The push for recycled papers continues to grow globally – and sometimes in the oddest places. For instance, along with office papers, the mob Lawyers For Forests publishes a prescriptive list of tissues and loo roll on its website. Long into recycling, we’ve tried most of their suggestions – with the unfortunate result that they are scratchy or “ineffective”. But, we persist with recycling. And so we should. 

According to KESAB Environmental Solutions, which runs not-for-profit community education programmes, paper makes up about 25% of the domestic waste stream, much of which can be recycled. 

Sometimes, we get quirky stuff: I haven’t seen uptake figures of the 2006 invention of the Ecopod (paper recycled into coffins), but reports this year have said that it is booming in the US. We’ve also seen ink delivered to printers in recyclable cardboard boxes and paper recycled into drinking bottles. 

So it seems mainstream to see bottle labels with recycled content, which is exactly what one of the US’s largest coated paper manufacturers has done with EcoPoint Plus: a label with 10% post-consumer waste. 

These labels have a bright white surface that suits offset and gravure. They’re suitable for high-speed converting and labelling, while the reverse-side coatings are designed for hot-melt adhesives.  

Not content to rest on the recycled laurels alone, the labels have certifications from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and the Programme
for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC).

But what about the debate over eco-kilometres? Perhaps importing from the US does counteract the “good” of recycling, but Australia’s manufacturing base means we will always be a net importer of paper. Making recycled paper uses fewer resources (oil, water and electricity), along with chlorinated bleach, and, of course, diverts paper from landfill. While a coffin or bottle made from dumped files and publications may seem leftfield, paper labels are not. Let’s hope we see more of them. 

Not going great, Gunns

Although I would rather count the number of words in a Kevin Rudd speech that make sense than mention “Gunns’ pulp mill” again, recent occurrences make it impossible to ignore. 

In December, Gunns’ chairman John Gay sold 3.4 million company shares, averaging a tad over 90 cents. 

OK, that’s fine, but a late February announcement had the six-monthly company profit to 31 December down 98% (from $33m to $400,000). 

Shell-shocked institutional investors sold, and demanded Gunns’ three long-term Tasmanian directors resign. Prices bombed from $1 to 57c, and there’s still no announcement on a financier, but plenty of off-the-record rumours of what’s happening. 

Add to that, March was Tassie election time, with both Labor and Liberal supporting the New Forest Industry Plan. So what does this mean for a mill that still doesn’t have final Commonwealth Government sign off? Who knows, but it’s certainly interesting times ahead. 

Samantha Schelling is a writer and editor, with a long-held interest in the environment and sustainability.

Comment below to have your say on this story.

If you have a news story or tip-off, get in touch at editorial@sprinter.com.au.  

Sign up to the Sprinter newsletter