Apology required, Dickie. But you appear incapable of appreciating anyone’s argument other than your own.

You attempt to slur my integrity is not supported by the published account of the NTN remarks. I have not falsely claimed or manipulated anything.

The Lloyd Smith quote is from the Examiner article of her visit to Tasmania were she spoke at a wilderness society rally.

The Examiner article Warning over `deadly' toxins from pulp mill was dated Thursday, 2 March 2006

The article quoted her exactly and has never been challenged.

"In Victoria, in Lake Coleman, they found levels (of dioxins) in carp because they were exposed to effluent of an ECF pulp mill," she said.

The NTN lack of expertise in pulp mills is shown last year on the ABC AM program on 5th October 2007 when the transcript records:

“MARIANN LLOYD-SMITH: No, I certainly don't. I think it's very easy of people, just look at the Swedish pulp mills, which we know are world's best practice and it looks like the 47 Swedish pulp mills will now generate only 20 per cent more dioxin than Malcolm Turnbull is permitting Gunns to emit. So, certainly we would not consider it world's best practice in any form.

MARIANN LLOYD-SMITH: Sweden is where the world's best practice has been developed for pulp mills, and it comes in a form of a thing called a total chlorine-free pulp mill, which are functioning very, very successfully. They don't use chlorine and they don't use chlorine dioxide.”

The 47 Swedish mills is from a private submission to the Federal Minister opposing the mill’s approval that states: “Of the 47 Swedish pulp mills, 22 produce bleached kraft pulp and 19 of these use ECF bleaching processes and 2 use TCF bleaching processes with 1 employing both ECF and TCF processes”

As your link to the NTN publication shows ECF is a process that uses chlorine dioxide in its bleaching process. Like the majority of bleached kraft mills in Sweden, the Tasmanian mill will also be world's best practice ECF.

Cinders

It's clearly evident that the Examiner has misquoted Lloyd-Smith by their inclusion of “ECF” in their article. I have provided you with Lloyd-Smith’s own article where that term is not mentioned. Nor is it mentioned in the National Dioxin Programme from which she was quoting or the subsequent submission by Lee Bell.

Furthermore you will realise that the entire statement was not her assertion but that of the NDP.

You are quoting from the joint submission by Drs Godfrey, Raverty and Wadsley when you state : “Of the 47 Swedish pulp mills, 22 produce bleached kraft pulp and 19 of these use ECF bleaching processes and 2 use TCF bleaching processes with 1 employing both ECF and TCF processes.”

Unfortunately, you omitted the sentence subsequent to that: “The Swedish dioxin load, as well as similar results for British Columbia and Quebec, show that the 3.4 pg TEQ/L limit proposed (Gunns) is about 4 times higher than the Swedish average and therefore clearly not world's best practice.”

I can understand your confusion over Lloyd-Smith’s seemingly ambiguous statement on her praise of Sweden’s TCF technology.

I am of the opinion that there are six plants employing TCF and 2 plants which employ both ECF and TCF with the balance being ECF so perhaps we are all confused.

However, I understand Lloyd-Smith was referring to production rates and the stringent regulatory standards for MPLs in Sweden and according to the following link, in Sweden, 42% of production was TCF by 2002.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:2b7RWhD7NXgJ:findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5371/is_200210/ai_n21323638+total+chlorine+free+sweden+42%25+production&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=au&lr=lang_en

The regulatory system in Sweden is far more stringent than Australia’s pro-industry third world standards.

One would have hoped that in the 21st century, Gunns would have employed the MACT (Maximum Available Control Technology) where the obligation for analytical testing and reporting would have been significantly reduced and the bun fight would have ceased.

I regret that I have cast aspersions on your integrity Cinders, however, providing links to one’s claims (which you did not) often mitigates the need for challege though I can be a nasty old tart at times eh?

Apologies for highjacking (corrupting?) Mark's thread!

No one seems to have pointed out the obvious flaws in the article by Mark Poynter. The proposition that forests in Australia are sustainably managed is, unfortunately, simply not true. The article states this fallacy a number of times and relies on it as key supporting evidence. I'm no greeny and I have no doubt that there are many holes in the arguments made by the Wilderness Society and others on this subject. However, the forestry profession needs to get off its high horse of sustainable management and take a more serious, in depth and historical look at forestry in Australia. I feel I am reasonably qualified to make these comments as I have a BSc(Forestry) from ANU and have closely followed forestry and the environmental debate for over 30 years.

I too share Dickie’s regret in him making false claims about my integrity and honesty. He blames a newspaper story for a misquote and me for not providing a link for his mistake.

