI) (GPI, 2012). The GPI is a nonprofit program founded in 2001 to focus on the publishing industry as a whole (from forests to recycling). The GPI outlines the impacts, solutions, and actions to improve the impacts of the book industry on the planet, not just environmental, but social aspects as well. GPI has identified three impact areas of greatest concern related to the publishing industry which are endangered forests, climate, and people.

Organizations in the industry also have participated in a variety of sustainability programs that include Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Elkington’s Triple Bottom Line (TBL), London Financial Times “FTSE4Good index,” and the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (Tian and Martin, 2012). These programs provide metrics that enable companies to measure progress within their sustainability programs. As of the publication of this report, 231 companies in the Forest and Paper Products Sector worldwide posted sustainability reports with the GRI (GRI, 2012).

The pulp and paper industry and book publishing companies have adopted sustainability principles (Ynostoroza, 2008). For example, AbitibiBowater is the largest North American supplier of uncoated freesheet substitutes. The company is based in Montreal and runs 27 pulp and paper mills. All of their woodlands are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI), or the Canadian’s National Standard for Sustainable Forest Management. As part of their effort, they utilize co-generation energy production in eight of their plants and are constructing a carbon neutral plant that uses biomass waste from woodcutting.

Another company, Courier Corporation, has both FSC certification and the Rainforest Alliance Certified seal, and they manufacture in the United States. Their customers are largely North American, thereby cutting down on transportation costs. They measure inputs and outputs, minimize wastes, recycle, and offer digital workflow (digital workflows reduce the demand for paper products). The printer, Edward Brothers, has three printing plants that recycle four types of paper, ink, printing plates, used CDs, plastic bottles, and paper dust from book binding. The Ann Arbor printer, Malloy Inc., has been recycling for 15 years, has both FSC and SDI certifications, and uses Glatfelter’s Thor paper with 15 percent post-consumer weight (PCW). Their text stock is made from 80 percent recycled stock. Thomson-Shore, Inc. was the first to join the Green Press Initiative and set a goal of 25 percent PCW recycled fiber within three years and they reached 38 percent PCW in 2008. Transcontinental Printing offers paper that is 100 percent postconsumer recycled materials at the same price as virgin fiber paper. They used this paper for special edition Harry Potter books that were printed in their “eco-efficient” Gagne facility in Montreal. Some companies seek to obtain the majority of their pulp from locally-sourced sustainably-managed forests (e.g., 75 percent for Finch Paper) (Tolliver-Negro 2010). Over 200 book publishers, including Random House, Simon & Schuster, Scholastic, Thomas Nelson, Pearson/Penguin, and McGraw Hill, have pledged goals of obtaining wood from FSC-certified forests and increasing the use of recycled fiber (Publishers Weekly, 2009).

11 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2.2

2012

Carbon Stock Losses from Pulpwood Extraction

As previously stated above, the results from the BISG survey indicates that over 60 percent of the carbon footprint of the industry is from land use change and that the primary concern is the unsustainable forestry practices in forests (e.g., Brazil) (BISG, 2008). Paper is made from pulp which can be derived from pulpwood or from recycled paper. While recycling used paper products is standard practice, the reality is that trees must be felled to supply pulpwood (e.g., recycled paper can only be recycled approximately three times before becoming unrecyclable).

The growing trend is to obtain pulpwood from certified sustainably-managed forests. While there are a number of certification programs, two are most prevalent, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). The goals of these programs are to provide an assurance that wood is derived from forests that are healthy and sustainably managed. It has been noted that even though a forest is certified, it does not mean that no ecological harm is done (Sturdevant, 2008). At issue is the conversion of primary forests to plantation forests which do not store as much carbon as old growth forests. Conversion also reduces biological diversity.

James (2012) compares GHG emissions from land use change and compares the global markets for recycled paper and virgin fiber in the UK and China. He concludes that timber in the Global North would be harvested regardless of demand for paper (e.g., timber would go to other products such as fuel wood). He concludes that timber in the south would be harvested specifically to meet increasing demand for paper (e.g., in China). Price is the most significant factor and suggests that sources that are at the lowest cost increase pulpwood extraction. For example, Brazil is low cost with increased extraction potential. One key point James makes is that no additional carbon stock losses would be realized by switching from virgin to recycled paper in the Global North (except in Canada where forests are being degraded) since that wood would still be harvested as a fuelwood source.

2.3

Energy Consumption in Pulp and Paper Mills

Pulp and paper manufacturing comprises the fourth largest emitter in GHG in the U.S (Tian and Miller 2012). Due to its large impact, GHG emissions in the pulp and paper manufacturing have been the focus of policies in industrialized countries. Two types of measures can be taken to reduce GHG emissions – improving plant energy efficiency and switching energy sources from fossil fuels to renewable energies. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has outlined numerous strategies that could reduce emissions by up to 40 percent that include strategies to improve efficiencies in boilers, chemical furnaces, turbines, natural-gas fired dryers, thermal oxidizers, kraft and soda lime kilns, makeup chemicals, flue gas desulfurization systems, wastewater treatment, and on-side landfills (US EPA, 2010).

While improving energy efficiencies is an effective short-term strategy, switching fuel sources to renewable sources offers significant GHG reductions, particularly from fossil fuels. The latter are used mostly in the United States with stationary sources from natural gas, fuel oil and from purchased electricity from local purveyors (Kramer 2009). It is well known that pulp and paper mills generate half their energy needs from biomass, specifically from black liquor. Research is being conducted to improve this process. Results indicate that there is potential for mills to

12 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

become carbon negative using carbon capture and storage in the process and other technologies (e.g., integrated gasifier of black liquor) (Mullersten et al, 2004).

However, probably the largest opportunity to reduce GHG emissions in the short-term is to switch fuels from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Vos and Newell (2009) compared carbon dioxide emissions from two paper companies in China and in the United States and concluded that the Chinese paper making process produces approximately 42 percent more emissions than the United States company; a higher percentage of biomass being used in the United States while the Chinese company relies upon coal consumption.

2.4

GHG emissions from Transportation

GHG emissions from the transportation of goods are considerable and are often not calculated in national GHG inventories. China along with the United States are the leading nations for imports and exports of goods and in the case of China the total GHG emissions from import and export transportation was calculated to be 300 metric tons carbon dioxide which is five times higher than that in European nations (Anderson et al, 2010). Anderson et al (2012) conclude that the GHG emissions from transports should be assessed from a life cycle perspective and should be allocated to the consumer. This approach to measurement will likely increase reported GHG emissions in industrialized nations. Yet, currently, emissions from imports and exports are not counted in national inventories used for Kyoto Protocol reporting.

There are relatively few studies that consider the GHG impacts of transportation of paper products. Vos and Newell’s (2009) comparison of a United States company and Chinese company indicated that GHG emissions in the Chinese company were eight times higher than the United States counterpart. However, they also pointed out that these emissions were significantly lower than those from manufacturing.

2.5

GHG emissions from Landfilled Paper

Used paper can be recycled, landfilled, or incinerated. GHG emissions result from each of these options. Recycled paper must be transported back to pulp mills which results in GHG from fuel combustion, landfilled paper results in methane emissions from anaerobic conditions, and incinerated waste results in methane and nitrous oxide emissions (carbon dioxide emissions from decomposed paper is not counted in GHG inventories since it is a biogenic source and it is assumed that these emissions will be reabsorbed through photosynthesis). It should also be noted that landfilled paper products store carbon for a period of time which is counted as a carbon sink in GHG inventory methodologies.

