BIST
1393
USD/EUR
1,1866
Amerikan Doları
2,33908
Euro
10,2543
İngiliz Sterlini
12,0051
Japon Yeni
8,0021
Rus Rublesi
2,2819
SA Riyali
2,1201
Altın
1,02041
Son Güncelleme: 02.08.2021 02:31
Site İstatiğimiz
Toplam: 50309795

Waste paper

BIR report highlights increase in proportion of paper and board made from recovered fibre

This is one of many key findings in “Paper and board recycling in 2019: Overview of world statistics”, the second edition of the BIR Paper Division’s revamped analysis of global statistics relating to the recovered fibre industry. The report explores not only production and utilization of recovered fibre but also major international trade flows, as well as key pulp and paper/board market information.

Based on data compiled with the assistance of the European Recycling Industries’ Confederation (EuRIC), RISI and CEPI, experts within the BIR Paper Division also make a number of reasoned calculations to quantify the fundamental role of recycled fibre as an environmentally beneficial component of global paper and board production.

“2019 brought an increase in the proportion of the world’s paper and board that was made from recovered fibre – from 50.27% in 2018 to 51.15% the following year,” points out Jean-Luc Petithuguenin, President of BIR’s Paper Division and CEO of France-based Paprec, in his introduction to the new publication.

Asia produced almost half of all the paper and board using recovered fibres, not least because of its leading role as a cardboard producer, while Europe achieved a recovered fibre incorporation rate average of almost 55%.

Despite its increasingly stringent import restrictions, China remained the world’s leading recovered fibre importer in 2019. Of particular note, Europe shipped more recovered fibre to India in 2019 than it did to China – a development that “none of us would have anticipated only a handful of years ago”, according to Mr Petithuguenin.

The 2019 data also underline significant emerging outlets for recovered fibre, notably Vietnam, as well as the continued strong market presence of other, more established buyers in Asia such as India and Indonesia, Mr Petithuguenin adds.

Andritz starts up reject handling line in Laos

Andritz’s scope of supply includes a compete reject handling line that processes rejects from the mill’s two OCC lines and the pulp drying line on site and has a design capacity of 400 t/d.

The innovative reject line delivered and started up by Andritz comprises the following key equipment:

  • Reject Compactor ReCo for dewatering the light rejects from coarse and drum screening to highest dryness
  • ADuro P shredder equipped with a unique knife system and a robust rotor to ensure that the material is cut to the required particle sizes in only one step
  • ADuro C shredder with special coupled shafts to facilitate knife exchange during maintenance and thus reduce downtime

In addition, Andritz installed approach flow systems and broke handling as well as several stock preparation components as part of two OCC lines. The stock preparation systems feed two paper production lines that feature a maximum capacity of 1,434 t/d each and produce high-quality test liner and corrugated paper as their final product.

Andritz starts up reject handling line in Laos

Andritz’s scope of supply includes a compete reject handling line that processes rejects from the mill’s two OCC lines and the pulp drying line on site and has a design capacity of 400 t/d.

The innovative reject line delivered and started up by Andritz comprises the following key equipment:

  • Reject Compactor ReCo for dewatering the light rejects from coarse and drum screening to highest dryness
  • ADuro P shredder equipped with a unique knife system and a robust rotor to ensure that the material is cut to the required particle sizes in only one step
  • ADuro C shredder with special coupled shafts to facilitate knife exchange during maintenance and thus reduce downtime

In addition, Andritz installed approach flow systems and broke handling as well as several stock preparation components as part of two OCC lines. The stock preparation systems feed two paper production lines that feature a maximum capacity of 1,434 t/d each and produce high-quality test liner and corrugated paper as their final product.

Andritz starts up reject handling line in Laos

Andritz’s scope of supply includes a compete reject handling line that processes rejects from the mill’s two OCC lines and the pulp drying line on site and has a design capacity of 400 t/d.

