8 DS SMITH ANDRITZ
Contamination costs where quality counts
Pulp Paper & Logistics
paper fibres to supply our paper mills which, in turn, feed our packaging plants. We’re one of Europe’s leading recyclers, managing more than five million tonnes of fibre every year. We need quality fibres to
D
power the DS Smith supply cycle. Our paper mills can only make paper from paper – not plastics, glass, metal, or any other recyclable material that can sometimes end up in paper and card recycling collections.
September/October 2017
Key to the production of high-quality paper products from recycled material cost-effectively is by ensuring that it is uncontaminated. Niels Flierman* explains the complexities in reaching such a goal
S Smith’s focus on quality recycling comes from its need to source clean
This is why we are strong advocates of the separation of recycling steams at the point of collection. Early segregation of recyclables gives us the best chance of ensuring the highest quality of fibres. Our closed-loop recycling
capabilities mean that, once a cardboard box is discarded, we can collect it through our Recycling Division, recycle it at our Paper Division’s mills, and then turn the recycled paper into new boxes at our Packaging plants – all within the DS Smith Group, and all within 14 days
of the discarded box being collected.
Dealing with contamination Contamination in paper recycling streams introduces a number of challenges to our production process. Some are straightforward impacts on production: glass in a bale of paper can break our mill machinery, for example, or plastics can be hard to separate out in the paper-making process, and then can get caught in moving machinery parts. That leads to downtime in our
production process while we remove the contaminant, which costs machine maintenance, work hours, and lost time. But there are also less immediate costs to be considered. Heavily-contaminated paper quite often cannot be recycled at all. In such cases, papers can end up in waste-to- energy, or even landfill. Not only do both these options fall further down the waste hierarchy than recycling, they can also result in added environmental and financial costs. So, contamination in paper for
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36
