Untitled Document
Pulp Fiction: Chemical Hazard Reduction at
Pulp and Paper Mills
August 2007
Executive
Summary
Download
the full report.
Executive
Summary
Across the country, pulp and paper mills,
petroleum refineries, chemical plants and
other industrial facilities use and store large
amounts of hazardous chemicals that could be
released in the event of an accident or
terrorist attack. Releases at these chemical
facilities could endanger thousands or even
millions of people working and living in
nearby communities. According to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
more than 100 facilities each would endanger
at least one million people in a worst-case
chemical release. Another 3,000 facilities each
would endanger at least 10,000 people or
more.
Many of these chemical facilities can eliminate
the health and safety risks they pose to local
communities. Chemical facilities often have
multiple options for their production
processes, and some of these options are
inherently safer than others.
Facilities that
reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous
chemicals, or that make changes to storage
pressure or other processes, can remove the
potential of a hazardous chemical release,
making the facilities inherently safer and less
appealing targets for terrorists.
Pulp and paper mills stand as a salient
example of chemical facilities that can
implement readily available safer alternatives
to eliminate or reduce unnecessary risks to
workers and local communities in the event of
an accidental or deliberate chemical release.
Chlorine and chlorine dioxide are used as
bleaching agents in many pulp and papermaking
processes. The dominant industry
processes are the elemental chlorine (EC)
process, which relies on chlorine gas, or the
elemental chlorine-free (ECF) process, which
uses chlorine dioxide, a gas with hazards
similar to chlorine. A
In the event of an accidental or deliberate
release, chlorine and chlorine dioxide present
serious hazards. Chlorine, used as a chemical
weapon, is highly toxic and corrosive. It
irritates the mucous membranes of the nose,
throat, and lungs, and causes breathing
difficulties, violent coughing, acute
tracheobronchitis, and chemical pneumonia.
Exposure to relatively low levels of chlorine
can be fatal. Similarly, chlorine dioxide causes
shortness of breath, bronchitis, and
emphysema. Acute exposure can cause
potentially fatal pulmonary edema.
To estimate the number of Americans at risk
of injury or death in the event of a chlorine or
chlorine dioxide release at a pulp and paper
mill, we examined Risk Management Plans
submitted to EPA by the owners or operators
of each facility. These plans, legally required
under the Clean Air Act, estimate the distance
that an extremely hazardous chemical could
travel off-site in the event of a release, and the
number of people living in the affected area
or “vulnerability zone.” This data analysis
revealed that pulp and paper mills that
continue to rely on chlorine or chlorine
dioxide endanger millions of people.
Key findings include:
• In the United States, 16 pulp and paper
mills still use chlorine and 58 use chlorine
dioxide in their processing or store it onsite.
• These 74 facilities use and store almost 4
million pounds of chlorine and chlorine
dioxide, endangering 5.7 million people
living in 23 different states.
• The states with the most pulp and paper
mills using or storing chlorine and
chlorine dioxide include Alabama with
seven, Florida and Georgia with six, and
Louisiana, Maine, and South Carolina with
five each.
• In Ohio, two pulp and paper mills place a
total of almost 1.3 million people at risk. In Tennessee, three pulp and paper mills
endanger a total of 730,000 people. Pulp
and paper mills that continue to rely on
chlorine and chlorine dioxide endanger at
least 400,000 people in Florida, Louisiana,
South Carolina, and Washington.
• A single pulp and paper facility that uses
or stores chlorine or chlorine dioxide can
endanger a large number of people. In
Ohio, a single facility places 1.2 million
people at risk in a worst-case chemical
release; in Tennessee, a single facility
endangers more than 600,000 people.
The pulp and paper industry has readily
available safer alternatives to chlorine and
chlorine dioxide bleaching that can reduce or
eliminate these risks. The most commonly
used chlorine-free bleaching process, typically
called a totally chlorine-free (TCF) process, is
oxygen based and uses either hydrogen
peroxide or ozone. TCF bleaching protects
worker and community health and safety by
eliminating the presence of chlorine, chlorine
dioxide, and highly toxic chlorinated
byproducts, such as dioxins and furans.
Another equally safe technology is processed
chlorine-free bleaching (PCF), which also
eliminates the need for chlorine and chlorine
dioxide. TCF material originates from virgin
pulp, whereas the PCF process uses recycled
material.
Despite the safety and environmental benefits
associated with chlorine-free bleaching, most
pulp and paper mills have not switched to
these safer and more secure technologies.
In order to adequately address the recognized
safety and security threats created by facilities
using and storing dangerous chemicals, the
United States needs a comprehensive policy
dedicated to making its pulp and paper
mills—and all chemical plants—safer. This
policy should:
• Eliminate or reduce the use of highly
toxic chemicals by switching to safer
technologies where feasible. Safer
technologies are the most effective way to
secure facilities and to protect workers
and communities in the event of a
deliberate or accidental chemical release. Pulp and paper mills can eliminate or
significantly reduce the use of chlorine
and chlorine dioxide by implementing
readily available safer alternatives.
• Maintain and expand public access to
basic information about chemical use
and hazards at individual facilities. In
order to evaluate, understand, and
respond to potential chemical threats,
workers and communities must have
access to information about the use,
storage, and release of hazardous
chemicals.
• Preserve the ability of states and
localities to address chemical facility
safety and security. Threats at chemical
facilities vary by community and state.
Confronting these threats requires
collaboration between local, state, and
federal officials. In order to promote
effective collaboration, states and localities
must be allowed to establish safety and
security programs that are more protective
than federal requirements. In the absence
of a comprehensive and permanent
federal program, states including
Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and
North Carolina already have adopted
measures to improve chemical security
and safety within their borders.
By adopting safer technologies, chemical
facilities can achieve a number of benefits.
For example:
• Safety and security reliability. Hazard
reduction makes chemical and industrial
processes inherently safer by reducing or
eliminating the use of highly toxic,
volatile, or flammable chemicals or by
limiting the quantity of these substances
used or stored on-site. From a security
perspective, eliminating the source of the
threat can make facilities less attractive
targets for terrorists.
• Improved environmental performance.
In addition to safety and security benefits,
safer technologies also can improve
environmental performance at chemical
facilities. Using hazardous chemicals in
production and manufacturing processes
often results in toxic byproducts or
pollution. For example, chlorine-based
pulp and paper bleaching processes
generate dioxins and furans. Chlorinefree
technologies eliminate these toxic
pollutants by taking chlorine out of the
equation.
• Operating cost savings. Although
switching to safer technologies may
require an initial capital investment, these
technologies can offset recurring
operating costs. For example, pulp and
paper mills that eliminate the use of
chlorine or chlorine dioxide can achieve
significant cost savings associated with
pollution control, workplace safety
requirements, emergency response,
employee training, security costs, and
safety equipment. In the long-term,
avoiding or reducing these annually
recurring costs can save facilities money.y and require
facilities to find safer alternatives to
dangerous chemicals.