Bell Bay Pulp Mill
[6][7] The proposed mill is to use the Kraft process, with Elemental Chlorine Free[8] bleaching,[9] and it is claimed it is to be fed with 100 per cent plantation grown eucalyptus feed stock, having a production capacity of 1.1 million tonnes per annum of Air Dried pulp.
The Wesley Vale project was to be a kraft mill and was also subject to local opposition due to its use of elemental chlorine as the main bleaching chemical, which was a convention of that time.
As a result of the failure of the Wesley Vale project, a major series of scientific studies termed the National Pulp Mills Research Program[10] was commissioned by the Commonwealth Government to support an update and strengthening of the Australian guidelines for this industry sector.
The State commissioned research that reported the project will generate $6.7 billion in spending over 25 years and create up to 1600 temporary jobs during the construction phase.
[15] A report by Naomi Edwards, Economics Adviser to Australian Greens Leader Bob Brown has questioned the financial viability of the proposed Tamar Valley pulp mill.
[16][17] A January 2008 report commissioned by The Wilderness Society estimated the Bell Bay Pulp Mill may run at a $300 million loss to Tasmania.
[19] The company has released statements (on numerous occasions – 2008,[9] 2009[20] and 2010[21]) that it was in negotiations with several partners to secure financial backing for the proposed pulp mill.
[29] In early March 2011, following a one-week delay after Gunns contacted his department the day prior to the deadline requesting tougher environment standards,[30] the Federal Environment Minister, Tony Burke, gave the final approval for the Gunns' proposed pulp mill, on the basis of tougher environmental conditions requested by the company itself.
In September 2006, a protest rally against the proposed pulp mill was held in Launceston with speakers, included Greens politician Christine Milne and TV gardener Peter Cundall.
[40] Protesters listened and watched outside parliament as the Tasmanian Greens attempted a last-ditch bid to revoke a law allowing Gunns to build the $2.3 billion pulp mill in the Tamar Valley.
It failed when Labor and the Liberals joined to vote down the bill to repeal the Pulp Mill Assessment Act, which was fast-tracked through Parliament in 2007.
[58] Professor Quentin Beresford from Perth WA has written an academic paper citing the Lennon government's approval of the Gunns pulp mill in Tasmania as a case study to illustrate the notion of institutional corruption.
[59] Gunns sued 20 environmental organisations and individuals for some $6 million in the days preceding the announcement of its plans to build a pulp mill in the Tamar Valley.
[62] The integrated process as then described by Gunns had not been approved by the United Nations Environment Programme as Accepted Modern Technology (AMT) for this purpose and therefore was inconsistent with Tasmanian guidelines.
The "integrated" design for chlorine dioxide generation was not selected by Gunns to proceed as it was effectively prevented from implementation by the State Permit (Condition 3GN9.1).
Raverty resigned from the now defunct Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC) panel on the mill, citing undue political interference.
This new tough stance coincided with further splits emerging between Tasmanian environmental groups over the failure to halt logging in all high-conservation-value forests in an immediate moratorium.