Villanueva and Wenzel (2007) concluded in an exhaustive literature review that recycling has environmental benefits over incineration and landfilling. Duke University updated its 1995 report in 2002 which included a comparison between using virgin fiber and recycled paper and concluded that there was a “clear and substantial environmental advantage from recycling all of the grades of paper” (Duke, 2002). Their data dispels the claim that energy from transportation of recycling outweighs the benefit from recycling (e.g., from a life cycle standpoint, more energy is consumed to manufacture paper from wood than from fuel combustion from the transportation 13 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

of recycled paper). The Duke study also points out that there are energy benefits from recycled paper over incineration and landfilling for most paper types. However, for certain paper types (e.g., corrugated cardboard), the use of virgin fiber is better since the excess wood can be used in the process which reduces the amount of purchased energy needed for manufacturing.

Hong and Li (2012) conducted a case study of a pulp and paper mill in China. They used data supplied by a major mill to estimate the environmental impacts of using entirely recycled paper and compared it to wood pulp. They concluded that higher GHG emissions resulted from making paper from wood pulp than from recycled paper per functional unit. Their study assumed coal for all outputs for Chinese paper manufacturing.

2.6

Summary of Previous Research and Research Questions

Based on the literature review, there is clear opportunity to reduce GHG emissions from all four stages in the life cycle of paper. Carbon stock losses can be minimized by using wood that is derived from sustainably-managed forests that inherently do not convert primary forests to plantation forests. In the pulp and paper industry, while there is a potential to consume less energy by improving efficiencies, there is greater opportunity is to reduce GHG emissions by switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Additionally, reductions can be realized through the acquisition of locally-sourced woodpulp and recycled paper. And lastly, GHG reductions can be made by increasing the percentage of recycled paper.

However, the question remains which of these strategies alone or in combination would be the most advantageous from a GHG perspective. Individual companies can reduce their GHG emissions, but these impacts may negate emissions from a global perspective. Therefore, we have designed the study to examine the cumulative impacts from the most important nations involved in the pulp and paper industry. This paper attempts to answer these following research questions that are centered around that theme: 1. What are the absolute GHG emissions of the pulp and paper industry from a life cycle perspective and for each stage in the process?

2. Which countries and to what extent are forests losing carbon stocks?

3. What is the impact of replacing fossil fuels with renewable energies?

4. What would be the relative impact of reducing the transportation of pulpwood, recycled paper, and paper products in the global market?

5. What would be the overall reduction of GHG emissions given increased rates of paper recycling?

6. Based on the results of this study, what recommendations should be given to individual firms involved in the pulp and paper industry?

14 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

3.0 METHODOLOGY In this study, we examine GHG emissions from a life cycle perspective in four categories including pulpwood extraction, energy use in pulp and paper manufacturing, international transportation, and landfilled paper products. This section presents the methodology, data sources, and assumptions used to estimate baseline and scenario GHG emissions. Section 4.0 presents a summary of the data and GHG emissions for each category and in aggregate.

3.1

Pulpwood Extraction

Forests provide a number of wood products tracked by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), including fiber board, industrial roundwood, paper and paperboard, and pulp used for paper products (FAO, 2012a). The dataset contains products produced by country as well as products imported and exported for each country (Table 2). Wood products related to the paper industry include pulpwood (which represents the total amount of wood produced specifically to make pulp), pulp for paper (pulp is produced in a mill from pulpwood), and the total weight of paper products (made specifically into newsprint, printing and writing paper, and other paper products). The FAO also maintains statistics for forested lands across the country including total land forested in primary and plantation forests (FAO, 2012b).

For the baseline carbon flux associated with land use change from pulpwood extraction, first the carbon flux was estimated by calculating the change in carbon stock of forested land from 2005 to 2010 in each country. The carbon stock for 2000 was subtracted from the carbon stock in 2005 and divided by five to obtain an estimate of annual change. Carbon was converted to carbon dioxide (CO2) by multiplying by 44/12 (the molecular rate ratio between CO2 and carbon). Since the CO2 flux contains the change from carbon from all wood, the percent production of pulpwood was calculated by dividing the volume of pulpwood produced by the total volume of wood products produced in each country. It is assumed that all the wood extracted from the forest is converted into wood products and that none are lost to fire or pests. The percent CO2 flux from pulpwood production was multiplied by the total CO 2 flux to determine the annual CO2 flux from pulpwood production in each country.

For the scenario analysis, countries with negative carbon sequestration rates (that is carbon is being removed from forests) were brought to zero. Countries with positive carbon sequestration rates (which means that these countries are adding carbon into their total forests) were removed from both baseline and scenario analysis.

15 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 2. Pulpwood and paper products usage by selected country (2010).

Pulpwood (metric tons) Region

Country China

Asia

Paper Products (metric tons)

Production 20,420,200

Imports 11,106,137

Exports 120,522

Production 96,501,000

Imports 4,029,373

Exports 4,882,587

India

4,047,900

669,078

1,764

10,809,244

1,283,537

313,576

Indonesia

5,820,000

870,153

2,546,192

11,527,000

386,490

3,950,373

9,423,000

1,730,766

381,472

27,364,000

2,067,819

1,643,158

511,000

2,532,650

82,365

11,106,000

810,593

2,796,164

Japan Republic Korea Finland

of

10,508,000

415,066

2,158,822

11,758,000

447,842

10,820,073

France

1,827,941

1,920,833

525,488

8,829,800

5,604,820

4,664,061

Germany

2,763,023

3,881,882

996,753

23,072,000

10,793,569

13,916,361

571,000

3,147,588

24,296

9,086,755

5,282,320

3,580,753

Sweden United Kingdom Canada

11,714,402

434,428

3,054,662

11,410,000

912,267

10,107,429

228,000

1,027,708

36,120

4,300,001

6,825,398

1,220,285

18,576,000

249,000

8,990,866

12,733,000

2,647,000

9,464,000

USA Russian Federation Brazil

50,250,939

5,411,779

7,617,970

77,689,080

10,139,399

11,968,247

7,346,000

67,272

1,850,623

7,551,000

1,324,182

2,408,708

14,164,000

422,079

8,381,000

9,844,000

1,388,909

1,970,002

Chile

4,102,000

20,010

3,381,000

1,204,000

601,000

631,780

Study Area Total

162,273,405

33,906,429

40,149,915

334,668,439

54,544,518

84,337,557

World Total

185,466,581

44,496,527

47,812,302

401,668,439

108,149,528

112,547,272

87%

76%

84%

83.3%

50.4%

74.9%

Europe

Italy

North America Russia South America

Percent of World

3.2

Energy Use in Pulp and Paper Manufacturing

Pulp and paper mills use energy to convert pulpwood into pulp and pulp into paper products. In the United States, the total energy consumed to manufacture paper was 2,361 trillion British Thermal Units (BTUs) in 2002 and 2,354 trillion BTUs which is the third highest in manufacturing fuel consumption in the country (US DOE, 2006).

An emission factor to convert paper products into energy use was calculated by dividing the total paper produced in the United States by the total energy used to manufacture paper for 2002 and 2006, respectively. The emission factors were calculated as 28.8 and 27.9 million BTUs (MBTUs) per metric ton of paper for 2002 and 2006, respectively. An emission factor of 28 MBTUs per metric ton of paper produced was used to estimate total energy consumption assuming that a similar energy demand in mills around the world, an assumption that is not necessarily valid given the known differences in energy use by processes in mills and would need further research to determine.

The energy use for paper products was converted to metric tons of CO 2 by multiplying by country-wide emission factors for electricity and heat output published by the International Energy Agency (US DOE, 2012). The estimates were derived by using fuel mix and 16 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

consumption data for each country in 2009 and assumed to not change significantly in 2010.

These estimate factors are highly uncertain, but do provide a relative comparison of GHG emissions from different fuel mixes in countries around the world. At the mill level, energy consumption may vary widely, particularly for mills that locate near renewable energy sources (e.g., hydroelectric plants). A more in-depth analysis would be required to further refine emissions from pulp and paper production.

For Scenario 2, the European Union emission factor averaged between 2007 through 2009 (356 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour [KWH]) was used to determine the relative reduction of GHG emissions in all countries assuming it is possible for all countries to transition to a similar fuel source mix.

3.3

GHG Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood and Paper Products

Pulpwood is transported to pulp and paper manufacturing mills, and paper products are either consumed within its own country or exported to another country for consumption. To estimate emissions associated with imported pulpwood and paper products, no emissions are calculated for in-country production of either pulp or paper products nor between pulp and paper mills which are assumed to be located in the same location. The analysis of in-country emissions are not the focus of this report.

For this study, CO2 emissions are calculated for imported pulpwood and paper products and assigned to the import country (for the 16 countries). This avoids double counting of exported goods and assigns responsibilities to the consuming countries. The approximate distances for rail or barge transport were determined for each trading country pair (432 trading pairs for pulpwood and 1,216 trading pairs for paper products) assuming that all shipments are supplied by shipping containers or by rail (and not by truck or air). ArcGIS Explorer was used to estimate the sea or land distances between each of the trading companies and no intermodal-transport was included.

The estimate for both pulpwood and paper product transportation is underestimated since within country estimates were not included in the estimate.

Average emission factors were derived from McKinnon and Piecyk (2011) for rail and barge shipments (22 and 31 grams CO2 per metric ton-kilometer [gCO2/tonne-km], respectively). It was assumed that international trade occurs either by sea or by rail. Average emission factors for road and air transportation are much higher (62 and 602 gCO2/tonne-km, respectively) and thus, the estimate is likely to underestimate emissions from international trade.

Scenario 3 estimates were derived by assuming a 10 percent reduction in international trade.

This scenario could represent purchasing from in-country sources or from a closer source local sources (an export country that is relatively closer).

3.4

GHG Emissions from Landfilled Paper

Used paper products are either recycled or disposed into landfills or burned for energy production. Landfilled paper results in GHG emissions from the decomposition of organic 17 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

matter into methane. Burned paper releases CO2, CH4, and N2O into the atmosphere, but results in energy production which may offset GHG emissions from fossil fuels. While some countries burn waste and produce energy, this study assumes that all paper waste is landfilled.

To estimate GHG emissions from landfilled waste, the total paper consumption was calculated using FAO data (see Table 2). Consumption was assumed by adding the imported paper products to the total paper produced within each country and subtracting the exported paper products. It was assumed is that all paper produced and imported is consumed within the data collection year. To determine the amount of waste landfilled, recycled paper production obtained from FAO data was subtracted from the total consumed paper. Recycling rates were determined by dividing the total amount of paper recycled by the total paper products that are consumed. The calculated landfilled paper was multiplied by an emission factor for mixed paper disposed in a landfill without landfill gas recovery obtained from background studies used in the United States EPA Waste Reduction Model (WARM) (0.3 metric tons carbon per wet ton of mixed paper) (Freed and Lee, 1998). It should be noted that there are different emission factors for different paper products (e.g., newsprint and corrugated cardboard) and for different landfill types (e.g., with landfill gas recovery with flaring and electricity generation).

Scenario 4 estimates were obtained by increasing each country’s recycling rate by 10 percent.

Additional GHG reductions would occur under this scenario which would include reduced woodpulp extraction from forested land and lower energy usage in manufacturing; however, these reductions are not calculated here.

18 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

4.0 RESULTS 4.1

Baseline GHG Emissions

4.1.1 Carbon Flux from Pulpwood Extraction From Table 3, Russia, Brazil, United States, and China have the highest total areas of forested lands. Finland, Sweden, Japan, and Brazil have the highest percentages of forested land (all over 60 percent of the total land area). The countries with the lowest percentages of planted forests are Brazil (1 percent), Russia (2 percent), Canada (3 percent), and Indonesia and Italy (each with 4 percent) indicating that wood pulp extraction from these countries are largely derived from primary or other naturally regenerated forests. As shown in Table 2, all study countries except for Indonesia, Brazil, and Canada are increasing their carbon stocks. Carbon stock losses are highest in Indonesia and Brazil (-188 and -157 mtCO2/year, respectively) and are much lower in Canada (-17 mtCO2/year). The United States, China, and Russia represent the highest rates of afforestation (99, 59, and 43 mtCO2/year, respectively).

Table 4 presents the percent contribution to pulpwood production with the highest pulpwood contributions derived from Indonesia and Brazil (both about 40 percent). The three countries with annual losses of carbon stock as a result of pulpwood reductions are Indonesia, Brazil, and Canada (with respective losses of 76.8, 62.2, and 1.5 million metric tons CO2 per year).

4.1.2 Energy use in Pulp and Paper Manufacturing According to Table 5, the countries that produce the most paper are China and the United States (96.5 and 77.7 million metric tons in 2010). Collectively, the European countries in the study countries are the third largest producer, with 68.4 million metric tons. The countries with the highest energy mix emission factors are India, Indonesia, China, and the United States.

Table 6 shows the relative percentages of energy mixes by country. From a GHG perspective, energy that utilizes renewable energy sources emits fewer emissions than energy from fossil fuels. Among the fossil fuels, natural gas is the best, followed by oil and coal respectively.

Excluding energy from electrical sources, the three countries with the highest coal usage (as a percentage) in the industrial sector are China, India, and Indonesia (63, 37, and 34 percent).

Natural gas usage is highest is Russia, Chile, and Canada (all over 40 percent). Renewable energy use is highest in Brazil (43 percent). Brazil, India, United States, and Canada have renewable energy rates over 10 percent.

Due to the high production rate and higher energy emission factor, China was the highest CO 2 emitter in 2010 (588 million metric tons). The United States was second, and Europe was third (324 and 158 million metric tons, respectively).

19 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 3. Forest data and carbon stock calculations for selected countries (2010).

