Kraft Mill Health Impact

    The following paper was written by Dr. Scott Emerson, M.D. for the
Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.  It is reprinted in full with
permission by the author.

                IN THE WAKE OF JAMES RIVER

    Within the last decade our state lawmakers, business, financial
leaders, and planners have undertaken a major effort to attract and
expand the pulp and paper industry in Upper Michigan.  The chant of
jobs, jobs, jobs along with renewable resource justifications have been
logical and powerful arguments supporting this economic development
plan.  However, parallel with this effort over the last five to six
years a flurry of medical and scientific information has come to bear on
the pulp and paper industry’s significant health and environmental
problems.  Additionally, within the last five years our solid waste
dilemma, global deforestation and global warming, and our generally
deteriorating air and water quality have become major concerns
nationally while at the same time locally, recreation and tourism have
become big business and our unemployment rate has declined.  New
information and the realities of the 90′s, I feel, demand a new vision
along with a dramatic change and abandonment of the old pulp and paper
economic plan imagined for the U.P. by our leaders almost a decade ago.

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF BLEACHED KRAFT PROCESS

        Currently bleached Kraft (sulfate) chemical pulp mills make
    their product by converting trees into wood chips, digesting the
    wood chips into a pulp with sulfur containing chemicals (sodium
    sulfide) and caustics (sodium hydroxide) and then in a separate
    process bleaching the tan or brownish colored pulp white with
    chlorine gas or chlorine dioxide.  Large volumes of very hazardous
    material, (i.e. chlorine gas – easily as dangerous as low level
    radioactive waste) is transported via truck, rail, or ship to the
    chemical plant site.  Air, water, and land pollutants are produced
    both from the digestion process (sulfur compounds) and the bleaching
    process (organochlorines).  As pulp and paper mills have become more
    complex in recent years, accidental spills due to human error,
    automatic machine triggered spills, and deliberate dumps of
    pollutants have made up a significant component of mill effluents (1
    – Bonser, et. al.).  The accidental spills historically and
    typically go undetected for long periods of time (1).

RISK ASSESSMENT VS. EFFECT:  A TOXICOLOGIST’S PERSPECTIVE

        When politicians, regulatory agencies, media, business leaders
    and the general public look at the extremely complex health and
    environmental issues surrounding the location of a proposed huge new
    pulp and paper mill on Keweenaw Bay, it is important to understand
    two fundamentally different ways that scientists determine adverse
    impact.  Many studies can only be done by using risk assessment
    approaches with complex mathematical modeling extrapolating animal
    studies across specie lines to humans.  These studies usually only
    assess the risk of one disease like cancer, occurring.  These types
    of studies are the backbone upon which many decisions are made, but
    they are also removed from the complexities and dynamics of the real
    world.  The second type of study looks back at the actual observed
    effect of a given exposure on a population of humans and compares
    that to a very similar group of humans who have not had such
    exposure.  This latter type of study looks at the complexity of the
    real world much better.  It measures real effects and looks at
    multiple disease outcomes (i.e. cancer plus kidney failure,
    emphysema, neurologic problems) in real people in the exposed group.  
    This second type or, epidemiologic study, is generally considered
    much more accurate, powerful, and meaningful by scientists.

A NEW LOOK AT SOME HEALTH EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL PULP MILLS

        Two recent studies of this second type on paper industry workers
    (Henneberger 1989 and Schwartz 1988) both confirmed numerous other
    similar studies showing a significantly increased rate of
    gastrointestinal cancer (up to 3 times) and leukemia in these
    workers compared to their cohorts in the general population or in
    the sawmill and lumbering trades (2,3).  The studies’ authors
    collectively list at least 15 known suspected chemicals in the mills
    which could be triggering the increase in  cancer deaths, and the
    paper industry admits that there are probably a large number of as
    yet unidentified chemicals produced by the mills which may be
    contributing to these observed effects (9).  Further, a recent
    Finnish study in 1986 (Jappinen and Tola) compared lung cancer and
    coronary artery disease occurrence in two similar groups of
    cigarette smoking workers in the pulp and paper industry and sawmill
    workers.  There was an excess of observed lung cancer and coronary
    artery disease in the pulp and paper group (4).  In addition,
    Henneberger in his Harvard School of Public Health Study, discovered
    that non-smoking mill workers lost lung power as fast as if they
    smoked a pack of cigarettes per day for 20 years (9).  Further,
    Gottlieb in 1982 reported a definite increased occurrence of lung
    cancer in non-worker residents living for 10 years within a one mile
    radius of large (greater than 100 employees) Kraft pulp and paper
    mills.  Those persons living near lumber and sawmills and machine
    manufacturing plants showed no increased cancer (5). At least two
    groups of pollutants produced by the bleached Kraft mill process are
    high on the list as causes of these above observed real effects; the
    organochlorines and sulfur compounds.  There remain many
    unidentified others of uncertain toxicity.

DIOXIN IS BUT THE TIP OF THE ORGANOCHLORINE ICEBERG

        There is good evidence from frozen tissue and lake bed studies
    (Schecter et al and Czuczwa) that the organochlorine group of
    compounds has only recently within the last 30 or 40 years begun to
    build up in our bodies and environment (6).  The concern with this
    group of chemicals is that they tend to persist, once created, for
    long periods of time (years) and become concentrated in the food
    chain.  Bonser, et. al. in 1988 report a 500,000 to one million
    concentration factor from water to fish, and Stevens and Gerbec in
    1988 describe bio-concentration in milk produced from cows downwind
    from airborne release of these compounds (1, 7).  Infamous recent
    examples of this class of pollutant are DDT, PCB’s and chlordane.  
    2, 3, 7, 8 TCDD, or dioxin, currently the most talked about
    chlorinated organic is probably relatively unimportant for human
    toxicity compared to the thousands of as yet unknown and untested
    organochlorine compounds created and released into our environment
    daily by the pulp and paper industry (1).  Using best available
    current technology and strictly adhering to Michigan’s current
    environmental standards, the James River Corporation’s new bleached
    mill on Keweenaw Bay was projected to produce and release an
    additional 1.8 million pounds of these chlorinated compounds per
    year into the Lake Superior region.  The health and environmental
    effects of on going permitted accumulative low level releases of
    organochlorines into our environment remains at the frontier of
    science, but we definitely do know that this class of compounds
    historically has had a bad environmental and health record and that
    there are definite excessive unexplained real cancers in the pulp
    mill work environment and in surrounding areas where they are
    produced.

SULFUR COMPOUNDS: THAT URINE SOAKED NEWSPAPER AROMA

        Sulfur compounds produced and released by the pulp and paper
    industry include sulfur dioxide, methyl mercaptan, methyl sulfides,
    hydrogen sulfide, and perhaps others.  Sulfur dioxide, an acid rain
    gas, is thought by Henneberger to be the chronic low level pollutant
    responsible for the loss of lung power in mill workers mentioned
    earlier (2).  The sulfur class of pollutants are also considered
    possibly responsible for the tainting of drinking water and fish
    sometimes observed around pulp mills (1).  The cleaner the drinking
    water, the more easily tainted.  Recently, commercial fishing
    catches from Nipigon Bay near the Red Rock mill have been rejected
    for market sale because of "off" flavors (1).  When airborne, these
    same compounds are also responsible for the rotten egg or rotting
    cabbage odor typically noted by residents around pulp mills.  
    Hydrogen sulfide, or rotten egg gas, is heavier than air and causes
    eye and respiratory irritation at low concentration and becomes
    extremely toxic at higher concentration acting like cyanide as a
    respiratory poison (Ellenhorn) (7).

PHILOSOPHY AND OUR ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIC FUTURE

        The above brief discussion paints only a small part of the
    picture of total adverse impacts of building new chemical pulp and
    paper industries in northern Michigan.  Clearly though, things are
    not as rosy in this industry as some political and business leaders
    with narrow agendas have stated to many of us now shaping our future
    here.  Many, if not most, of us live in the Upper Peninsula because
    we like the quality of life it offers with abundant wildlife, clean
    air  and water and relatively low population density.  Many of us
    are asking with unemployment sharply down, how many more jobs and of
    what type does the U.P. really need?  Certainly we want some measure
    of economic security, but not at the expense of the primary values
    which keep us here.  in the future, the quality of our environment
    in northern Michigan will be our greatest calling card for the
    growing number of diverse small value added businesses now leaving
    industrialized urban areas.  The communication revolution has taken
    away the last incentive for living in an urban environment.  In
    contrast, continued expansion and concentration of economic and
    political power in the hands of a few very large pulp and paper
    companies spells danger for a balanced and stable U.P. economic
    future and furthermore, does not necessarily create the best type of
    jobs U.P. residents could have.

WHAT OUR LAWMAKERS SHOULD DO

    1.  The Swedish paper industry astutely recognizing the magnitude of
        the organochlorine problem and responding to increasing
        international market pressure for zero organochlorine production
        in their processes within the next 10 to 15 years (1).  Michigan
        should join this effort by declaring a moratorium on new
        construction on Kraft mills utilizing any chlorine bleaching
        process. This would be in keeping with the spirit of the
        International Joint Commission’s Great Lakes Water Quality
        Agreement, which Michigan has signed and reportedly supports.

    2.  Actively encourage the new construction of 100% recycled
        unbleached paper mills in our state located in geographic
proximity
        to the recycled fiber resource base.  Solid waste management is
        the growth industry for the 90′s and this would help solve our
        solid waste dilemma.  Pulping more and more trees, as opposed to
        paper recycling, contributes to our current landfill problems,
        deforestation, and global warming.

    3.  Give tax incentives and mandate retrofits of existing mills for
        oxygen delignification and high degrees of chlorine dioxide
        substitution.  This will decrease organochlorine emissions from
        existing mills (1).  Encourage Ontario, Wisconsin, and Minnesota
        to do the same.

