St Mathias Church at Windermere. The Tamar valley is an idylic place to live - but what if it starts smelling of rotten eggs?
By far the most important issue facing local residents is the smell. All Kraft pulp mills smell because they emit, amongst other compounds, a gas called hydrogen sulphide. It smells of rotten eggs and can be detected by the human nose at concentrations below one part per hundred million. A typical odour footprint of a large mill is 50 kms - so you might be able to smell it at Launceston airport. In Finland they call it the smell of money and people get used to it - but they don't have a large tourism industry with vineyards like Tasmania does. Let's see what Gunns handout says about the smell.
John Gay: 'Issues surrounding mills of days gone by, such as odour, noise, emissions, effluent and containment, have been addressed by international engineering experts.'
Comment: It would be strange if they hadn't, but have they been solved? Check out what happened at the latest mill opened in Australia in Tumut NSW in 2001. The link below tells us that the town of Tumut had an odour problem from the new pulp mill built 13 kms (by road) away. Apparently, further investigation found that it took 5 years for VISY to get the smells under control and it was described as like living next to a dysfunctional septic tank.
Several Tamar valley residents have experience of a pulp mill. They say that the smell gets into your hair, clothes, fabrics and furnishings and makes food taste like boiled cabbage. The proposed mill at Longreach will be five times larger than Tumut. The RPDC guidelines allow Gunns Ltd TWO YEARS to control the smell before action is taken. Let's see how our New Zealand friends fare
Hmm - not very encouraging. Let's see if Gunns have more to say:
Gunns Ltd: 'In terms of odour emissions, this pulp mill will feature the most sophisticated odour abatement system in the World. Odour will be collected and destroyed through a burning process in a recovery boiler with a power boiler as a back up. When these two boilers are not operating during mill start ups and shut downs. a tertiary system which is a small dedicated incinerator will be used to burn any odourous gasses.
Comment: But will it work bearing in mind the tiny concentrations that the human nose can detect? It appears that pulp mill task force chairman Bob Gordon is not too confident:
Bob Gordon in an interview on 21/4/05: 'I don't know if the mill will smell but it may.'
RPDC: 'While they are extremely smelly and can be detected by the human senses at extremely low levels, they can be controlled but cannot be eliminated entirely given the nature of the process.' ........ AND...... 'The commission is advised that the odour-free kraft mill does not exist' ....... AND....... 'Selection of a site that minimised the nuisance should be a prime consideration because complete odour elimination from Kraft mills was not possible.'
Gunns proposal to RPDC dated 9/5/05: 'The IIS (integrated impact statement) will describe the effect on the environment that any emission and any of its components will have including modelling of the dynamics of dispersion of liquid and gaseous emissions including odours'
Comment: At no point have Gunns Ltd said in their original literature that it will not smell, in fact, representatives of the pulpmill taskforce have been advising local residents that there will be several days a year you will not want to go outside. But Gunns Ltd are now saying via their press releases that their new technology will definitely stop the smell and that this has been proven at the latest mills in Europe at Stendal, Germany and Veracel, Brazil..
These are quotes from the Pulp Mill Study Program Report 1 published by the Taskforce on their trip to China, Europe and Canada:
Complaints: 'Without exception, almost all of the complaints received related to odour emissions. Some noise complaints had also been received. In general, these complaints could be generally related back to particular incidents and unfavourable weather conditions.'
Comment: These sort of weather conditions are presumably where the air becomes trapped by an inversion layer and the smell cannot escape.
Quote from Pulp mill task force study program on odours in Finland: 'There have been a number of complaints over the past year principally due to problems with startup of the new recovery island. These were mostly odour and were commonly related to wind direction.'
Comment: So it will not smell if the wind is blowing it away from you!
Quote from Pulp mill task force study program on odours from Stendal: 'According to the company, there have been some complaints from individuals - principally during start up and when malfunctions occur.'
The Northern Tasmanian Development Group study tour in March 2006 reported that 'Pulp Mills in Europe emitted odour two or three times a year despite modern technology'. It is not clear whether that information was provided by the mills or whether they asked the locals. However, the modern pulp mill at Stendal that they visited is built on a flat plain - no inversion layer to hold the smell in unlike Longreach. Jo archer reported that the smell from the older pulp mill at Gruvon made her gag but John Carswell said that because new mills have two large furnaces, they can burn odourous gases. The Longreach mill will have twice the output of pulp as the mill at Stendal.
Stendal pulp mill during construction - note the flat topography - no inversion layer here.
Here is a link that shows that odour may well be a problem at Veracel in Brazil:
RPDC final scope guidelines: 'Details must be provided of the number of odour emissions from the proposed pulp mill.' AND ' All relevant documents, including operator logs, to be provided to the regulatory authority in the event of more than one odour emission per week during the commissioning period.'
Historic Kings Bridge at the mouth of Launceston's stunning Cataract Gorge. Will the smell spread right up to Launceston?