Other Naturally Regenerated Forest (1,000 ha) 118,071

Planted Forest (1,000 ha) 77,157

Percent Planted Forest 37%

Carbon Stock (million metric tons) 6,203

Carbon Stock Per Hectare (metric tons) 30

Change in Carbon Stock (20052010) (million metric tons) 80

Annual CO2 Sequestration (million metric tons CO2) 58.7

Forested Land (1,000 ha) 206,861

Percent Land Area 22%

Primary Forest (1,000 ha) 11,632

India

68,434

23%

15,701

42,522

10,211

15%

2,800

41

37

27.1

Indonesia

94,432

52%

47,236

43,647

3,549

4%

13,017

138

-256

-187.7

Japan * Republic of Korea Finland

24,979

69%

4,747

9,906

10,326

41%

1,526

61

29

21.3

6,222

63%

2,957

1,443

1,823

29%

268

43

9

6.6

22,157

73%

0

16,252

5,904

27%

832

38

0

0

France

15,954

29%

30

14,291

1,633

10%

1,208

76

9

6.6

Germany

11,076

32%

0

5,793

5,283

48%

1,405

127

24

17.6

Italy

9,149

31%

93

8,435

321

4%

558

61

9

6.6

Sweden United Kingdom Canada

28,203

69%

2,609

21,981

3,613

13%

1,255

45

7

5.1

2,881

12%

0

662

2,219

77%

136

47

2

1.5

310,134

34%

165,448

135,723

8,963

3%

13,908

45

-23

-16.9

304,022

33%

75,277

203,382

25,363

8%

19,308

64

135

99.0

809,090

49%

256,482

535,618

16,991

2%

32,500

40

58

42.5

519,522

62%

476,573

35,532

7,418

1%

62,607

121

-214

-156.9

Chile 16,231 22% 4,439 9,408 2,384 15% *Japan did report data in the 2010 assessment; therefore, 2000 and 2005 were used in this assessment.

1,349

83

2

1.5

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America

20 | P a g e

Country China

USA Russian Federation Brazil

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 4. Pulpwood production and growing stock data for selected countries (2010).

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America

21 | P a g e

Country

China India Indonesia Japan Republic of Korea Finland France Germany Italy Sweden United Kingdom Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil Chile

Pulpwood Production (Round and Split) (cubic meters)

Percent Pulpwood from Total Forest Products

Annual CO2 Sequestration from Pulpwood (million metric tons CO2)

CO2 produced per cubic meter of pulpwood (CO2/m3)

Growing Stock (million cubic meters)

Growing Stock per Hectare (cubic meters)

5,048,000 623,800 24,700,000 4,121,000

2.1% 1.5% 40.9% 9.8%

1.2 0.4 -76.8 2.1

0.25 0.66 -3.11 0.51

14,684 5,489 11,343 4,415

71 80 120 176

1,919,000

15.6%

1.0

0.54

605

97

25,983,355 11,214,858 12,659,253 370,204 30,700,000

37.2% 20.0% 14.3% 3.4% 29.5%

0.0 1.3 2.5 0.2 1.5

0.00 0.12 0.20 0.61 0.05

2,189 2,584 3,492 1,384 3,358

99 162 315 151 119

2,070,608

12.0%

0.2

0.09

379

132

23,409,000 127,119,000

8.7% 32.7%

-1.5 32.3

-0.06 0.25

32,983 47,088

106 155

41,202,228

23.7%

10.1

0.24

81,523

101

69,779,000 19,424,000

39.7% 35.6%

-62.2 0.5

-0.89 0.03

126,221 2,997

243 185

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 5. Energy and CO2 emissions from pulp and paper production for selected countries (2010).

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America World Total

Country China India Indonesia Japan Republic of Korea Finland France Germany Italy Sweden United Kingdom European Subtotal Canada

Paper Production (metric tons) 96,501,000 10,809,244 11,527,000 27,364,000 11,106,000 11,758,000 8,829,800 23,072,000 9,086,755 11,410,000 4,300,001 68,456,556 12,733,000

USA

77,689,080

Russian Federation Brazil

7,551,000 9,844,000 1,204,000 401,668,439

Chile

Country Emission Factor* (grams CO2/ KWH) 743

CO2 Emissions (million metric tons CO2 588.4

Percent CO2 from World Total 35.7

951 746 438 460 187 87 441 386 43

84.4 70.6 98.4 41.9 18.0 6.3 83.5 28.8 4.0

5.1 4.3 6.0 2.5 1.1 0.4 5.1 1.7 0.2

490

17.3

1.0

NA

157.9

9.6

357 2,175

167

17.5

1.1

508

323.9

19.7

211 276 34

317 393 376 500

19.6 31.7 3.7 1,648.1

1.2 1.9 0.2

Energy Consumption Calculation (million MBTU) 2,702 303 323 766 311 329 247 646 254 319 120 1,917

*Value includes both electricity and heat generation for 2009. Energy calculation was converted to KWH before multiplying by emission factor.

22 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 6. Energy consumption for industrial end-use by fuel for selected countries (2008) (by percent).

Region

Asia

Europe North America Russia South America World Total 1.

2.

3.

Country China India Indonesia1 Japan Republic of Korea2 OECD Europe Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil Chile3

Liquids 15.4 29.4 23.0 48.1

Natural Gas 3.3 8.8 21.1 6.5

Coal 62.6 37.3 34.4 28.6

Electricity 18.3 12.7 13.9 11.7

Renewables 0.4 11.8 7.5 3.9

52.3

6.8

22.7

15.9

2.3

38.3 30.8 36.0 21.7 30.5 36.2 28.9

26.1 38.5 32.8 47.8 8.5 39.7 23.0

12.3 7.7 7.3 13.9 6.8 1.7 26.0

18.6 13.5 13.8 14.8 11.9 10.3 14.6

6.3 9.6 10.1 0.9 42.4 12.1 7.4

Non-OECD country used for Indonesia Republic of Korea is from “South Korea” Chile is from “Other Central and South America

23 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

4.1.3 GHG Emissions from the Transportation of Pulpwood and Paper Products The total CO2 emissions from the transportation of pulpwood were 7.7 million metric tons (Table 7). Over half of these emissions were from imports to China (4.1 million metric tons), with the next highest contributions from Korea and Italy (with 0.8 and 0.6 million metric tons, respectively). These imports originated mostly from Brazil, the United States, and Canada as shown in Table 7. As shown on Table 8, emissions from imports of paper products are about half as much as from pulpwood imports (4.3 million metric tons). The countries with the highest GHG emissions from imports are the United States, China, and Brazil (1.1, 0.7, and 0.3 million metric tons, respectively). Transportation emissions are highest from Europe, United States, and Canada (1.4, 0.9, and 0.6 million metric tons, respectively). Table 9 summarizes the combined emissions from both pulpwood and paper products.

4.1.4 GHG Emissions from Landfilled Paper Products The three countries that recycle the most paper by weight are the United States, China, and Japan (47, 44, and 22 million metric tons, respectively) (Table 10). However, these are not the countries with the highest recycling rates (Korea and three European countries have rates over 80 percent). The total GHG emissions from landfilled paper were 145.3 million metric tons CO 2, with the highest contribution from China, the United States, and India (approximately 57, 32, and 12 metric tons CO2, respectively.

4.1.5 Aggregated Baseline Scenario Total GHG emissions from the cumulative impacts from pulpwood extraction, pulp and paper manufacturing, transportation of imported pulpwood and paper products, and from landfilling waste were 1,736 metric tons CO2e (Table 11). By far, the largest category of emissions is identified in the energy use to make pulp and paper (approximately 83 percent) (Figure 1).

GHG emissions from carbon losses and landfilled paper were both approximately 8 percent and transportation of imported pulpwood and paper products was less than 1 percent.

