No social acceptance
The majority of Australians are opposed to the pulp mill. A recent poll showed that 61% of Australians strongly oppose Gunns' pulp mill.

Impact on Human Health
The Tamar Valley which is home to over 100,000 people and is the site Gunns has chosen, has an inversion layer for a large part of the year which traps air pollution and odour in the valley. This has lead to major health problems from existing sources of air pollution. The Tamar Valley is recognised as having some of the lowest standards of air quality in Australia.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) Tasmanian branch says the pulp mill ‘could cause an increase in the already existing morbidity and mortality from atmospheric pollutants'.

Site selection
CSIRO pulp mill expert Dr Warwick Raverty, who was on the board of the government-accredited assessment of the pulp mill, has said that Gunns chose the ‘worst place possible' in Tasmanian to build the pulp mill.

• The pulp mill site is approximately six kilometres away from the Bell Bay industrial zone but within two kilometres of local residents, vineyards and organic farms.
• Until recently the pulp mill site was a nature conservation area. That status was removed by the state government to allow the project to proceed, despite Aboriginal artifacts and endangered species being present.
• An alternative site next to Gunns' own plantation estate exists at Hampshire in north-west Tasmania.

Economic impact
Independent research has shown that Gunns' proposed pulp mill would be bad for the economy and employment in Tasmania. -readmore-

• The Tasmanian Roundtable for Sustainable Industries (TRSI) found the pulp mill will cost 1220 jobs in tourism and the fishing industry while Gunns has indicated the pulp mill will only create 280 jobs.
• Dr Peter Brain from the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) found the most likely impact of the mill on the Tasmanian economy over 20 years would be negative $0.3 billion, not the positive $3 billion claimed by Gunns. In a separate report, NIEIR found that "if anything goes wrong with the mill the maximum cumulative Tasmanian consumption loss is estimated at -$3 billion'.
• Naomi Edwards (retired actuary and former partner with Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu) found that Gunns' consultants Allens only addressed potential economic benefits but did not address potential economic costs; did not consider the broader economic implications of the pulp mill; and did not consider the opportunity cost implications of the pulp mill.
• The Federal Government Environmental Economics Unit found that "Gunns do not measure nor take account of such impacts that can not be immediately identified as potentially impacting on the total effect of the investment". The Australian (September 2007) ‘Gunns investors having doubts’.
  
• Dr Graeme Wells of Wells Economic Analysis found that the economic benefits of the pulp mill had been overstated and provided a critical analysis of information ignored by Gunns consultants (Allen Consulting Group) in their Economic Impact Assessment Report. This report was commissioned by The Wilderness Society.

Forest destruction
At full capacity, Gunns' proposed pulp mill would consume 4.5 million tonnes of wood every year, 4 million tonnes for pulping and 0.5 million tonnes for burning to generate electricity in a wood fired power station. At start-up Gunns' have indicated that 80% of this wood will be sourced from Tasmania's native forests (Gunns Ltd, 2006 Bell Bay Pulp Mill, Integrated Impact Statement). This would lead to accelerating the destruction of irreplaceable native forests, which grow slower than plantations and are harvested at an unsustainable rate (Dr Chris Beadle. The pulp mill: the forgotten issue is wood supply). Over 25 years, the pulp mill will lead to the destruction of at least 200,000 hectares of irreplaceable native forests.

Clearfell logging is carried out in Tasmania. Areas that have been logged are then burnt in high-intensity fires to remove wood waste. After logging has occurred on private land native wildlife is poisoned with 1080 to stop them feeding on the regrowing seedlings. Many endangered species will be driven closer to extinction by the pulp mill such as the Tasmanian devil, the giant freshwater lobster, the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle and the spotted-tail quoll. -readmore-

The IUCN, the expert international conservation body, says of Tasmania's unprotected native forests that:

• There is a clear body of evidence that there are areas which may have potential to demonstrate outstanding universal value which are outside the existing boundary of the (World Heritage Area);
• It would be desirable that a moratorium on logging activity in areas of potential outstanding universal value be considered, as logging in these areas would foreclose the option of adding these areas to the (World Heritage Area).