The innovative reject line delivered and started up by Andritz comprises the following key equipment:

  • Reject Compactor ReCo for dewatering the light rejects from coarse and drum screening to highest dryness
  • ADuro P shredder equipped with a unique knife system and a robust rotor to ensure that the material is cut to the required particle sizes in only one step
  • ADuro C shredder with special coupled shafts to facilitate knife exchange during maintenance and thus reduce downtime

In addition, Andritz installed approach flow systems and broke handling as well as several stock preparation components as part of two OCC lines. The stock preparation systems feed two paper production lines that feature a maximum capacity of 1,434 t/d each and produce high-quality test liner and corrugated paper as their final product.

First-ever guidance released for integrating plastic impacts into company ESG assessments

Aimed primarily at ESG data and insights providers, the report Integration of plastics impact evaluation into ESG assessments, supports organizations looking to strengthen its reporting and transparency around plastic usage and impact.

“Despite ESG D&I assessors’ recognition of material financial impacts connected to plastics, an absence of reliable and comparable company data makes it difficult to provide an objective assessment of a company’s plastic performance”, says Andrea Dreifke-Pieper, Director, International Economy Unit, WWF. “This new report from WWF will help overcome these challenges by providing guidance on how plastic impact evaluation can be effectively integrated into ESG assessments.”

The report outlines how relevant plastic performance indicators can be developed and integrated into existing ESG analysis frameworks, taking the companies’ position in the value chain, performance on current plastic action, and preparedness for transitioning into account.

“By setting standards for plastic impact evaluation in ESG analyses, ESG D&I Providers can encourage increased reporting and action on companies’ plastic impact. In the long run, this should be transformed into mandatory standardized reporting and full transparency on companies’ plastic footprint”, emphasizes Dreifke-Pieper.

Over the last decade, plastic pollution has risen to the top of the global environmental agenda due to the increasing ecological, social and economic impacts of this complex problem. With this rising tide of awareness, companies are under increasing pressure to disclose relevant plastics usage and management information for investors and regulators. Through interviews with a range of ESG analysts and investors, the report highlights plastic impact evaluation remains limited. While some ESG data and insights providers already report on some aspects of companies’ plastic impacts, this is a new area of work for the majority of data providers and the lack of consistency across different ratings makes it difficult for investors to make informed decisions.

Download the report

First-ever guidance released for integrating plastic impacts into company ESG assessments

Aimed primarily at ESG data and insights providers, the report Integration of plastics impact evaluation into ESG assessments, supports organizations looking to strengthen its reporting and transparency around plastic usage and impact.

“Despite ESG D&I assessors’ recognition of material financial impacts connected to plastics, an absence of reliable and comparable company data makes it difficult to provide an objective assessment of a company’s plastic performance”, says Andrea Dreifke-Pieper, Director, International Economy Unit, WWF. “This new report from WWF will help overcome these challenges by providing guidance on how plastic impact evaluation can be effectively integrated into ESG assessments.”

The report outlines how relevant plastic performance indicators can be developed and integrated into existing ESG analysis frameworks, taking the companies’ position in the value chain, performance on current plastic action, and preparedness for transitioning into account.

“By setting standards for plastic impact evaluation in ESG analyses, ESG D&I Providers can encourage increased reporting and action on companies’ plastic impact. In the long run, this should be transformed into mandatory standardized reporting and full transparency on companies’ plastic footprint”, emphasizes Dreifke-Pieper.

Over the last decade, plastic pollution has risen to the top of the global environmental agenda due to the increasing ecological, social and economic impacts of this complex problem. With this rising tide of awareness, companies are under increasing pressure to disclose relevant plastics usage and management information for investors and regulators. Through interviews with a range of ESG analysts and investors, the report highlights plastic impact evaluation remains limited. While some ESG data and insights providers already report on some aspects of companies’ plastic impacts, this is a new area of work for the majority of data providers and the lack of consistency across different ratings makes it difficult for investors to make informed decisions.

Download the report

Valmet introduces its climate program

Valmet’s climate program includes ambitious CO2 emission reduction targets and concrete actions for the whole value chain, including Valmet’s own operations, the supply chain, and the use of Valmet’s technologies by its customers. The program is aligned with the Paris Climate Agreement’s 1.5-degree pathway and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and Valmet is in process to send its climate targets to the Science Based Targets Initiative for validation.