Cumulatively, China was highest contributor with 650 million metric tons which is nearly twice the second highest contributor (i.e., United States at 357 million metric tons) (Figure 2).

Together, China and the United States are responsible for over half the emissions. However, when assessing the percentage of emissions within each country (Figure 3), there is a much different distribution. For example, carbon stock losses comprise a large percentage of total emissions in Indonesia, and Brazil.

24 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 7. CO2 emissions from the transportation of pulpwood imports (2010).

India Asia

Europe

Indonesia

33 1,298

92,326

2

Republic of Korea

30

Finland

276

France

22

Germany

106

Italy

19

10

679,876

69,876

19,429

99,858

75,961

54,632

130,483

45,649

16,055

104,945

6,659

138,863

652,193

3,750,277

1,288

898

21,448

3,392

29,429

44,392

118,463

4,290

108,736

92,725

4,389

247,799

Total

All Others

Study Countries

1,270,119

319,560

4,069,837

240,981

12,992

253,973

308,916

101,287

410,203

36,910

402,869

58,983

461,853

187,545

758,240

52,239

810,479

78,709

1,472 4

3,624

399

209

361

78,410

3,990

87,274

5,123

92,397

12,345

13

23,718

21,568

37,464

1,189

65,641

59,855

221,816

7,459

229,275

40,854

9,277

134,384

1,522

55,615

39,504

282,471

140,731

423,202

36

22,387

85,393

111,809

319

231,439

157,219

642,198

803

643,001

5

6,200

698

13,966

7,407

8,779

37,056

0

37,056

36,963

8,559

33,519

3,142

1,397

84,036

20,528

104,564

12,370

249

19,019

1

19,020

29,134

5,736

116,065

10,000

126,065

3,293

467

10,622

211

10,833

1,699

41,534

12,399

53,933

9,011

37

9,048

7,012,385

742,352

7,754,738

1,197 33,579

Sweden

1

United Kingdom

74

Canada

1

594

USA

17

16,095

63,486

1,368

12

5,482

8,898

499

29,628

1

Chile

1

13,467

649,425

Brazil

379

Russia

131

United States

327,881

Canada

1,354

133

48

Europe

7,195

20,670

427

Japan

Korea

China

Indonesia

Destination Country

Japan

Region

India

China

Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Transportation (Production Countries) (metric tons CO2)

161

219

5,805

North America Russia

Russian Federation Brazil

12

1,596

798

South America Chile Totals

25 | P a g e

12 2,285

93

252,454

8,858

1,866

585,370

8,998 1,313,466

1,393,938

1 89,240

2,143,432

1,221,383

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 8. CO2 emissions from the transportation of paper products (2010).

Chile

Study Countries

55,964

3,859

606,048

52,465

658,511

5,935

NA

4,496

2,344

45,468

38,054

33,258

124,884

13,971

1,438

2,856

272,704

12,036

284,740

4,716

351

NA

3,940

2,130

44,146

66

24,939

5,988

675

25

86,976

6,960

Asia

93,933

Japan

4,290

41

70,878

NA

3,352

74,212

4,290

143,652

13

449

0

301,177

4,453

312,618

Republic of Korea

7,354

2,244

12,061

1,303

NA

24,861

6,647

56,228

80

3,079

0

113,857

13,540

127,397

Europe

India Indonesia

Total

Russia 4,333

Brazil

United States 209,143

Canada 49,470

Europe 207,222

NA

Korea 7,882

China

Japan 20,225

Production Country

Indonesia 47,884

India 66

China Region

All Others

Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Transportation (Destination Country) (metric tons CO2)

Finland

486

5

56

334

12

11,089

98

888

330

52

0

13,350

110

13,460

France

5,310

176

2,245

2,094

3,230

64,401

7,631

17,632

1,548

8,080

3,454

115,801

9,750

125,551

Germany

7,080

104

748

2,288

514

148,392

6,459

65,502

6,797

1,571

10

239,465

21,111

260,576

Italy

13,381

302

10,824

0

1,103

49,976

16,410

92,290

3,160

12,570

6,771

206,787

19,692

238,497

Sweden

1,062

45

88

177

49

8,906

39

1,198

26

35

0

11,625

253

11,878

United Kingdom

34,371

1,870

13,467

1,537

4,489

88,177

33,579

39,638

3,158

40,108

0

260,394

33,111

318,046

Canada

11,248

119

23,732

2,957

6,464

25,038

NA

84,672

91

820

0

155,141

1,284

156,425

USA

56,569

12,148

92,346

7,262

113,126

384,900

336,733

NA

281

26,635

0

1,030,000

68,743

1,140,587

Russian Federation

2,264

430

4,489

242

719

22,013

74

1,155

NA

559

1,346

33,291

439

33,729

Brazil

39,903

4,771

61,418

2,171

2,870

126,078

67,915

21,099

11,879

NA

2,572

340,676

3,443

344,119

Chile

3,309

44

1,278

879

1,273

80,683

1,846

54,153

210

3,422

NA

147,097

15,219

162,317

197,278

22,716

346,010

47,753

192,681

1,398,148

564,515

937,073

51,865

155,457

20,893

3,934,389

262,609

4,282,384

North America Russia South America Totals

26 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 9. CO2 emissions from transportation of pulpwood and paper imports (2010).

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America

Imports Pulpwood (metric ton) 11,106,137

CO2 from Pulpwood Imports (metric ton) 4,069,837

Imports Paper Products 4,029,373

CO2 from Paper Imports (metric ton) 658,511

CO2/ metric ton 0.37

CO2/ metric ton 0.16

Total CO2 (metric tons) 4,728,348

Average CO2 per metric tons 0.31

India

669,078

253,973

0.38

1,283,537

284,740

0.22

538,713

0.28

Indonesia

870,153

410,203

0.47

386,490

93,933

0.24

504,136

0.40

Japan Republic of Korea Finland

1,730,766

461,853

0.27

2,067,819

312,618

0.15

774,471

0.20

2,532,650

810,479

0.32

810,593

127,397

0.16

937,876

0.28

415,066

92,397

0.22

447,842

13,460

0.03

105,857

0.12

France

1,920,833

229,275

0.12

5,604,820

125,551

0.02

354,826

0.05

Germany

3,881,882

423,202

0.11

10,793,569

260,576

0.02

683,778

0.05

Italy

3,147,588

643,001

0.20

5,282,320

238,497

0.05

881,498

0.10

434,428

37,056

0.09

912,267

11,878

0.01

48,934

0.04

1,027,708

104,564

0.10

6,825,398

318,046

0.05

422,610

0.05

Country China

Sweden United Kingdom Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil Chile

Totals

27 | P a g e

249,000

19,020

0.08

2,647,000

156,425

0.06

175,445

0.06

5,411,779

126,065

0.02

10,139,399

1,140,587

0.11

1,266,652

0.08

67,272

10,833

0.16

1,324,182

33,729

0.03

44,562

0.03

422,079

53,933

0.13

1,388,909

344,119

0.25

398,052

0.22

20,010

9,048

0.45

601,000

162,317

0.27

171,365

0.28

33,906,429

7,754,738

0.23

54,544,518

4,282,384

0.08

12,037,123

0.14

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 10. CO2 emissions from landfilled paper (2010) (metric tons).