The 21-country strong World Heritage Committee recently resolved that the Federal Government should "consider, at its own discretion, extension of the (World Heritage Area) to include appropriate areas of tall eucalypt forest, having regard to the advice of IUCN".

There has been NO assessment by either the state or federal government of the impact Gunns' proposed pulp mill would have on Tasmania's forests. Despite claims by Gunns that it will not use oldgrowth logs in the pulp mill, there are no impediments to this in either the state or federal government approvals, in legislation, or in the wood supply deal with Forestry Tasmania.

Climate Change

Research by the Australian National University has shown that Tasmania's native forests are some of the richest stores of greenhouse gases on the planet. Tasmania's forests can contain up to 1200 tonnes of carbon per hectare.

Highly conservative estimates show that native forest logging to supply the pulp mill will cause emissions of 10 Mt CO2 per annum, equivalent to increasing Australia's total greenhouse gas emission by 2% (The Green Institue, www.greeninstitute.com.au).

Scientific evidence shows that native forests are carbon sinks which continue to sequester carbon for up to 800 years. Research published in Nature "old-growth forests accumulate carbon for centuries and contain large quantities of it. We expect, however, that much of this carbon, even soil carbon, will move back to the atmosphere if these forests are disturbed." Scientific evidence is now clear: native forests should not be disturbed by logging due to the huge amount of carbon they store and the ongoing role they play in sequestering carbon.

Pollution
Each day the pulp mill will discharge 64,000 tonnes of effluent containing dioxins and furans — some of the deadliest substances known to science — into Bass Strait, endangering marine life (Bottle-nosed Dolphins, Australian Fur Seals and Fairy Penguins) and the Tasmanian fishing industry.

The pulp mill would consume 26 billion litres (Gl) of water annually, which cannot be recycled, due to the chlorine bleaching process to be used by the mill.

The mill would heavily pollute the air in the nearby urban area. The Australian Medical Association has warned that the mill’s emissions will cause increased deaths in the already polluted Tamar Valley.

Following Gunns' abandonment of the independent assessment fast-track approval legislation was forced through parliament by former Tasmanian Premier Paul Lennon. That legislation contained section 11 which removes people's fundamental rights. It reads Section 11. Limitation of rights of appeal:

1. Subject to subsection (2) and notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act -(a) a person is not entitled to appeal to a body or other person, court or tribunal; or (b) no order or review may be made under the Judicial Review Act 2000; or (c) no declaratory judgment may be given; or (d) no other action or proceeding may be brought - in respect of any action, decision, process, matter or thing arising out of or relating to this Act.
2. Subsection (1) does not prevent a review of any action, decision, process, matter or thing which has involved or has been affected by criminal conduct. (3) No review under subsection (2) operates to delay the issue of the Pulp Mill Permit or any action authorized by that permit.

Aboriginal heritage and values
The Tasmanian Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (TALSC) and the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre (TAC) officially oppose the proposed pulp mill because of its impacts on Aboriginal culture and heritage. These impacts to important heritage sites will occur at both the proposed pulp-mill site on the Tamar River and in the forests that will be logged to feed the mill.

The Tasmanian Aboriginal community also opposes the mill because of the impacts of the mill's effluent on the marine environment around the Bass Strait islands officially recognised as Aboriginal land. This includes toxic impacts on species traditionally hunted on and around the islands. Along with many other Tasmanians, Aboriginal Tasmanians condemn the atrocious community consultation and lack of proper assessment of the proposed pulp mill and its impacts.

The entire assessment and licensing process has been plagued by factual misrepresentations by Gunns and undue pressure from the Tasmanian government to 'fast-track' the project's approval. The state legislation enabling the fast-tracking of the permit for the Gunns pulp mill includes a Section 11 preventing any person from challenging the legality of the permit in the courts, which is claimed to be legally invalid and without parallel in modern democratic legislation (The Australian, 16 August 2008).