    4.  Require the DNR to institute at least meaningful monitoring of
        pulp mill effluents.  Their current focus on the expensive and
        scientifically unsound measurement of concentration of only
        dioxin (one of thousands of organochlorines) in bleach Kraft
        mill effluents is misleading and of concern to those of us who
        pay the State to regulate this industry.  Total organochlorine
        loading in effluent or sediment per dry ton of bleached pulp is
        widely accepted as a more appropriate monitor.

    5.  Michigan should establish a long-term plan and goal for its
        forest management centered around converting and aggressively
        expanding its Northern hardwoods, red and white pine saw log
        acreage everywhere soils are of adequate quality.  Gradually
        through sustained selection cut and site conversion sometime in
        the next century, Michigan can once again achieve renown for its
        quality saw timber.  Global demand and price paid will be
        exceptionally high for this type of product, but will be much
        less for lower quality pulp wood.  Consistent with this long
        range investment, and inventory of our state forests’
        sustainable selection cut saw log capacity should immediately be
        made available to sawmill, lumbering, and furniture
        manufacturing firms accompanied by an aggressive campaign by the
        Michigan Department of Commerce to have them locate or re-locate
        in Upper Michigan.

    6.  Promptly redirect the $300,000 in taxpayer’s money currently
        being used by the Michigan Department of Commerce to attract
        further chemical pulp industry here into other economic
        development schemes which do not pose a direct threat to our
        tourism lure.  Improving our transportation systems (including
        air service) and attracting further recreational development for
        the Keweenaw is more appropriate than investment which
        facilitates bad air, bad water, chemical plants, and excessive
        clear cuts.  Most tourists have had enough of that at home.

THE CONSUMERS RESPONSIBILITY

        The consumer of paper products must bear significant
    responsibility for the environmental degradation caused by the pulp
    and paper industry because the industry typically responds with a
    product to meet our demands.  We can demand more unbleached paper
    products such as coffee filters, tissue and toilet paper, diapers,
    plates, towels, packaging, stationary, and computer paper.  We must
    ask, "Is a 90 brightness snow white quotient really essential for
    the function of these products considering the risk to our
    environment, food chain and health from the chlorine bleaching
    process?"  "Do we want to support more of our trees converted into
    the flood of high quality paper used in junk mail?"  We can
    participate in paper recycling efforts and demand and use recycled
    paper products.  Since paper now constitutes 39% of our solid waste
    stream, this will help resolve our current landfill dilemma
    statewide.  The state should aggressively support a public awareness
    campaign addressing these consumer issues.

Sincerely,

T. Scott Emerson, M.D., F.A.C.E.P.
– Assistant Clinical Professor
  Michigan State University, College of Human Medicine
– Co-Director Hyperbaric Medicine Program
  Marquette General Hospital
– Attending Staff Physician, Emergency Department
  Marquette General Hospital
– Board Certified Emergency Medicine
– Board Eligible Medical Toxicology
– Member of Michigan Forestry Association

                        REFERENCES

    1.  Bonsor, N., McCubbin, N., Sprague, J.:  Stopping Water Pollution
        at its Source, Kraft Mill Effluents in Ontario, a Municipal
        Industrial Strategy for Abatement.  April 1988, 260 page report.

    2.  Henneberger, P.K., Ferris, B.G., Monson, R.R.:  Mortality Among
        Pulp and Paper Workers in Berlin, New Hampshire.  British
        Journal of Industrial Medicine 46:  658-664, 1989.

    3.  Schwartz, E.:  A Proportionate Mortality Ratio Analysis of Pulp
        and Paper Mill Workers in New hampshire.  British Journal of
        Industrial Medicine 45:  234-238, 1988.

    4.  Jappinen, P., Tola, S.:  Smoking Among Finnish Pulp and Paper
        Workers – Evaluation of its Confounding Effect on Lung Cancer
        and Coronary Heart Disease Rates.  Scand J. Work Environment
        Health 12, pg. 619-626, 1986.

    5.  Gottlieb, M., Shear, C., Seal, D.:  Lung Cancer Mortality and
        Proximity to Industry.  Environmental Health Perspectives 45,
        pp. 157-164, 1982.

    6.  Schecter, A., Dekin, A., Weerasinghe, N,. Arghestani, S., Gross,
        M.:  Sources of Dioxins in the Environment: A Study of PCDP’s
        and PCDF’s in Ancient Frozen Eskimo Tissue.  Chemosphere; 17 (4)
        pg. 627-632, 1988.

    7.  Stevens, J.B., Gerbec, E.N.:  Dioxin in the Agricultural Food
        Chain.  Risk Analysis 8, pg. 329-335, 1988.

    8.  Ellenhorn, M., Barceloux, D.:  Medical Toxicology – Diagnosis
        and Treatment of Human Poisoning, 1987.

    9.  Holer, B.:  Interview with P.K. Henneberger.  Boston Globe,
        September 18, 1988.

        Thanx!              PEACE!!!                M E J E D W A
                        "Traditional Law"
As wild things walk in beauty on the earth, let us walk trails of faith
and brotherhood with nature heart by heart.  

Comments are closed.