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America Study Area Total World Total Percent of World

28 | P a g e

Country China India Indonesia Japan Republic of Korea Finland France Germany Italy Sweden United Kingdom Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil Chile

Consumption (metric tons) 95,647,786 11,779,205 7,963,117 27,788,661 9,120,429 1,385,969 9,770,559 19,949,208 10,788,322 2,214,838 9,905,114 5,916,000 75,860,232 6,466,474 9,262,907 1,173,220 304,992,041 397,270,695 76.8%

Recovered Paper (metric tons) 44,110,000 850,000 3,934,000 21,800,000 8,857,000 579,000 5,276,000 15,535,000 5,194,000 1,835,000 8,003,000 3,444,000 46,873,000 2,100,000 4,019,000 489,000 172,898,000 208,004,105 83.1%

Recycling Rate 46.1 7.2 49.4 78.4 97.1 41.8 54.0 77.9 48.1 82.9 80.8 58.2 61.8 32.5 43.4 41.7 56.7 52.4

Landfilled Paper (metric tons) 51,537,786 10,929,205 4,029,117 5,988,661 263,429 806,969 4,494,559 4,414,208 5,594,322 379,838 1,902,114 2,472,000 28,987,232 4,366,474 5,243,907 684,220 132,094,041

CO2e from Landfilled Paper (million metric tons) 56.7 12.0 4.4 6.6 0.3 0.9 4.9 4.9 6.2 0.4 2.1 2.7 31.9 4.8 5.8 0.8 145.3

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 11. Baseline GHG emissions by sector (2010) (million metric tons CO2e).

Region

Asia

Europe

Country China India Indonesia Japan Republic of Korea Finland France Germany Italy Sweden United Kingdom

Loss of Carbon Stock from Pulp Extraction

76.8

Europe Total Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil

Transportati on of Pulp and Paper Products 4.73 0.54 0.50 0.77

Landfilled Paper 56.7 12.0 4.4 6.6

Total 649.8 96.9 152.3 105.8

Percent of Total 37.4% 5.6% 8.8% 6.1%

41.9

0.94

0.3

43.1

2.5%

18.0 6.3 83.5 28.8 4.0

0.11 0.35 0.68 0.88 0.05

0.9 4.9 4.9 6.2 0.4

19.0 11.6 89.1 35.9 4.5

1.1% 0.7% 5.1% 2.1% 0.3%

17.3

0.42

2.1

19.9

1.1%

157.9

2.49

19.4

179.79

10.4%

0.18 1.27 0.04 0.40 0.17 12.03

2.7 31.9 4.8 5.8 0.8 145.4

21.9 357.1

1.3% 20.6%

24.4 100.1 4.7 1,736.0

1.4% 5.8% 0.3%

0.7%

8.4%

Chile Study Area Total

140.5

17.5 323.9 19.6 31.7 3.7 1,437.9

Percent of Total

8.1%

82.8%

North America Russia South America

1.5

Energy from Pulp and Paper Production 588.4 84.4 70.6 98.4

62.2

0.7% 8.4%

8.1% Loss of Carbon Stock from Pulp Extraction

Energy from Pulp and Paper Production Transportation of Pulp and Paper Products Landfilled Paper 82.8%

Figure 1. Percent distribution of GHG emissions by category (2010).

29 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

700 600 500 400

300

Landfill

200

Transportation

100

Energy China India Indonesia Japan Republic of Korea Finland France Germany Italy Sweden United Kingdom Canada USA Russian Federation Brazil Chile

0

Pulp Extraction

Figure 2. GHG emissions by country (2010) (in metric tons CO2e).

30 | P a g e

2012

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

100% 56.7 90%

4.73

4.4 0.5 12

6.6 0.77

0.3 0.94

0.9 0.11

4.9 0.68

0.4 6.2

0.05

0.54

80%

2.1

2.7

0.42

0.18

1.27

0.88

4.9

5.8 0.4

31.9 4.8

0.04

2012

0.8 0.17

31.7

70.6 70% 60% 0.35 50% 588.4

98.4

84.4

41.9

18

83.5

40%

4

17.5 17.3

28.8

Transportation

19.6

3.7 62.2

30% 76.8

6.3

20%

10% 1.5 0%

Figure 3. Percent distribution by category for each country (2010)

31 | P a g e

Landfill

323.9

Energy Pulp Extraction

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

4.2

2012

Scenario Analysis

With all four scenarios applied, a potential reduction of GHG emissions of almost 25 percent could be realized.

The largest reduction potential in terms of total percent reduction was in Indonesia, mostly due to pulpwood extraction and a shift in energy away from coal. China and India could also realize a large percent reduction (both close to a 50 percent reduction) by shifting toward a renewable energy mix similar to Europe. Brazil could also realize a reduction by not losing carbon stock from pulpwood extraction.

Table 12. Scenario GHG Emissions by Sector and Country (2010) (million metric tons CO2e)

Region

Asia

Europe

North America Russia South America

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

Energy from Pulp and Paper Production 281.9

Transport of Pulp and Paper Products 4.3

Minimize Landfilled Paper 51.8

Scenario Total 338.0

India

31.6

0.5

11.9

44.0

Indonesia

33.7

0.5

4.0

38.2

Japan Republic of Korea Finland

79.9

0.7

4.2

84.8

649.8 96.9 152.3 105.8

32.4

0.8

0.0

33.2

43.1

23.0%

18.0

0.1

0.8

18.9

6.3

0.3

4.4

11.0

Germany

67.4

0.6

3.1

71.1

20.2%

Italy

26.5

0.8

5.6

32.9

Sweden

4.0

0.0

0.2

4.2

19.0 11.6 89.1 35.9 4.5

0.5%

France

United Kingdom

12.6

0.4

1.2

14.2

19.9

28.6%

Europe Total

134.8

2.2

15.3

152.3

179.79

15.3%

Canada

17.5

0.2

2.3

20.0

8.7%

USA

227.0

1.1

26.7

254.8

21.9 357.1

Russian Federation

19.6

0.0

4.6

24.2

Brazil

28.8

0.4

5.3

34.5

Chile

3.5

0.2

0.7

Country China

Scenario 1 Loss of Carbon Stock from Pulp Extraction

54.6% 74.9% 19.8%

5.2% 8.4% 6.7%

28.6% 0.8% 65.5%

4.4

1,736.0

24%

0

978.5

10.8

127.0

1,311.3

Baseline Totals

140.5

1,437.9

12.0

145.4

1,736.0

Percent Reduction

100%

32%

10%

13%

24%

32 | P a g e

Percent Reduction 48.0%

24.4 100.1 4.7

Scenario Totals

Note: Totals may not add due to independent rounding.

Baseline Total

6.4%

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

5.0 CASE STUDY: MACMILLAN PUBLISHING COMPANY In addition to estimating and comparing national GHG emissions from the industry, we also examined GHG measures from one book publishing company (i.e., Macmillan Publishing Company). Macmillan Publishing Company (Macmillan) is an international family-owned book publishing company which operates in over 80 countries (Macmillan, 2012a). Macmillan owns and operates mills in the United States, Canada, and Finland. Macmillan initiated a sustainability program in 2010 which included conducting a GHG inventory, offsetting GHG emissions through the purchase of carbon offset credits, and by developing initiatives to reduce GHG emissions within its own operation.

