Pulp Paper & Logistics


DS SMITH


recycling means: ● lost value in recycling revenues ● wasted journeys ● production downtime ● machine repairs ● higher production costs ● a valuable resource lost from the recycling process. These are not the only concerns.


Every time we have to reject material at a recycling depot or a mill because it is contaminated, there are added administration costs for the business and for our customers. Invoice queries, photographic evidence, the administration surrounding rejected tonnage – it all adds up. In paper mills, depending on their production capabilities, costs can run to many hundreds of thousands of pounds per year. It’s costly and inefficient for our customers to provide us with contaminated fibres, and it’s a complex problem to deal with, once we’ve discovered the contamination. In this case, prevention is clearly better than cure, so a focus on quality needs to be applied right at the start of the recycling process.


The benefits of separate collections Limiting the opportunity for contamination in recycling collections benefits our customers as well as our paper mills. Our customers will realise the full value of their material, and we receive clean fibre that we can put straight into our production processes. We can limit the impact of


contamination long before we start the physical paper-making process. Fibre that is separated from other materials at source has a much lower chance of being contaminated by any other materials. Mixing recyclables


together relies on effective and efficient sorting further down the line. Paper fibres are particularly


prone to contamination from other recyclables. Glass – especially when it shatters into small fragments – is a prime example. Food is another issue in paper fibre recycling streams, particularly oily and greasy food which can have a detrimental effect on the quality of the fibres. If recyclables are collected


already segregated, then the effort to unsort material streams is saved, and the likelihood is that the material will be of a higher quality.


But it’s not a perfect world In an ideal world, as recyclers, we would want all material to reach us free of contamination. In reality, dealing with contamination in recycling streams is an everyday occurrence. Segregating recycling streams at the point of collection does help to improve quality, but in truth, a myriad of variables can affect the quality of materials presented for recycling. So, once material for recycling


reaches us we deploy a robust quality monitoring system. We have a process of supply assessment that uses European


Paper Standard EN643 as a basis. Our teams work with our recycling customers and explain the requirements of the standard – and we constantly monitor material flows from our customers to ensure that only the right quality material is supplied to our mills.


A strategy for the future A reliable source of high-quality fibre is at the heart of our paper and packaging production. It plays a key role in DS Smith being a leading supplier of sustainable packaging to some of Europe’s biggest brands. Clean, uncontaminated material also leads to much greater production efficiency. It ensures that all paper intended for recycling


is actually recycled – not sent to energy-from-waste or landfill. And it ensures quick, efficient production processes with no downtime or machine damage. It also reduces the administrative, financial, and environmental burdens associated with contaminated material. Eliminating contamination is the


most sustainable solution – but it remains a challenge for the industry. To promote less contamination and greater efficiency, we need consistent collection methods. The industry and its stakeholders


must commit to a single standard – such as WRAP’s Framework for Greater Consistency for Household Recycling in England. Introducing a two-stream system (with food collected separately) means that all households would see paper and card collected as one stream, and plastic packaging, metals, glass and cartons are collected as a separate stream. This would help the efforts


to recover cleaner fibre from domestic recycling streams, thus easing the burden of contamination in the paper making process.


* Niels Flierman is operations


director at DS Smith Paper in the UK


September/October 2017


ANDRITZ 9


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