In fact the RPDC final scope guidelines require Gunns to monitor an area in a radius of 55kms from the proposed mill as that distance is quote 'The distance over which odours from other Kraft mills have been known to cause nuisance.' In other words, almost anywhere in northern Tasmania from Port Sorrell to Bridport and down to Longford could be affected.
The tourism aspect is a bit of a worry. Suppose the mill has a malfunction and bad smell day just when a cruise ship calls, or during Festivale, Targa Tasmania, or an AFL weekend? Or when a TV travel programme team visit? Unfortunately, people pass on their bad experiences more than their good and we could lose numbers. 'Tasmania's so beautiful but it smells'. Can we take the risk?
Targa Tasmania 2006 at George Town - will competitors and spectators take away a negative message about Tasmania?
In the Examiner on 8th April 2006 Gunns Ltd CEO John Gay says that the proposed mill will not smell as it has a tertiary burner and that Gunns Ltd are spending an extra $20m. to prevent smells. We now know that Gunns Ltd assurances a few months ago that the latest mills do not smell have been proved false. We also know that Visy had to spend up to $50m. extra dollars on their mill at Tumut on odour abatement and that it still smells from time to time (see Mercury article on Tumut in previous section). The Tumut mill is only one fifth the size of the proposed Longreach mill. Who do you believe?
IIS: In the IIS, Gunns admit that the latest mills in Europe do still smell from time to time but say that their mill will be different. The reason they give is that the proposed mill will have a back-up odourous gas incinerator which will function full-time (instead of just being activated when required as at other mills). As well as this, there will be a further back-up incinerator in case it is required. These will be kept running at all times to prevent shutdowns and faults causing odours. Also, the effluent treatment will not require cooling towers which is another source of odour. Comment: This technology has not been tried before so it would be wise to exercise caution as to whether it will completely effective. If it is, then it will be the first Kraft pulp mill ever not to smell. IIS: The odour quotient analysis says that odour events are unlikely to occur, and if they do neither the strength or frequency are likely to be annoying. IIS: In site selection section: In the advent of unfavourable atmospheric conditions and adverse conditions at the pulp mill, there is potential for odour problems at Rowella unless the situation is managed appropriately.The Beca AMEC Ltd peer review of the IIS commissioned by the RPDC says:
The proponents statement "The best available technology will be used to ensure that the mill will have among the lowest air and odour emissions of any pulp mill operating in the World. The mill will have the World's first three-tier odour abatement system to capture odourous gases. This will make its odour emissions the lowest in the World"is misleading. It goes on to say 'the apparent lack of mention of any special design features aimed at minimising fugitive TRS odour emissions is considered to be a critical deficiency. These near ground level emissions typically come from seals on pumps, pipes, vessels and from drains in the evaporation area of the mill. In combination, these many hundreds of minor ground-level emissions have proved to be a significant source of nuisance odour in modern Kraft mills that have been built specifically with very high boiler and kiln stacks, designed to carry the major sources of residual TRS to heights in the atmosphere where dispersion is efficient. In an area close to a major city, like Launceston, having well documented geographical and meteorological features that make dispersion of nuisance odours generated at, or near, ground level very slow and inefficient, this omission of this second source of TRS is considered serious'.Not only that, on page 58 it says that the apparent lack of mention of any special features aimed at minimising odours is considered to be a critical deficiency and that the omission of mention of this second source of odours cannot be tolerated. Apparently Stendal has a vacuum system enclosing valves and pumps and a 6m. high wall around the smelliest areas. The report also states that Gunns three tiers of odour control may be inedequate for the highly sensitive area of the Tamar valley and an extra tier of odour control (a flare) should be built into the system.
In the Examiner on 1/11/2006, it is reported that the latest pulp mill opened in Chile, which is an ECF mill using Pine and Eucalypt producing 850,000 tonnes of wood pulp (very similar to Gunns project), is causing awful smells with people being ill up to 11kms away. Sales of wine from the area have also been badly affected. Dr. Warwick Raverty, a pulp mill expert who has resigned from the RPDC panel, says that the mill as proposed in the draft IIS will smell and the odour likely to spread right up to Launceston. This is an excerpt taken from a report on the pulpmill being built in Uruguay by Finnish company Botnia: "Some claim that erection of the mill will also affect air quality as well. Botnia itself acknowledged that the paper mill’s emissions will cause a lingering stench, as well as possibly generating adverse effects, including eye and nasal irritation and wheezing."Report on mill being built in Uraguay
The following link updated on 15th June 2007 answers questions on pulp mills. Note that the odour panel is spread out in a 70km radius:
Aracruz answer questions on odour
This is what Dr. Raverty at his Launceston lecture had to say about the possibility of odour occuring from the Longreach mill:The odour from the kraft pulpmill at Tumut took five years to control. The Tumut mill is one fifth the size of Longreach and was built and is operated by a firm, Visy, that have years of experience in running pulp and paper mills. Gunns have no experience with pulp and papermills at all. There is no such thing as a kraft pulpmill that does not smell and to build one in a valley with an inversion layer where 100,000 people live does not seem a very sensible decision. There are over 400 places in a mill that can cause odour and so it is difficult to pin the cause down. A bottle was passed around with some of the odourous chemicals from Tumut and it was generally agreed that the smell was quite repulsive. The very latest high technology mill at Stendal in Germany has developed odour problems in its second year of operation, probably due to all of the many thousands of plastic pipe and pump seals becoming saturated with odour over the course of the first 12 months of operation. Dr.Raverty emphasised that what Finns and Swedes, like Jaakko Powry's experts, considered odour-free would be quite unacceptable to the noses of most Tasmanians. A mill with the same odour abatement system as the Stendal mill built at Hampshire would not create odour problems. At Longreach the same mill is virtually certain to cause major odour problems and even stunt lung development in children living near the mill, according to the latest AMA evidence.