The Macmillan Sustainability Program is generally commensurate with initiatives advanced by other publishing companies. Macmillan conducted a baseline GHG inventory for 2009 which resulted in estimated emissions of approximately 109,736 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalents (Macmillan, 2012b). Not surprisingly, the largest emission sources were from their paper mills and transportation of their products. They set a GHG reduction goal of 32 percent in 2013 with a ramping up to 65 percent by 2019 from 2009 emissions. They have already made progress towards that goal by accomplishing a 28 percent reduction in carbon dioxide intensity per ton of product which also resulted in an 11 percent reduction in pricing.

Macmillan operates six mills in the United States, Canada, and Finland. They do not own the forests or the mills. They have a variety of guidelines for the mills. For example, they require 26 percent FSC-certified groundwood paper. One of their most important producers, the Resolute mill, is 100% certified. Some of the mills are integrated with forest resources and some are not.

Those that are not get pulp delivered from a variety of sources. While they don’t own forests, they recently joined the Sustainability Forest Initiative to influence their producers and the industry. Some of the forest sources they use are certified, some are not.

One of Macmillan’s stated sustainability efforts is to improve energy efficiency in the manufacturing process (Publishers Weekly, 2012). They have called for their mills to become more energy efficient. Beginning in 2012, 60 percent of paper was produced from mills that use hydropower and/or other renewables. In addition, they have lowered the basis weight of paper and have made a two-thirds reduction from changing the process of making jackets and covers.

Smaller print runs (as a result of more e-books) and overhaul of packaging process also reduce GHG emissions. They are phasing out paper catalogs by winter of 2012. Other strategies included switching their fleet to hybrid cars and utilizing energy efficient warehouse lighting thereby cutting energy consumption by 50 percent last year. Additionally, they have implemented measures in their offices and facilities that include recycling in buildings, paper saving measures, green cleaning practices, and transportation measures. Another strategy they have employed is to participate in carbon offset projects as a measure to offset emissions.

Currently, they purchase offsets that total about 30,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalents annual. They purchase two types of projects from the Carbon Fund: Nigeria cook stoves and landfill emission projects.

These measures are similar to others in the field and are a positive step in mitigation climate change. For one, the Macmillan Sustainability Program exhibits a top-down commitment. They 33 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

began with an inventory to provide a baseline by which to evaluate initial strategies. They asked employees (i.e., their internal stakeholders) for ideas and strategies. As they develop a more detailed long-term strategy, they have invested in socially-conscious carbon offset projects.

However, it has been suggested from Macmillan that strategies to mitigate climate change should look at the life cycle on a global scale. Strategies that focus solely on increasing recycling pulp might not have the greatest GHG reduction benefit. Rather, an individual facility might achieve reductions by utilizing local pulpwood coupled with consuming renewable energy would have a lower carbon footprint than simply increasing recycled paper. Additionally, a large percentage of recycled paper could be shipped to foreign markets such as China which would reduce their importation of pulpwood from the rapidly declining rainforests in Brazil and Indonesia for example. In addition, using recycled pulp uses less energy and would reduce the GHG emitted from fossil fuels (e.g., coal) which would effectively reduce net GHG emissions overall.

34 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

6.0 CONCLUSIONS Table 13 presents a summary of the answers to the research questions. In summary, there is great opportunity to reduce GHG emissions in the pulp and paper industry in all four categories assessed in this study. Carbon stocks are being lost in Indonesia, Brazil, and Canada from the removal of wood for wood products including pulpwood used to make paper. Yet, efforts are being made to develop more sustainable approaches to paper manufacturing. For example, there is already a shift in the paper industry to purchase wood from sustainably managed forests. These forests are typically planted forests that are managed so that there is no net loss of carbon over the long term. Continuing to remove wood from primary forests has resulted in an overall loss of carbon in Brazil, Indonesia, and Canada and therefore should be counted in an inventory of life cycle emissions of pulp and paper.

Table 13. Summary of research questions.

Question 1: What were the absolute GHG emissions of the pulp and paper industry from a life cycle perspective and for each stage in the process in 2010?

• For the study countries, the total GHG emissions were 1.7 billion metric tons of CO2e.

• China was by far the largest contributor, followed by the United States and the group of European countries included in this study.

• Energy in the pulp and paper process represented 82 percent of GHG emissions, followed by emissions from landfill and loss of carbon (each with about 8 percent). Transportation made the smallest contribution to overall GHG emissions.

Question 2: In which countries and to what extent are forests losing carbon stocks?

• Indonesia is losing the most carbon for the production of pulpwood (approximately 77 million metric tons CO2 annually).

• Brazil is close behind with approximately 62 million metric tons CO2 lost.

• Canada is also experiencing a loss of primary forests, but to a lesser extent with only 1.5 million metric tons.

• Indonesia, Brazil, and Canada have low percentages of planted forests (4, 1, and 3 percent, respectively) meaning that the pulpwood is obtained mostly from primary and other naturally regenerated forests.

• By eliminating the emissions from carbon losses, approximately 140 million metric tons can be reduced (which is about 8 percent of emissions from the baseline scenario).

Question 3: What is the impact of replacing fossil fuels with renewable energies in the pulp and paper manufacturing?

• Since energy consumption is the largest contributor to GHG emissions, the largest reductions can be realized from this category.

• A 32 percent reduction can be achieved if countries adopt renewable energy mixes similar to the average mix in the European Union.

Question 4: What would be the relative impact of reducing the transportation of pulpwood, recycled paper, and paper products in the global market?

• GHG emissions from transportation are the lowest of the three cumulatively; however, GHG reductions can be realized by reducing trips by locally-sourcing pulp and recycled fiber.

Question 5: What would be the overall reduction of GHG emissions by increasing the rate of paper recycling?

• By increasing recycling rates, approximately 13 percent reductions of GHG can be realized by avoiding methane emissions in landfills. Additionally, carbon stocks would remain in forests and would thus create an additional carbon stock savings.

35 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Question 6: Based on the results of this study, what recommendations should be given to individual organizations involved in the pulp and paper industry?

• Purchase pulp from sustainably-managed forests that do not convert primary forests to plantation forests.

• Switch fuels from fossil fuels to renewable energies • Improve energy efficiency in pulp and paper mills • Increase the recycled content of paper • Locally-source pulpwood and recycled paper • Purchase paper from local markets • Support through membership and participation organizations that are advancing sustainability principles (e.g., FSC, SFI, GRI, GPI) • Lobby governments to stop deforestation practices (which would eliminate cheap wood being obtained from primary forests)

The largest GHG emission source from a life cycle perspective is from energy consumption of the manufacturing of pulp and paper. This is due to the energy intensive processing of both pulp and paper. Therefore, the largest opportunity for GHG reductions would be to replace high emitting fossil fuels like coal and oil with lower emission sources such as natural gas and other renewable energies. While transportation of imported products produces GHG emissions, transportation of imports is not as high as was expected. It appears that a focus on energy reduction and fuel switching would be a better strategy when assessing the largest contributions to GHG reduction. GHG emissions from landfilled paper were also relatively small when compared to emissions from energy.

Therefore, a scenario where pulp and paper products is obtained solely from sustainable forests and pulp and paper mills that are supplied by renewable or low-GHG emitting sources (like natural gas) would be better strategies to reduce GHG emissions than limiting imported pulp and paper products or increasing recycled paper production.

