American Society of International Law; Center for Human Rights and Environment; International Court of Justice; IFC; Inter Press Service News Agency; Latin Business Chronicle; Reuters; World Bank Group
Last week,
The Argentine protests began in early 2005 after Botnia, a Finnish paper company, received authorization from the government of
Both cellulose mills will utilize the kraft process of extracting pulp with sulphate. Approximately 95% of all wood pulp is manufactured through this process, which entails boiling wood chips in a caustic soda to create a strong, brown-colored pulp. The pulp is then bleached, in order to remove the brown-tinted lignin, using chlorine or chlorine dioxin, sodium hypochloride, and oxygen peroxide. The byproducts of this bleaching process are the main cause for alarm among opponents of the mills. Traditionally, the bleaching process used chlorine as the primary agent—today this method is used in approximately 20% of pulp production—which produces high levels of organochlorines (dioxins and furans). These compounds are two of twelve POP (Persistent Organic Pollutants) designated by the Stockholm Convention as being highly toxic to living organisms. Consequently, the majority of pulp mills in operation today use an alternative bleaching process, known as ECF. The proposed mills in Uruguay will use this method. The Elemental Chlorine Free (ECF) process—used in nearly 75% of all wood pulp—significantly reduces the amount of organochlorides produced. (A third process, Totally Chlorine Free (TCF), was recently developed and accounts for only 5% of all wood pulp manufactured; it is currently disfavored because it is cost prohibitive and creates an inferior product.)
The estimated cost of Celulosa de M’Bopicua (CMB), ENCE’s proposed mill, is US$ 600 million; it will produce 500 thousand tons of wood pulp annually. ENCE halted construction last month after deciding to move its mill to another region of Uruguay. Botnia’s mill, Orion, is projected to cost nearly US$ 1.2 billion and produce one million tons of pulp per year. Together, the two pulp mills represent the largest foreign investment in
Despite Argentina's continuing resistance to the project, Uruguayans welcome the pulp mills (local polls indicate only 16% public disapproval). Earlier this year,
Meanwhile, a World Bank study conducted by independent researchers supports Uruguay's position. The final cumulative impact study, released on
Questions:
Argentina has ten older-generation pulp mills; once completed, the two new mills in Uruguay, designed to use cleaner technology, will produce more than twice the total output of Argentina's ten mills. To what extent is Argentine opposition motivated by economic rivalry in addition to (or rather than) environmental concerns? (Argentina's environmental record is worse than Uruguay's: Euromonitor reports Argentine daily organic water pollutant emissions are more than seven times Uruguay's emissions rate.) Will Argentina generate its own environmental fact-findings to counter the EcoMetrix reports? If the roles in this conflict were reversed, would Uruguay have the economic or political ability to intervene in Argentina's economic development plans? How should a country balance its interests in increased employment and economic growth against environmental interests? What if the environmental interests are those of a foreign coutntry?
No comments:
Post a Comment