Valmet’s own operations account for approximately 1 percent of the company’s value chain’s carbon footprint and around 4 percent arises through Valmet’s supply chain. Valmet targets to reduce 80 percent of CO2 emissions in its own operations and 20 percent in its supply chain by 2030. Valmet aims to reach its own operations’ climate targets without emission compensation.

Furthermore, since most of Valmet’s value chain’s carbon footprint originates from the use phase of Valmet’s technologies, the program emphasizes Valmet’s current and future ability to enable 100 percent carbon neutral production for its customers. Valmet targets to enable carbon neutral production for all pulp and paper industry customers by 2030, which requires the company both to develop new technologies enabling fossil free pulp and paper production and to further improve the energy efficiency of its current technology offering by 20 percent by 2030. Today, the customers’ chemical pulp mills utilizing Valmet’s technologies are often over 100 percent bioenergy self-sufficient already. Furthermore, Valmet’s current bioenergy boiler offering enables 100 percent fossil free heat and power production.

“Climate change and global warming are significant challenges that are driving companies to rapidly transform and reduce their carbon dioxide emissions. We believe that technology plays a key role in mitigating climate change and global warming and the transition to a carbon neutral economy. Our climate program covers the entire value chain and with concrete actions we will significantly reduce our own carbon footprint and support our suppliers to do the same. Valmet is also strongly committed to be the preferred partner for our customers on their journey to carbon neutrality,” says Pasi Laine, President and CEO, Valmet.

AF&PA releases guide to further advance paper recycling

The guide provides data on how certain non-fiber elements, such as coatings and additives, impact the recyclability of paper-based packaging.

“Paper recycling is a circular economy success story. Increasingly, consumers are seeking more sustainable packaging, and as a result, brands are challenged to add more recyclable packaging to their portfolio. Combining our industry’s track record on paper recycling – meeting or exceeding a 63 percent recycling rate since 2009 – along with AF&PA’s industry data and statistics, this guide will be a true asset to those seeking to innovate around sustainable packaging. I am confident that a deeper understanding, as to the complexities brands and packaging designers face in balancing design and performance with recyclability, will further advance paper recycling innovation,” said Heidi Brock, AF&PA President and CEO. The findings in the report are the result of an AF&PA member survey of company mills in a range of sectors in the United States and Canada. The survey had a 75 percent response rate. In total, data for 86 mills was reported.

The study included corrugated packaging, bleached and unbleached paperboard cartons, carrier stock cartons, Kraft paper bags, multiwall shipping sacks and molded fiber containers. The study examined numerous non-fiber elements including inks and dyes, adhesives, tapes and labels, coatings and barriers, metals and plastics, foils, wet strength, and non-tree fibers.

Key findings include:

  • Non-fiber elements may present a recycling “challenge” when they slow down the mill’s pulping process, plug screening systems or leave residue on finished paper or paperboard. However, innovations in packaging design and materials, as well as improvements in recycling technology, have made these treatments easier to recycle than historically.
  • Being a “challenge” does not mean “not recyclable.” Each non-fiber element applied to each kind of packaging was rated by some mills as not a “challenge.”

“This technical guidance is not meant to be mandatory or a standard for the packaging industry. Rather, it is an information tool to help individuals and organizations that specify and design packaging to better meet a customer’s recycling needs,” said Brian Hawkinson, AF&PA’s Executive Director of Recovered Fiber.

In addition to data about the impact non-fiber elements have on packaging recyclability, the report includes resources about the recycling process, standards and testing facilities and insights from mills on specific non-fiber elements.

The Design Guidance for Recyclability is available for free

AF&PA releases guide to further advance paper recycling

The guide provides data on how certain non-fiber elements, such as coatings and additives, impact the recyclability of paper-based packaging.