Publishing companies, like Macmillan Publishing Company, could realize GHG reductions by adopting an integrated strategy that incorporates the recommendations presented in Question 6.

Macmillan is already leading the industry by siting facilities near hydroelectric plants, which addresses the largest source of GHG emissions. They also have taken steps to improve energy efficiencies.

It should be noted that there is high uncertainty associated with the estimates presented in this study which was designed to determine “ballpark” GHG estimates for a select group of countries. For example, the energy mix at specific pulp and paper mills are known to vary significantly and might alter the results significantly. Major emission sources excluded from this study include transportation within each country, which may be significant in relatively larger countries like the United States, Canada, and China. Future studies could further refine emissions at the mill level and could add in-country emissions from transportation of pulp and paper products. Therefore, further research summarized in Table 14 could be conducted to further refine this study and to provide guidance to firms interested in mitigating GHG emissions.

36 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Table 14. Potential research for consideration.

Study Name Comparative Analysis of Sustainability Programs available to the Pulp and Paper Industry

Sustainability Benchmarking of Macmillan Publishing Company

Comparative Analysis of Macmillan Publishing Company with other leading multinational firms

Analysis of Macmillan Publishing Company’s GHG and sustainability measures from a historical, current, short-term, and long-term perspective

37 | P a g e

Description With the numerous programs and certification programs in existence, a firm may not be aware of all the programs, the benefits of each one, and the requirements for participation. For example, there are at least three well known forest certification programs and a number of sustainability and GHG reporting programs.

From the first study, create a sustainability benchmark and provide a database of performance indicators/metrics that can be utilized by Macmillan to monitor and track performance of their initiatives.

Compare Macmillan with other publishing companies in general terms (e.g., reduction goals, mitigation strategies, etc.). Data would be obtained from academic literature and review of sustainability plans (and corporate sustainability reports of selected companies) from other publishing companies around the world.

While a preliminary GHG inventory and list of mitigation measures were provided to Hofstra, the details, history, and future plans were not readily available. For example, we can analyze the reduction of the shift towards renewable energies that Macmillan already done. We can also estimate the reduction potential for other planned measures (e.g., energy efficiency measures within each mill). This information could be used to measure and track the performance of these measures, and provide a document to share with stakeholders and customers.

Approach Research programs and provide a synopsis of the benefits and detriments of each program.

Interview and collect specific sustainability data and prepare a sustainability report according to sustainability reporting guidelines (i.e., Global Reporting Initiative) Research firms affiliated with major sustainability programs (e.g., Global Reporting Initiative) and compare the performance of each firm.

Interview and collect data to conduct a more detailed analysis of GHG emissions and other sustainability measures (e.g., water, air, pollution, and other sustainability indicators related to social equity and economic factors). Benefits and liabilities of current business practices will be compiled.

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

7.0 REFERENCES CITED Anderson, O., Gossling, S., Simonsen, M., Walnum, H.S., Peeters, P., Neiberger, C., 2010. CO2 emissions from the transport of China’s exported goods, Energy Policy. 38, 5,790-5,798.

Book Industry Study Group (BISG), 2008. Environmental trends and climate impacts: findings from the UNITED STATES book industry, published by Book Industry Study Group and Green Press Initiative. Available at: http://www.randomhouse.biz/media/pdfs/EnvironmentalTrends.pdf Duke University, Environmental Defense Fund, Johnson & Johnson, McDonald’s, The Prudential Insurance Company of American, Time, Inc., 1995. Paper task force recommendations for purchasing and using environmentally preferable paper, published by the Environmental Defense Fund.

Duke University, Environmental Defense Fund, Johnson & Johnson, McDonald’s, The Prudential Insurance Company of American, Time, Inc., 1995, updated in 2002. Paper task force lifecycle environmental comparison: virgin paper and recycled paper-based system, published by the Environmental Defense Fund.

Freed J.R., Lee, E., 1998. Greenhouse gas emission factors for management of selected materials in municipal solid waste, published by ICF Consulting Group and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/downloads/r99fina.pdf .

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2010a. FAOSTAT dataset, accessed November 5, 2012. Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org/home/.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2010b., Global forest resource assessment 2010, accessed November 5, 2012. Available at http://www.fao.org/forestry/fra/fra2010/en/.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2010c., Forestry trade flows, accessed November 5, 2012. Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org/home/index.html#DOWNLOAD. Green Press Initiative, 2012. Green Press Initiative background and history, accessed October 31, 2012. Available at: http://www.greenpressinitiative.org/.

Global Reporting Initiative, 2012. Sustainability disclosure database, accessed October 15, 2012. Available at: http://database.globalreporting.org/search.

Kramer, K., et al. 2009. Energy efficiency improvement and cost saving opportunities for the pulp and paper industry (Report No. LBNL-2268E), Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley, National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. October 2009, available at

38 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/industry/downloads/Pulp_and_Paper_Energy_Gui de.pdf.

James, K. 2012. An investigation of the relationship between recycled paper and card and greenhouse gas emissions from land use changes, Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 67, 44-55.

Macmillan Publishing Company, 2012a. Background information and history, accessed November 20, 2012, Available at: http://www.holtzbrinck.com/artikel/778433&s=en.

Macmillan Publishing Company, 2012b. Personal communication.

McKinnon A., Piecyk M., 2011. Measuring and managing CO2 emissions, published by Logistics Research Cener, Heriot-Watt Univerisity, Edinburgh, UK. Mollersten, K., Gao, L., Obersteiner, M., 2004. Efficient energy systems with CO2 capture and storage from renewable biomass in pulp and paper mills, Renewable Energy, 29, 1,5831,598.

Publishers Weekly, 2009. Book industry getting greener, published December 7, 2009.

Publishers Weekly, 2012. Macmillan puts its green foot forward, published June 1, 2012.

Sturdivant, J., 2008. The ‘green’ team: Random House, Scholastic, Simon & Schuster, and the Green Press Initiative help lead the industry’s ‘green’ transformation, Book Business Magazine. February 2008, 12-17.

Tian, X., Martin, B.l, 2012. Business model sustainability in book publishing, Publishing Research Quarterly. 28, 100-115.

Tolliver-Nigro, H., 2010. It is safe to use paper (again): an inside look at sustainable forestry and integrated papermaking, The Seybold Report. 10 (16), August 23, 2010.

United States Department of Energy (US DOE), 2006. Manufacturing energy consumption survey, accessed November 12, 2012 at http://www.eia.gov/emeu/mecs/.

United States Department of Energy (US DOE), 2012. CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, Highlights, published by the US DOE’s International Energy Agency (IEA), Accessed October 15, 2012, Available at: http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/CO2highlights.pdf.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2010. Available and emerging technologies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the pulp and paper industry, prepared by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Villanueva, A. and H. Wenzel, 2007. Paper waste- Recycling, incineration or landfilling? A review of existing life cycle assessments, Waste Management, 27, p. S 29-46.

39 | P a g e

Comparative Analysis of GHG Emissions in Pulp and Paper

2012

Vos, R., Newell, J., 2009. A comparative analysis of carbon dioxide emissions in coated paper production: key differences between China and the UNITED STATES, published by the Center for Sustainable Cities, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.

Ynostoroza, R., 2008. Manufacturers working to meet demand for green alternatives, Publishers Weekly, March 10, 2008.

40 | P a g e