Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, an international chemicals expert, said the federal Environment Minister was using World Bank standards, applied to projects in developing countries, as the benchmark for world's best practice.
"He is comparing Tasmania's pulp mill with projects in developing countries and there are mills in Sweden that have higher standards," Dr Lloyd-Smith said. "If you are comparing it to a World Bank standard, any argument about world's best practice goes down the drain."
The World Bank supports and funds projects in developing countries and last year approved funding for two controversial pulp mills in Uruguay.
Dr Lloyd-Smith, co-ordinator of the National Toxics Network and a pulp mill opponent, said there was no set of world standards for mills.
"It is a political throwaway line that gets used all the time and means nothing," she said.
Dr Warwick Raverty, a pulp and paper scientist, also criticised Mr Turnbull's label. "I think with regard to the marine discharge limits (of dioxins in effluent), he is correct in saying they are the tightest in the world.
"But across the board, it is highly questionable to say it is world's best practice."
Gunns will have to limit dioxin levels in effluent at 13 picograms per litre of effluent.
But, while many pulp mills in Sweden and Canada imposed the same limits, in practice they had reduced operating levels to only one picogram per litre, Dr Raverty said.
Petroleum engineer Dr Andrew Wadsley also criticised the separate limit of 850 picograms of dioxins per kilogram of sediment.
"That is definitely not world's best practice," Dr Wadsley said.
No comments:
Post a Comment