“Paper recycling is a circular economy success story. Increasingly, consumers are seeking more sustainable packaging, and as a result, brands are challenged to add more recyclable packaging to their portfolio. Combining our industry’s track record on paper recycling – meeting or exceeding a 63 percent recycling rate since 2009 – along with AF&PA’s industry data and statistics, this guide will be a true asset to those seeking to innovate around sustainable packaging. I am confident that a deeper understanding, as to the complexities brands and packaging designers face in balancing design and performance with recyclability, will further advance paper recycling innovation,” said Heidi Brock, AF&PA President and CEO. The findings in the report are the result of an AF&PA member survey of company mills in a range of sectors in the United States and Canada. The survey had a 75 percent response rate. In total, data for 86 mills was reported.

The study included corrugated packaging, bleached and unbleached paperboard cartons, carrier stock cartons, Kraft paper bags, multiwall shipping sacks and molded fiber containers. The study examined numerous non-fiber elements including inks and dyes, adhesives, tapes and labels, coatings and barriers, metals and plastics, foils, wet strength, and non-tree fibers.

Key findings include:

  • Non-fiber elements may present a recycling “challenge” when they slow down the mill’s pulping process, plug screening systems or leave residue on finished paper or paperboard. However, innovations in packaging design and materials, as well as improvements in recycling technology, have made these treatments easier to recycle than historically.
  • Being a “challenge” does not mean “not recyclable.” Each non-fiber element applied to each kind of packaging was rated by some mills as not a “challenge.”

“This technical guidance is not meant to be mandatory or a standard for the packaging industry. Rather, it is an information tool to help individuals and organizations that specify and design packaging to better meet a customer’s recycling needs,” said Brian Hawkinson, AF&PA’s Executive Director of Recovered Fiber.

In addition to data about the impact non-fiber elements have on packaging recyclability, the report includes resources about the recycling process, standards and testing facilities and insights from mills on specific non-fiber elements.

The Design Guidance for Recyclability is available for free

AF&PA releases guide to further advance paper recycling

The guide provides data on how certain non-fiber elements, such as coatings and additives, impact the recyclability of paper-based packaging.

“Paper recycling is a circular economy success story. Increasingly, consumers are seeking more sustainable packaging, and as a result, brands are challenged to add more recyclable packaging to their portfolio. Combining our industry’s track record on paper recycling – meeting or exceeding a 63 percent recycling rate since 2009 – along with AF&PA’s industry data and statistics, this guide will be a true asset to those seeking to innovate around sustainable packaging. I am confident that a deeper understanding, as to the complexities brands and packaging designers face in balancing design and performance with recyclability, will further advance paper recycling innovation,” said Heidi Brock, AF&PA President and CEO. The findings in the report are the result of an AF&PA member survey of company mills in a range of sectors in the United States and Canada. The survey had a 75 percent response rate. In total, data for 86 mills was reported.

The study included corrugated packaging, bleached and unbleached paperboard cartons, carrier stock cartons, Kraft paper bags, multiwall shipping sacks and molded fiber containers. The study examined numerous non-fiber elements including inks and dyes, adhesives, tapes and labels, coatings and barriers, metals and plastics, foils, wet strength, and non-tree fibers.

Key findings include:

  • Non-fiber elements may present a recycling “challenge” when they slow down the mill’s pulping process, plug screening systems or leave residue on finished paper or paperboard. However, innovations in packaging design and materials, as well as improvements in recycling technology, have made these treatments easier to recycle than historically.
  • Being a “challenge” does not mean “not recyclable.” Each non-fiber element applied to each kind of packaging was rated by some mills as not a “challenge.”

“This technical guidance is not meant to be mandatory or a standard for the packaging industry. Rather, it is an information tool to help individuals and organizations that specify and design packaging to better meet a customer’s recycling needs,” said Brian Hawkinson, AF&PA’s Executive Director of Recovered Fiber.

In addition to data about the impact non-fiber elements have on packaging recyclability, the report includes resources about the recycling process, standards and testing facilities and insights from mills on specific non-fiber elements.

The Design Guidance for Recyclability is available for free