Get to the bottom of the toilet paper controversy

March 19, 2009
By: Patrick Moore

Re: We don’t have to destroy our forests to get soft toilet paper, Issues & Ideas, March 11

Greenpeace’s Richard Brooks claims I should go to forestry school because I indicated — contrary to Greenpeace’s claims — that paper, including toilet paper, is made from the waste produced in sawmills.

Actually, I did go to forestry school. I have an honours B.Sc. in forestry and forest biology, a PhD in ecology and an honorary doctorate in science.

Instead, it’s Brooks who needs to better understand the facts. He misleads readers by claiming “60 per cent of the trees cut in Canada’s forests are sent directly to pulp mills to make soft toilet paper and other paper.”

Timber is measured by volume (cubic metres) or weight (tonnes), not by individual trees, as Brooks states. It is true that about 60 per cent of cut timber goes to pulp mills. That’s because it’s only possible to convert 40 to 60 per cent of a round, often imperfect log into square lumber. The remainder ends up as slabs, chips and sawdust. In addition, some of the logs and tree tops cut are not suitable for lumber. This waste wood is turned into paper products, including toilet paper, employing 52,000 people in pulp and paper mills across the country — there’s certainly nothing wrong with that.