The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The betrayal of the Tamar Valley > Comments

The betrayal of the Tamar Valley : Comments

By Peter Henning, published 17/9/2008

Gunns Pulp Mill: Tasmanian politicians have once again passed over the chance to elevate public good over private gain.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
OK Steel let me rephrase to make it easier for you to understand. No manager of Gunns (past or present) has ever had a bribery charge made against them, whether convicted or not.
Posted by tragedy, Thursday, 25 September 2008 10:17:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is amazing how the greens try and claim the high ground while telling bald faced lies.

In a decade of running at the permissable pollution levels the plant will produce about 1 teaspoon full of dioxins.

This will be of course unmeasureable and a calculated value only, mostly because as dioxins actually exist naturally, the background level of dioxins will be thousands of times higher.

Something like dumping salt into the sea.

If the Gunns mill is not built, not one tree will be spared as the contract will simply cut them down and sell them as chips to be made into paper by some one else with probably less pollution control.

If Gunns mill is stopped, the people in the Tamar valley lose, the country loses and the environment loses.

I also notice that no one has bothered to try and challenge me on the Tumut comparison as it would expose their double standards.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 26 September 2008 4:41:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Re the Tumut comparison - there are large eucalyptus plantations in the Tumut area (the mill uses 90% trees sourced from hardwood plantations). There are so many plantations being established that communities south of Tumut have been concerned about loss of population from forestry companies buying up farms and using the former farmland to establish new plantations.
My understanding of the Tasmanian situation is that ALL the timber which would be fed into the proposed Tamar pulp mill is old growth native timber.
Just a few points: 1) we need trees as carbon sinks and for the health of the environment generally (biodiversity etc) 2) making paper out of trees is incredibly wasteful, inefficient and energy-intensive. There are large numbers of plants (eg. flax, banna grass, rice) which have short growth cycles from which paper can be made. Paper can also be made from recycled clothing. Cloth-based paper is the highest quality paper there is. Acidic wood pulp paper falls apart within 50 years (ask any archivist). 3) Gunns probably haven't bribed any politicians - but there is the matter of influence. $53,000 may buy a lot of influence with a political party. See article here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/02/01/1838140.htm
Posted by Johnj, Friday, 3 October 2008 12:09:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Johnj

Thanks for proving my point.

Your comments on Tumut mill are so hopelessly inaccurate that as with most of the facts the green movement rely on it would appear to be mostly fabricated.

You said: "the mill uses 90% trees sourced from hardwood plantations"

Reality: The mill uses 100% softwood (pine) 40% of which is from off cuts of the saw mills.

The existing state forests have sufficient timber not only for the existing mill but also for the expansion which will nearly double the output. As the paper mill uses the young pine trees which are thinned out after 9 years to allow larger growth in others (high value), any new plantation is only viable if the majority of the wood goes to a saw mill.

The building of the Gunns mill won't result in one more tree being cut down compared to if it wasn't built. The difference is whether the chips are made into pulp in Australia or overseas.

Acidic paper hasn't been made for many decades, and as most paper is for packaging it would have little influence on the archivists.

Cloth based paper is the most expensive, not the best. Similarily the other plant products have been used for making paper, but the economics would at triple the cost the fibre.

Until the green movement bases its statements on facts rather than fantasy, they cannot be taken seriously.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 3 October 2008 9:08:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JohnJ

You really need to think through what you are saying and divorce yourself from your own prejudices when considering alernatives. It is a noble of you to offer to produce paper from different crops. But just think it through. If you used a crop such as rice or flax, how much cleared land would you require? How much chemicals would you need to pump into the system to allow these crops to survive ech year?

I am interested in your proof that making paper from trees is incredibly wasteful, inefficient and energy-intensive. For a start you don't have to have cleared land. Also, when you chop down a tree you don't release carbon from the tree. It stays with the wood product. And surprise surprise, it grows back again on its own accord. It is what is called renewable.

Then you claim Gunns buys influence with the governments. Again think this through. If Gunns did this to buy influence then it is money wasted as successive Govenments (State and Federal) have locked up over 1 million hectares of the most productive forests in Tasmania since 1985. Why would you bother donating money to influence governments when they totally ignore you and undermine your business?
Posted by tragedy, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 5:22:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy