See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338950201

WheatStraw-TAPPI

Article  in  Tappi · January 2020

DOI: 10.32964/TJ19.1.41

CITATIONS READS

0 211

1 author:

Peter W. Hart
WestRock Company
146 PUBLICATIONS   635 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Writing Brownstock Washing Textbook...tentative date Sept 2017 View project

Peroxide Explosions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Peter W. Hart on 31 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 PEER-REVIEWED NONWOOD PULPING

Wheat straw as an
alternative pulp fiber
PETER W. HART

ABSTRACT: The desire to market sustainable packaging materials has led to an interest in the use of various
fiber types as a raw material. It has been suggested that the use of annual crops for partial replacement of wood
fiber would result in more sustainable products. Several life cycle analyses (LCA) have been performed to evaluate
these claims. These LCAs provided conflicting and contradictory results because of the local conditions and the spe-
cific pulping processes investigated. Selected LCAs are reviewed and the underlying reasons for these conflicting
results are analyzed.
Of all the agriculturally sourced annual fibers available, other than wood, only straw pulp is currently available in
commercial quantities. A careful review of the available data suggests that neither an annual crop nor wood are
more sustainable in general. Countries that allow burning of straw after harvest present a unique situation. Each sit-
uation needs specific and direct comparisons that are not generally available. The use of straw fiber in place of wood
fiber does not appear to present any advantages to either the environmental impact of production or to the final
product quality. The impact of substitution of straw fiber for hardwood pulp in bleached board applications and for
high yield pine in linerboard applications has been examined in handsheet studies. In general, the partial substitu-
tion of straw pulp for wood pulp does not improve the handsheet physical properties. These studies suggest that
straw pulp should be used in low fiber strength requirement applications, such as tissue and molded fiber products.
Commercial progress of straw pulping by Kimberly-Clark and Essity in low fiber strength requirement applications is
a sign that the nonwood fiber opportunity has growth potential.
Application: As a routine part of sustainability and new product efforts, fiber from wheat straw was evaluated
as a potential partial replacement for hardwood kraft fiber. Sufficient technical gaps in the areas of availability, pulp-
ing and bleaching, transportation and storage, and physical strength properties remain, making the use of this mate-
rial suitable only for specialty niche markets at this time. No clear-cut sustainability advantage of using an annual
fiber was determined for this product.

A s part of the sustainability efforts in the paper indus-

try, periodic reviews of alternative fiber applications
are performed. These fibers are evaluated for their poten-
associated with the use of annual crop-based fibers as a re-
placement for wood pulp [2-6]. Unfortunately, the environ-
mental impacts of sourcing fiber from wood or nonwood re-
tial incorporation into the existing fiber mix and for their sources are not directly comparable because of the local
potential for opening new or improved market segments. environments, the processes employed, and the end use of
Over the last few years, there has been a significant the products. Nonwood fiber from wheat straw is attractive
increase in the potential use of annual crop-based fiber as a partial hardwood substitute where pulp mills have lim-
as a component of packaging, based upon the allure of ited hardwood supply [7]. Many of the challenges with use of
a more sustainable packaging material. Customers have straw pulp arise from the need to store a whole year’s supply
made inquiries about wheat straw, bamboo, Arundo, flax, from a single harvest season without substantial yield losses
bagasse, and hemp fibers. Of these fibers, only straw due to decay or fires [8]. Transportation of material to the mill
is currently available in commercially viable quantities. has been claimed to have both positive and negative environ-
Hemp, Arundo and bamboo would need to be cultivated mental impact [8]. Environmental impact from both wood
near mill sites in order to be viable as a wood fiber alter- and nonwood sources are mostly a result of the pulping pro-
native [1]. The commercial availability of these fibers will cess, followed by the pollution generated by resources used
depend on the value proposition presented to the farming to collect the fiber. Pulping chemicals are recovered and re-
community. All these fibers still exhibit several commer- used with high efficiency with wood pulp, and energy is gen-
cial and physical property deficiencies that need to be erated for running the mill in this process, but recovery pro-
overcome before they will be accepted into the current cesses are usually not available to nonwood mills. Some straw
fiber mix for packaging solutions as more than a mere pulping processes lose pulping chemicals as part of a byprod-
niche product. uct plant nutrient (sometimes called low grade fertilizer).
Some of the perceived improvements in sustainability have Other processes use low efficiency recovery processes such
been bolstered by a proliferation of claims and certifications as a Copeland process or a combined heat and energy process.
JANUARY 2020 | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 41
NONWOOD PULPING
Often, the difference between the high efficiency kraft pulp- made in the pulping processes, as reviewed below. An exam-
ing and recovery process and the lower efficiency straw pro- ple of this type of analysis is a study done for the World Busi-
cess is ignored in life cycle analysis (LCA) assessments. ness Council for Sustainable Development by the Internation-
The intensive use of fertilizer for nonwood fiber cultivation al Institute for Environment and Development, which
has often been used as a negative comparison with wood concluded that the use of nonwood fibers results in more pol-
fiber. A counter argument has been that, since straw is a crop lution and is less environmentally friendly than the use of al-
residue, fertilizer was used for the production of food and not most all species of wood fiber [12].
for production of straw. An advantage of using crop residues,
particularly wheat straw, is a reduction in the amount that NGOs and political action groups
would be burned at the end of the season. The use of straw As a result of the multiple LCAs with a variety of local condi-
pulping chemicals to produce black liquor to be used as a fer- tions, several different groups have attached significant sus-
tilizer for crops is an added benefit for farming and a neces- tainability claims to the use of annual crop-based fibers. Many
sity for the pulp mill. The installation of mini-mills to serve of the arguments by non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
local communities provides a source of additional income for and political action groups in favor of the use of nonwood
farmers, new employment, and relief from pollution gener- fiber focus on unsustainable harvesting of old growth boreal
ated by burning excess straw in the field. Burning of straw is forests, primarily softwoods [13-18]. Counter arguments by
being banned in more and more locations, thus removing this the pulp and paper industry focus on the need for valuing and
advantage of straw fiber from an LCA accounting. managing forest lands for sustainable production of fiber, lest
these forests are cleared for range or crop lands [19-23].
Life cycle analyses of straw pulp
There are a plethora of life cycle analyses (LCAs) for straw Paper-based consumer products using crop-
pulp available in the literature [9]. The LCAs are highly depen- based fiber
dent upon the choice of fiber source for comparison and A database on paper-based consumer products with environ-
where exactly the boundary conditions of the analysis are mental benefits, including annual crop-based fiber content, is
drawn. As a result, it is easy to produce an LCA that is heavily available [14]. For example, Kimberly-Clark has created the
biased towards annual crop fibers such as straw [3]. Many of GreenHarvest tissue product line with 20% nonwood fiber
the LCAs performed for multiple nonwood fibers have indi- from straw and bamboo pulp production integrated with the
cated that straw is the most sustainable of the nonwood fibers Mobile Mill [24]. Some reports have claimed that paper made
[7]. Often, the comparison is strongly biased by comparing from straw fiber has equivalent or enhanced physical proper-
local, unbleached high yield straw pulp as a partial replace- ties compared to that made with wood pulp, but most com-
ment for fully bleached Canadian boreal softwood being trans- mercial nonwood fiber applications have been in products
ported to Alabama, rather than locally sourced plantation like molded fiber and tissue where fiber strength has not been
wood [3]. Other analyses devalue the fertilizer demand com- a significant requirement. Essity (formerly SCA), a major tissue
ponent of straw production by stating the fertilizer will be producer in Europe, recently announced licensing a propri-
required for wheat regardless of the straw utilization [8]. Sev- etary wheat straw pulping process to also make products with
eral of the LCAs do not account for the highly efficient regen- 20% nonwood fiber [25]. Most straw processes produce a yel-
eration and reuse of pulping chemicals and energy associated low/tan colored fiber that would result in a speckled or low
with wood pulping, thus artificially increasing the cost and brightness product when mixed with bleached wood fiber.
impact of wood pulping. Since kraft pulping results in 96% This type of visual product is not deemed acceptable for cur-
(older) to 98.5% (newer) recovery of pulping chemicals and a rent U.S. tissue markets.
significant generation of power from biomass sources (black
liquor), the pulping and recovery cycle must be included in STRAW PULPING PROCESSES
any believable assessment. Table I gives a summary of various wheat straw pulping
LCA analyses can also be skewed against straw pulping. methods. This table provides the active cooking chemicals,
Some LCA studies have unfairly employed data from older process operating temperatures, retention times, expected
pulping methods, with examples primarily from China, for process yields, and specific processing issues that need to be
example, using caustic to pulp straw to a 30% yield in order considered when proposing one of these processes. General
to produce a kraft pulp substitute but one that drains poorly discussion of selected processes will be provided in this sec-
and results in extensive organic carryover into the bleach tion as well as the combined table of pulping operations.
plant and to the environment. China has been consistently
shutting down these types of straw and bagasse pulp mills Traditional caustic pulping process
due to inefficiency and high levels of pollution [10,11]. Life Straw pulp has been a staple of the Chinese pulp and paper
cycle analyses comparing wood and nonwood pulp produc- industry for several decades. During the first 5 Year Plan, the
tion largely rely on data from outdated nonwood mills in Asia Chinese government actively and aggressively supported
that do not have the benefit of improvements currently being straw pulping. Over the last several years, straw pulping has
42 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020
 NONWOOD PULPING

Fiber Yield,
% Applied on O.D. Temperature, Time, Processing
Process Chemical % on o.d.
Biomass °C min Issues
biomass

Soda NaOH 12–16 145–165 90–240 30–45

Extremely poor drainage; diffi-
NaOH 12–16 cult to wash; high silica content
Soda-AQ 145–165 70–120 35–45
AQ 0.03 in black liquor results in recov-
ery difficulties.
Kraft NaOH+Na2S 12–16 145–165 70–180 35–50
Na2CO3 23–25
MgCO3 1 Expected to use a recovery
NACO 135 90–120 40–45 process to remove silica and
NaOH 6–8 recycle the Na2CO3.
O2 8 Bar Pressure
Lime
CaO 7–10 130–140 180-300 30–35 Paper machine scale is likely.
process
Na2SO3 8 Mainly suitable for medium
NSSC 170 120 52–55
Na2SO3 2–3 grades.

Estimated at about
Columbia River represents
5%–10% based on
55–60 first commercial installation,
assertion that process Uses twin
(if coproduct is which is behind schedule. Care
Phoenix NH3OH or KOH uses 25% of virgin 90–98 screws for
included, yield is required for a commercial
chemical hardwood processing.
is 95%–110%) evaluation, especially around
pulp or that total yield
the coproduct sales.
can be up to 110%.
H2O 10:1 ratio
DTPA 0.2
90–120 30–120
CH2O2 0.6
Multistage process: water and/
CIMV CH3COOH 1.7 50–60 or acid pretreatment followed
by alkaline peroxide bleaching.
NaOH 6–8.5
H2O2 5–6 85 240
PAA 1
Weak fiber; requires refining
to liberate fibers; uses acidic
Hot water H2O 8:1 ratio 145–160 120–180 65–75 water, as the recycled water
picks up acidity from the hemi-
celluloses dissolved in solution.
Mechano- Weak fiber; high power and
NaOH 2–6 95–98 45–60 70–78
chemical chemical consumption.
CMP—
NaOH 3–5 120 60 73–78 Weak fiber.
Refiner
Na2CO3 6–10 Fiber liberation occurs in high
consistency refiner following
APMP 95 30 70–75
chemical pretreatment; low
H2O2 4
strength pulp.
Uses a diffuser in a screw press
H.F. Process NaOH 6–7 95–98 240 75–78 for pulping; only suitable for
corrugating medium.
58–68
(if coproduct is Sells dust control; soil amend-
Tranlin (NH4)2SO3 9–13 165–173 160–210 included, yield ment byproduct for economic
is about 95%) return instead of recovery.

AQ = anthraquinone; NSSC = neutral sulfite semichemical; CIMV= Compagnie Industrielle de la Materière Végétale; CMP = chemimechanical; APMP =
alkaline peroxide mechanical pulp; H.F. = Hojbygaard Fabrick; NaOH = sodium hydroxide; Na2S = sodium sulfide; Na2CO3 = sodium carbonate; MgCO3
= magnesium carbonate; O2 = oxygen; CaO = calcium oxide; Na2SO3 = sodium sulfite; NH3OH = ammonium hydroxide; KOH = potassium hydroxide;
H2O = water; DTPA = diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid; CH2O2 = formic acid; CH3COOH = acetic acid; PAA = peracetic acid; H2O2 = hydrogen perox-
ide; (NH4)2SO3 = ammonium sulfite.

I. Process conditions associated with various straw pulping processes. Data obtained from references [8,25,27-33,39-42,45-52].

JANUARY | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 43

NONWOOD PULPING
been in significant decline in China because of the environ- Phoenix pulping process
mental toll associated with the practice. China has been con- The Phoenix wheat straw pulping process developed for Co-
sistently shutting down straw and bagasse pulp mills due to lumbia Pulp by Sustainable Fiber Technologies (SFT; Renton,
inefficiency and high levels of pollution [25,26]. Tradition- WA, USA) is proprietary, but several claims about its advan-
ally, straw pulping facilities have employed a chemical pulp- tages provide clues to the nature of the process [28,29]. The
ing method where sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and sodium claims also point to a more efficient and environmentally fa-
thiosulfate (Na2S2O3) were used as cooking chemicals; the vorable process than is commonly used in Asian countries for
resulting black liquor was treated for alkaline- and energy- straw and bagasse to produce fiber [9,28,30,31]. Life cycle
recovery; and some of the NaOH was recovered with the analyses that compare wood and nonwood pulp production
addition of quicklime. In the bleaching system (washing, largely rely on data from outdated nonwood mills in Asia that
screening, and bleaching), ClO2 was used for bleaching, and do not have the benefit of improvements made by SFT [32].
the screen rejects were incinerated. Treated wastewater The key environmental claims made by SFT are low water
was recycled to make pulp, and the sludge from the waste- usage (10% of a kraft mill), zero effluent, and use of pulping
water treatment was incinerated. The residues, screen byproducts as a fertilizer. The use of a mini-mill concept by
rejects, and sludge were typically incinerated for waste man- SFT helps restrict the carbon footprint and economize the
agement without energy recovery. Heat and electricity were utilization of resources [33]. The use of twin-screw extruders
supplied by a combined heat and power (CHP) plant, to pulp wheat straw under atmospheric conditions at high
in which ammonia and limestone were used to absorb consistency is seen as a key to low water usage. The use of
nitrous oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), respectively. ammonium sulfite, ammonium hydroxide, or potassium hy-
The black liquor from straw has high levels of silica and droxide as pulping chemicals allows black liquor to be used
is often discarded rather than recovered because the high as a “plant nutrient” [34-36]. Some claims have been made that
silica content forms a corrosive glass within a recovery suggest alkali will be used at the mill instead of an ammonium
boiler and causes premature boiler failure. The high levels based chemical. In that event, the “byproduct” liquor will not
of silica and saccharides in straw that dissolve in alkaline be able to be employed as a plant nutrient.
black liquor increase the viscosity of the liquor to the point While ammonium sulfite can be regenerated by flue gas
where pulp washing can only remove 80%–85% of the black desulfurization, chemical recovery is generally too costly for
liquor from the pulp prior to the bleach plant. Washing small nonwood pulp mills [37]. The high levels of silica in
of straw pulp is typically performed on vacuum drum wash- wheat straw present significant challenges in chemical recov-
ers with one-third of the loading factor typically used ery operations [38]. The SFT process has some claims around
for hardwood kraft pulps because of this difficulty associ- using calcium salts to precipitate calcium silicate on fiber to
ated with removing spent chemicals from the pulp. mitigate silicate deposits, but the final system is still unknown
The yield to the mill for chemical pulping of straw, typi- to the general public.
cally 30%–35% on o.d. straw, is known to be cost prohibi- Traditional kraft mills have the option of selling some of
tive. More sophisticated processes can get the yield over the boiler ash and some of the over-burned lime, but this ma-
40%, but never to the 52%–56% for hardwood. terial is typically discarded in a landfill from concerns about
the potential presence of detrimental trace materials. With
Enhanced chemical pulping process the conservative nature of the paper industry, there is only a
As a result of the large environmental impact and energy small chance that some companies would opt for selling the
requirements of traditional chemical pulping of straw, new plant nutrient produced by these straw pulping methods.
pulping methods were developed to enhance the value of Without the ability to sell the “plant nutrient”, the environ-
straw as a pulp fiber source. Several different pulping meth- mental footprint and economics of the straw pulping process-
ods have been developed based upon ammonia instead es would not be sustainable.
of caustic. Ammonium sulfite, (NH3)2SO3, is often used as
the active cooking chemical and is obtained by reaction of Acid processes
ammonia and SO2 from the combined heat and power Several acid-based processes have been developed to avoid
generation (CHP) at the mill. These ammonia-based pulping silicon dissolved in the black liquor. All these acid processes
methods produce plant nutrients that can increase the are similar to the Compagnie Industrielle de la Materière Vé-
productivity of soil and reduce the potential harm to soils gétale (CIMV; Neuilly-sur-Seine, France) process. The CIMV
from sodium in that fertilizer. The (NH3)2SO3 production process uses acetic acid and formic acid as the cooking chem-
also eliminates the use of limestone as part of the scrubbing icals [39-42]. The acids dissolve lignins and hydrolyze the
media required for SO2 absorption in conventional CHP hemicelluloses into oligo- and monosaccharides with high
processes since SO2 is eliminated from the flue gas. The xylose content. The raw pulp is filtered, the solvent is re-
economics of this approach is dependent upon establishing moved, and the pulp is bleached with hydrogen peroxide.
a year-round market for the plant nutrient [27]. Organic acids are recycled from the spent pulping liquor via
evaporation. Defibration takes place in a subsequent alkaline
44 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020
 NONWOOD PULPING

1. The number of additional truckloads required to produce 100 o.d. tons of pulp as a function of straw pulp yield. The analysis
assumed 18% moisture for straw and 50% moisture for the pine and hardwood chips. The hardwood pulp yield was assumed to be
50% on o.d. wood and the high yield pine yield was assumed to be 56% on o.d. wood. In practice, typical straw yields are less than
50%, thus at least 10 or more additional trucks will be required for each 100 tons of pulp produced.

peroxide bleaching process. The effluents from the mild acid curement area for straw is less than 125 km, the packing den-
cooking and bleaching stages can be treated in traditional sity of straw is considerably lower than either hardwood or
biological wastewater treatment systems. In the case of wheat pine pulpwood or chips. As with wood, the total amount of
straw, a pulp with an ISO brightness of over 80% and a yield straw required, and hence the number of trucks needed to
of over 50% can be obtained with a water-to-straw ratio of 10 haul that material, is dependent upon the pulp yield of the
and acid charge (25% formic and 75% acetic acid) in hot water cooking method employed. In all cases however, replacing
of 0–2.3% on the straw. Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid either bleached hardwood pulp or high yield brown pine pulp
(DTPA, 0.2% charge on straw) is used as a chelating agent in with straw will result in an increase in the total number of
these treatments, and the straw is washed and then bleached truck-miles required to supply a mill with raw fibrous mate-
with a P-P-Paa-P bleaching sequence. rial. Figure 1 shows a graph of the increased number of
If this type of straw pulp is mixed with a pulp of better trucks per day required to replace 100 tons per day of o.d.
quality, the amount of straw pulp substitution is limited to pulp as a function of the straw pulp yield. The limiting factor
20%–40% of the mix because of strength requirements. The in hauling straw is the U.S. Department of Transportation
addition of wheat straw pulp impairs the surface and optical (DOT) limits on flatbed trailer length and load height. Many
properties, and thus the printability, of the resulting paper. locations in China allow ~80 tons per truck, thus making
This kind of wheat straw pulp has high bulk and could pos- straw hauling more palatable for a mill. A typical round bale
sibly be used as a raw material for the middle ply of paper- of straw is 5-ft wide by 6-ft diameter with a weight at 18%
board or for molded fiber packages. moisture of about 1100 pounds per green bale. The straw is
typically cut and dried in open fields until it dries to about 18%
High yield processes moisture or less. If the straw is baled at higher than 18% mois-
High yield straw fiber may be produced by treatment of the ture, significant microbial action can occur, resulting in heat
straw with hot water followed by an alkaline peroxide bleach- generation, straw degradation, and potential fires within the
ing stage. Typically, the effluent is sewered, with no liquor straw bale. These bales would be either left in the field, moved
recovery, because of the high silicon content of the liquor. to the edge of the field or moved into a storage facility on a
This hot water, alkaline peroxide treatment typically produc- flatbed truck.
es pulp with 75% yield, like neutral sulfite semichemical The DOT requirements limit flatbed truck trailer to 40
(NSSC) hardwood pulp, but more susceptible to process refin- ft long and total height of 13 ft 6 in. and may limit width to
ing and freeness loss [8]. 8 ft 6 in. It is possible to stack up to 14 round bales per truck-
load. Using the 14-bale restriction, each truckload will carry
EXAMINATION OF SUSTAINBILITY CLAIMS about 6.3 o.d. tons (7.7 green tons) of straw per load. De-
Transportation pending upon height limitations, it may be possible to stack
One claim that is often made in support of straw pulping is a an additional 5 bales on top of the first layer and increase
reduction in raw material transportation because straw mills the total green weight to 10.45 tons at 18% moisture, which
tend to be small and limit their procurement area to a radius equates to 8.57 o.d. tons of straw per load. In contrast, wood
of 125 km or less [8]. While it is true that the economic pro- chip-loaded tractor trailers can go to 80000 lb. Typical
JANUARY | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 45
NONWOOD PULPING

2. Land required to sustainably support 350000 tons/year production of pulp.

empty weight is 35000 lb, and typical load weight is 40000 for growing hardwoods. Typically, a mill will have to incen-
lb, which equals 20 tons of green chips or 10 tons of o.d. tivize farmers to supply straw, so some mills may have to sup-
chips. Assuming a 50% pulp yield for hardwood and a 56% ply their own fiber regardless of the crop being maintained
yield on o.d. wood for high yield pine, more trucks will be on the land.
required for straw pulping at any commercially obtainable Traditionally, some of the straw is incorporated back into
straw pulp yield. the field as a natural form of fertilizer. The National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory (NREL) has estimated that some fer-
Land requirements and availability tilization will be required to overcome the removal of straw
Another claim often made about straw pulp is a reduction in to make pulp. These fertilizer requirements are over and
the amount of land required to support a mill [6]. As with the above the amount required to produce a wheat crop and only
trucking data, the amount of land required is dependent upon account for the lost nutrients associated with the straw re-
the pulp yield. For all cases, high yield pine requires less land moved. These requirements are based upon tons per acre of
to obtain a sustainable growth rate than straw, and hardwood applied fertilizer. The annual requirements to replace the
requires more land. The sustainable growth values for pine straw nutrient values are 9.8 kg of nitrogen, 54.3 kg of potas-
and hardwood in the coastal Virginia-Carolina region were sium oxide, and 3.0 kg of phosphorous per acre [43].
obtained from WestRock Forestry and were reported as 5 In addition to the land requirements for a theoretical mill,
green tons/acre-year for plantation pine and 0.59 green tons/ the availability of raw material for straw pulp production is
acre-year for natural mixed southern hardwood. The report- somewhat limited. Winter wheat agricultural activity does
ed values for straw are 1.57 green tons/acre-year. Figure 2 have a presence in the Carolinas and Eastern Virginia, with a
shows the land required to support 100 tons/day of pulp pro- reported 1,275,000 acres harvested in 2012. On a crop produc-
duction for a 350 day per year operating rate for all three fi- tion basis, this puts the Virginia-Carolina region at 4.5% of the
bers. This analysis simply looks at the required amount of United States winter wheat production, with the majority in
land. It does not evaluate whether the land is under plantation the more Western states, such as Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana,
management for growing trees, under management for grow- Colorado, Texas, Washington, South Dakota, and Nebraska,
ing wheat and straw as a side benefit, or wild management with some major production along the Mississippi river valley.

Available Straw 25% Straw Removal Tons Straw Pulp at 50%

Acres of Land in
State at 3000 lb/acre, Rate, Pulp Yield,
Winter Wheat
tons tons o.d. tons pulp
South Carolina 235000 352500 88125 44062

North Carolina 770000 1,115,000 288750 144137

Virginia 270000 405000 101250 50625

Regional Total 1,275,000 1,872,500 478125 239062

II. Estimated annual tons of winter wheat straw pulp available in the Virginia-Carolina region. Data based on National Agricultural
Statistic Service (NASS) Crop Production Report released 10 August 2012 [44].

46 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020

 NONWOOD PULPING

3. Freeness as a function of time in the Valley beater.

For the Virginia-Carolina region, the total amount of straw Handsheet Softwood, Hardwood, Straw,
available is limited to an equivalent of 239000 tons/year of Set # % % %
pulp if one assumes no other competitive pressures and no 1 50% 50% 0%
loss of material associated with degradation of raw materials
during the year-long storage required for the annual crop ma- 2 50% 40% 10%
terial. The total pulp production number was obtained by 3 50% 30% 20%
using the acres of wheat planted according to the National
4 50% 20% 30%
Agricultural Statistic Service (NASS) Crop Production Report
released August 10, 2012, and assuming an availability of 1.5 5 50% 10% 40%
tons/acre of straw [44]. It was assumed that 25% of the avail- 6 50% 0% 50%
able straw could be successfully removed from the field and
successfully processed in a mill. A 50% pulping yield was also III. Composition of tested handsheets.
assumed. The detailed numbers for the Virginia-Carolina re- Bleached board handsheets
gion are shown in Table II. Two sets of 120-g/m2 handsheet studies were conducted using
straw pulp. Both studies used unrefined fiber as received in
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES wet lap form, without refining as board grades are typically
Several studies have suggested that straw pulp can be used refined to about 550 mL CSF for machine operation. As the
as a replacement for hardwood up to potentially 30%–40% unrefined straw pulp is already lower than 600 CSF, it was de-
of the fiber. Other studies have claimed that straw fiber might termined that no additional refining was warranted. One set
enhance some of the strength properties of the resulting of handsheets used 50% bleached softwood fiber refined to
sheet. In general, the current commercial applications using 550 mL CSF and a sample of unrefined wheat straw pulp (505
straw pulp are tissue or molded pulp applications that do not CSF) substituted for bleached hardwood beaten to 550 CSF in
demand significant fiber strength. 10% increments from 0 to 50% of the sheet. The composition
In order to determine the impact of straw fiber on result- of these handsheets is shown in Table III. These handsheets
ing sheet properties, a sample of Columbia Gold Unbleached were tested for physical properties. Figures 4, 5 and 6 show
Wet Lap Wheat Straw Market Pulp was obtained and beaten the impact of straw fiber substitution on bulk, STFI, and burst,
in a valley beater at WestRock’s Richmond pilot plant in Vir- respectively. Figure 4 shows that the addition of straw pulp
ginia. The freeness of the straw pulp started at 505 CSF and enhances bulk, with a steady increase up to about 40% substi-
rapidly decreased with beating. The freeness curve as a func- tution. After the 40% level, the bulk levels off. Figure 5 shows
tion of time in the valley beater is shown in Fig. 3. The rapid that substituting a portion of straw pulp for hardwood has little
decrease in freeness suggests that straw pulp needs to be impact upon the STFI until the substitution level is increased
handled carefully under industrial conditions, as excessive to 30% of the sheet. Once the straw content of the sheet
pumping and mixing will be enough to lower the freeness of reached 30%, the STFI increased by roughly 5%. Finally, the
the straw pulp, potentially resulting in drainage problems on burst index (Fig. 6) increased by about 6% with the addition of
the wet end of the paper machine. The straw fiber is thin as little as 10% straw pulp. The burst index values were some-
walled and fractures quite easily. Pumping and blending will what erratic and need to be carefully viewed.
result in freeness loss. Also, the use of white water from a Stiffness, tear, and Young’s modulus were also measured
system containing straw pulp will load the system with ex- as a function of straw pulp substitution for hardwood. In all
cessive fines, also resulting in extremely low freeness and cases, the addition of straw in any amount resulted in de-
poor wet end drainage. creased property performance for these physical properties.
JANUARY | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 47
NONWOOD PULPING

4. Impact of straw pulp substitution for hardwood on handsheet bulk.

5. Impact of straw pulp substitution for hardwood on STFI.

6. Impact of straw pulp substitution for hardwood on burst index.

Linerboard handsheets CONCLUSIONS

The second set of 120-g/m2 handsheets employed 106 kappa num- From a sustainability or environmental perspective, the use of
ber high yield pine pulp refined to 620 mL CSF with unbleached straw pulp as a replacement for kraft pulp is of limited value. Each
straw pulp (505 mL CSF) substituted in 10% increments from 0 to situation needs specific and direct comparisons that are not gen-
50% of the sheet. As the percentage of straw pulp increased, the erally available. If details of various novel processes, such as the
handsheet density increased (Fig. 7). Tear (Fig. 8), tensile Phoenix pulping process, become public, a more relevant and
(Fig. 9), and burst (Fig. 10) also decreased with increasing modern comparison can be made. Claims around reduced trans-
straw substitution. Short span compression (Fig. 11) showed a portation requirements or reduced land impact requirements are
very slight increase with increasing straw substitution. not strongly substantiated upon close examination. Using straw
48 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020
 NONWOOD PULPING

7. Impact of straw pulp substitution for high yield pine pulp on resulting handsheet density.

8. Impact of straw pulp substitution for high yield pine pulp on tear index.

9. Impact of straw pulp substitution for high yield pine pulp on tensile index.

fiber will increase the amount of truck traffic entering the mill. case analysis, as straw fiber fractures due to normal pumping
Substituting straw pulp for high yield wood pulp will increase the and blending. The fracture case was not duplicated in these
amount of land required to support sustainable plantation growth. studies. Some improvements in selected strength properties
For the same amount of pulp fiber, straw pulp requires less land might result from partial substitution of straw for bleached
than mixed southern hardwood stands require. hardwood fiber. In general, straw fiber can be partially sub-
The handsheet studies showed limited to negative value of stituted for hardwood fiber in low strength applications, such
straw pulp substitution for high yield pulp, and this is a best- as in tissue and molded fiber applications. The economics,
JANUARY | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 49
NONWOOD PULPING

10. Impact of straw pulp substitution for high yield pine pulp on burst index.

11. Impact of straw pulp substitution for high yield pine pulp on short span compression index.

transportation, year-long storage, and sustainability difficul- 7. Hammett, A.L., Youngs, R.L., Sun, X., et al., Holzforschung 55(2):
ties associated with using straw as a fiber source still require 219(2001). https://doi.org/10.1515/HF.2001.036 .
greater study before straw pulp will become a reliable alterna- 8. Leponiemi, A., “Fibres and energy from wheat straw by simple
tive fiber source for more than specialty applications. TJ practice,” Ph.D. dissertation, Aalto University/VTT Publications,
Espoo, Finland, 2011.
LITERATURE CITED 9. Favero, A., Thomas, V.M., and Luettgen, C.O., J. Adv. Manuf. Process.
1. Bottiglieri, J., Paper360°, November/December 2016, p. 24. 1(3): e10023(2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/amp2.10023 .
2. Schwartz, A., Fast Company, 18 January 2011. Available [Online] 10. Fortin, D., Developments in the China Pulp Market: A Comprehensive
https://www.fastcompany.com/1718476/exclusive-how-kimberly- Analysis and Outlook, Fastmarkets RISI, Boston, 2019.
clark-ditched-its-forest-destroying-reputation-and-embraced-
greenpeac <08Jan2019>. 11. Wang, X., Ni, Y., Zhang, H., et al., Environ. Sci. Technol. 46:
12234(2012). https://doi.org/10.1021/es303373b.
3. Thomas, V.M. and Liu, W., “Assessment of alternative fibers for
pulp production: Public version,” Georgia Institute of Technology, 12. Anonymous, “Toward a sustainable paper cycle, an indepen-
Atlanta, GA, USA, 11 February 2013. dent study on the sustainability of the pulp and paper industry,”
report prepared for the World Business Council for Sustainable
4. Hurter, R.W., “Non-wood fiber paper marketing—Do’s and don’ts
Development, International Institute for Environment and
to avoid greenwashing,” TAPPI PEERS Conf., TAPPI Press, Peachtree
Development, London, 1996.
Corners, GA, USA, 2016.
5. Hurter, R.W., “Nonwood fibers—Opportunities and challenges 13. Conservatree.org, “Environmentally sound paper overview:
for papermakers,” PaperCon, TAPPI Press, Peachtree Corners, Essential issues,” Conservatree, San Francisco, CA, USA. Available
2015. [Online] http://www.conservatree.org/learn/Essential%20Issues/
EIPaperContent.shtml <08Jan2020>.
6. Kissinger, M., Fix, J., and Rees, W.E., Ecological Economics 62(3-4):
552(2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.019 .

50 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020

 NONWOOD PULPING
14. Canopyplanet.org, “Second harvest pulp and paper project: Making 27. Jia, M., Sun, M., Li, X., et al., J. Cleaner Prod. 193: 327(2018).
paper from straw,” Canopy, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Available https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.227.
[Online] https://canopyplanet.org/campaigns/next-generation-
28. Sustainablefibertecnologies.com, “Phoenix ProcessTM pulp vs
solutions/second-harvest/ <08Jan2020>.
Traditional kraft wood pulp,” Sustainable Fiber Technologies,
15. Dudley, N., Jeanrenaud, J.-P., and Sullivan, F., Bad Harvest: Renton, WA, USA. Available [Online] https://www.sustainablefib-
The Timber Degradation of Global Forests, Taylor & Francis ertechnologies.com/process .
Group, Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2014. https://doi.
29. Lewis, M., “Analytical fiber comparisons: Alternative pulp fibers
org/10.4324/9781315070445 .
derived from the Phoenix Process,” International Molded Fiber
16. Tier, J., “Worldwatch Institute—Flushing our forests down the toi- Association Conf., International Molded Fiber Association, New York,
let,” Sanitation Updates, 15 April 2010. Available [Online] https:// 2015.
sanitationupdates.blog/2010/04/15/worldwatch-institute-flushing-
our-forests-down-the-toilet/ <08Jan2020>.
30. Sun, M., Wang, Y., Shi, L., et al., Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev.
92: 823(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.036
17. Environmentalpaper.org, “New wheat straw copy paper one
of the most environmentally sustainable in North America,” 31. Sun, M., Wang, Y., and Shi, L., Sci. Total Environ. 616-617:
news release, Prairie Pulp & Paper/Canopy, Vancouver, 753(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.250 .
25 October 2012. Available [Online] 32. Ma, X., Zhai, