I was encouraged to read of AF&PA's three new awards scheme for recycling, attractively underpinned by cash awards. Here in Europe things are problematic. The industry has its objectives, but Europe's legislators have different ones. Both sides are on a collision course.

The arguments are as follows: the industry, represented by the Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI)—Europe's equivalent of US's American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA)—wants separate waste streams, ideally at source, i.e. the household. So, paper, board, glass, food-aluminum, and plastic should have dedicated containers or bins, be collected by the local authority, then delivered to specific waste treatment plants and recycled or re-used.

The legislators see things differently. European paper and board mills that consume wastepaper to make newsprint, tissue, board or printing & writing papers are classified as waste treatment plants. In turn, they don't get the tax breaks, financial incentives, or other regulatory support they deserve and to which they are entitled. Also complicating an already complicated mess is the attitude of many local authorities who will not, or cannot, send several trucks to collect separated waste. To them, one truck fits all.

So we face the bizarre situation in which the newest and biggest newsprint mill in the world-Stora Enso's 400,000 tpy mill in Langerbrugge, Belgium, which started up last year-is classified by the regulators as a waste treatment plant.

A spokesman for CEPI said, “We're hitting the numbers. We managed to push our recycling rate to 53.2% in 2003, (52% in 2002) and that means we utilized an extra 700,000 tonnes of recovered paper last year. The total amount of recovered paper that was recycled last year was 44.7 million tonnes. Our target is 56% by 2005.”

But there is still much to do. CEPI is working with its supply chain to ensure separate collection of paper and has started preparing guidelines for sourcing of recovered paper throughout the chain: from collection, to sorting and transportation, through to storage and end-use of recovered paper.

CEPI is also working with the European waste management industry on quality controls and responsible sourcing of recovered paper. The thorny issue of food contact and paper is also under consideration.

Now, with all this going on within the industry it would be reasonable to assume that the regulators are listening and are impressed, and that they would do what they could to assist the industry. It's not so.

The Regulators
The powers to be are obsessed with the use of recovered fiber in food contact paper and board. It is their major priority. They have issued a regulation which requires “traceability along the supply chain.” The industry is very doubtful that this can be achieved by paper and board mills. It points out that such “traceability” requires the participation of several actors. The industry produces paper and board and, at the end of the chain, it also recycles paper and board. A CEPI position paper stated, “Most of the decisions affecting recyclability are made by other industries: packaging manufacturers, printers, publishers etc. who, in turn are bound by the industries providing additives, glues, inks, machinery etc. used in converting operations. Also, before used paper and board products can be recycled, they will have to be collected in such a way that recyclability is maintained.” In other words, single stream separation and collection is critical for the process.

But the regulators state that a fresh look at a recycling strategy will not be ready until mid-2005.

Last year regulators published new rules on the use of chemicals, and those rules are wide-ranging and worry the industry. Paper producers fear, for example, that wood chips, bark, sludge or other papermaking residues may be categorized as “dangerous substances” and will require expensive and complex treatment processes. This will be an added cost to the industry which it cannot afford.

As we all know, the more times paper fiber is recycled, the weaker they become and are eventually lost in the production process. Also the greater the collection of paper from households implies a higher level of impurities, and, consequently, greater losses from the recycling process.

All of this means that the industry will have to intensify its lobbying with the regulators and convince them that most of the industry's products, waste and emissions can be either recovered, re-used, become fuels and soil improvers or considered biodegradable.

It will be useful to re-visit this problem in a year's time to see how close the regulators and the industry will be to amicable and cost-effective solutions.