16/4/2007: UNBEARABLE SMELLS AND NAUSEA CAUSED BY LATEST KRAFT PULPMILL 18/7/2007: ODOUR - THE PROCESS STINKS BUT WILL THE MILL?
What does the SWECO say about the odour - absolutely nothing! There is no analysis of the claim in Gunns'
IIS that the mill will smell only once every 11 year - it is just accepted as fact. There is no discussion
of ground level emissions that the Beca-AMEC peer review said might be a problem. At Tumut, the pulp mill
opened in 2002 (one fifth the size of Gunns' project) had odour problems for five years. 98% of these odours were from
leaks not from the stack. The Swedish engineer who designed the Tumut system claimed that Tumut had no odour
(in spite of 50 complaints a month!). This same engineer is now working for Gunns. The three tier system that Gunns
claim will stop odours will have no effect on ground level leaks from the thousands of joints and valves around
the complex. It just beggars belief that these will not leak at all during the life of the project. The only conclusion any sensible observer can come to is that it's unfortunately going to smell.
18/8/2007: RUTH FORREST RELEASES FULL REPORT
Independent MLC Ruth Forrest has now issued a full report from the visit to Nueva Aldea pulp mill in Chile. It
does not make for encouraging reading for residents of the Tamar valley:
* The mill operators claim that there were only 3/4 odour incidents in the first year lasting about an hour.
* The locals in a village 12kms away however reported frequent odours which are still continuing.
* There have been gastro' upsets, nausea, headaches and vomiting.
* A school had to be closed for the day and a church service cancelled because of the smell.
* Cellar door sales of wine have been badly affected.
* The river developed a brownish foam.
* Very little economic benefit for the locals. No benefit from pulp mill tourism.
* Lack of transparency in monitoring and lack of trust in the company.
* They recommend open and transparent independent monitoring if one is built in Tasmania.
VERDICT: This is a huge mill (the largest single line output in the World) and the potential for smell is therefore large. The RPDC, Dr. Warwick Raverty and the Pulpmill task force say it will smell, Gunns Ltd says it will not. The Beta AMEC and CSIRO peer reviews say there are serious deficiencies in Gunns odour control. We will really only know when the mill is built by which time, if Gunns Ltd are wrong, it will be too late. Unfortunately every kraft pulp mill ever built has an odour problem so it is difficult to see how Gunns Ltd will avoid the problem. Gunns Ltd will be keeping their fingers crossed that their technology works, or if not, it can be fixed quickly before there is too much of an outcry. Are you feeling lucky?
Let's not forget Gunns Ltd have an alternative uninhabited site at Hampshire and that one of Tasmania's proudest boasts is its wonderful fresh air.
Hydrogen sulphide is a highly poisonous, heavier than air gas that has a highly
distinctive smell - rotten eggs.
Unfortunately it can be detected by the human nose as concentrations of one
part in
100 million. At one part per million it can cause nausea, headaches and eye
irritation.
At 20 parts per million it causes nose, throat and lung problems.
Pulp mills produce hydrogen sulphide as part of the process. Attempts are
made to
scrub the emissions and/or burn off the gas before it is released. To stop
the smell,
this has to be a very, very comprehensive process.
There will be days when the pulp mill will need to vent hydrogen sulphide.
It cannot
be eliminated completely according to the RPDC although Gunns Ltd
says it can. In other words, there could be smelly days. After
a while you
cannot smell it as it destroys your ability to sense it. But visitors will
smell it.
The smell will travel up to 50kms - depending on the wind direction. The Tamar
inversion layer will hold it in. Here is a link that explains how hydrogen
sulphide can affect you:
Health effects of hydrogen sulphide
In the latest laws on industrial emissions (2004), Kraft pulp mills are exempt from hydrogen sulphide controls. They are included in total sulphurous emissions - this has the appearence of a nice convenient fudge!
