According to a report in The Age (29/10/07), the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) wants to stop businesses making misleading claims to green credentials. A spokesman for the ACCC said that terms such as "environmentally friendly" which were associated with (real) green marketing in the past, were now being applied to corporate and government activities, among other things. The spokesman said "it was necessary to query whether these claims were too good to be true and whether they truly delivered?" If the ACCC is serious about this, it should have a close look at the claims made by Gunns in its advertising material about the proposed pulp mill in the Tamar Valley. Earlier this year Gunns circulated throughout Tasmania a 15 page document in which it made a raft of claims, including the following:
- The Bell Bay pulp mill will set a new global benchmark in environmental standards (page 5)
- The mill will have ? surplus green power for sale (page 5)
- Locating the mill at Bell Bay reduces truck movements on our roads and provides better social, environmental and economic outcomes (page 5)
- Wood residue from the chipping operation and additional forest wood waste will be used to produce green power? (page 5)
- Effluent treatment at the Bell Bay pulp mill will be state of the art and the equal or better than that of any other pulp mill in the world (page 6)
- The pulp mill design will ensure the best overall environmental outcome for the project and Tasmania (page 7)
- Independent experts confirm that the operation of the pulp mill will result in very significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (page 8)
There has been a huge amount of real "independent" scientific, medical, technical, environmental, economic and social expertise, from a range of professionals with no vested interests, that has challenged the credibility of Gunns' claims to such environmental credentials. The latest comes from scientists Andrew Wadsley and Stuart Godfrey, who state that dioxin limits in mill effluent into Bass Strait would be three times less stringent than world's best practice, achieved by mills in Canada and Sweden. (Australian, 29/10) www.theaustralian.news.com.au Surely there is a strong case for action by the ACCC in relation to all Gunns' claims about the environment, both marine and air shed, about sustainability of wood supply, about its logging quantities, its forest practices, impacts on water catchments and water flows, use of water at the mill, log transport, comparison with other mills, green power, design, greenhouse gases, best available technology?To contact the ACCC see www.accc.gov.au Peter