A simple Google search on “Lloyd Smith pulp mill” reveals a copy of that story at http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=53299 where ECF is ‘misquoted’ at least 4 times.

Dickie confirms, as he attempts to defend, all points about the NTN, he identifies Lee Bell as BA MA, that Dr Lloyd Smith is a lawyer not a doctor of medicine, and exposes her claim that all Swedish mills are TCF.

Before returning to the topic, let’s record the following facts: 95% of the world’s bleached kraft pulp capacity is ECF, as approved in Tasmania. So too is 73.3% of Sweden’s bleached kraft pulp.

For accurate information on the issue of ECF or TCF check table 2.9 and section 4.2 of http://www.aet.org/science_of_ecf/eco_risk/beca.pdf

The NTN has argued for TCF and dismissed ECF despite reports that “The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) considers the ECF and TCF bleaching methods to be equivalent with respect to their potential formation of PCDD and PCDF.” (ENSIS- CSIRO)

When ECF or TCF bleaching technologies are used, “the concentrations of dioxins and furans in the effluents are below the detection limits” (World Bank)

“PCDD and PCDF emissions in ECF and TCF effluents are about the same” (Beca Amec)

Even the Chief Scientist was “impressed by the technical and engineering advances that have been made in the design and operation of Elemental Chlorine Free pulp mills.”

He accepted that the proposed mill was likely to conform to world’s best practice.

He was able to do because in 2004 the RPDC issued world class guidelines that included Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards. [Dickie’s own prerequisite for a mill]

To get back to topic, the pulp mill will save over a million tonnes of CO2 emissions each year by reducing shipping, using renewable power and regenerating harvested regrowth forest and plantations. No old growth forest, the ‘carbon banks’ of these ANU papers will be used.

Mark,

Do you realise the hornets next you have stepped on by challenging the latest myths pushed by people who are fundamentally opposed to any tree in a native forest being cut for any purpose? Over the years I have read that the cessation of native forest logging is the cure of most of Australia's environmental and other ills including, but not limited to:
- ensuring Melbourne has sufficient drinking water (no desalination plant or pipeline needed).
- saving all threatened species as logging, not frequent catastrophic wildfires, is the only real threat.
- eliminate the risk of wildfire as undisturbed forests don't burn.
- stop global warming
- stop the spread of the Bairnsdale ulcer.
- reduce the incidence of depression.
- stop the unnecessary release of toxins such as dioxins.

The word limit stops me from giving a complete list.

Tonight I have read that stopping logging will restore the level of fine particles emitted by eucalypt forests, that are a key ingredient to the formation of raindrops. By implication, stopping native forest logging will end the drought.

On that basis, it is time for all practicing foresters to find another job and leave the management of our precious native forests to the know all celebrities, lawyers, pseudo scientists et al. I know the forests deserve better, but so do Australia’s foresters.

Cinders

I've retracted my apology to you. Not only do you remain off topic, you continue to mischievously peddle misinformation.

I'm far from qualified to lecture anyone on ambiguity in language, however, since your skills appear even more inadequate than mine, I offer you an example of your failure to understand Lloyd-Smith’s statement:

1 When he knocked on the door, the landlady came downstairs in a night-dress and opened it for him.

“Sweden is where the world's best practice has been developed for pulp mills, and it comes in a form of a thing called a total chlorine-free pulp mill, which are functioning very, very successfully. They don't use chlorine and they don't use chlorine dioxide.”

Hellooooooooo Cinders!

2. “ECF” is “MISQUOTED” four times, Cinders? Where is the relevance to Lloyd-Smiths statement: “One 1994 Australian study cited in the National Dioxin Program reported results for the analysis of carp samples from Lake Coleman which received effluents from a treated pulp and paper mill with concentration in the 4 carp samples….”

3. “ Dickie confirms, as he attempts to defend, all points about the NTN, he identifies Lee Bell as BA MA,”

Manipulation of my statement again Cinders? Obviously you have no idea what the letters “ESD” mean. Letters which you have selectively omitted!

4. “Dr Lloyd Smith is a lawyer not a doctor of medicine, and exposes her claim that all Swedish mills are TCF.”

Oh yeah? "All," Cinders? Link please and how's that Pinocchio nose of yours doin'?

5. “He was able to do because in 2004 the RPDC issued world class guidelines that included Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards. [Dickie’s own prerequisite for a mill].”

"MACT" for Gunns, Cinders? Links please and oops - I see your nose has grown another inch already!

6. “PCDD and PCDF emissions in ECF and TCF effluents are about the same” (Beca Amec.)

Well franky my dear I don’t give a damn. Go tell someone else!

You're a well known activist for Gunns Cinders, which could explain why they're on the nose - errrrrr....ahem!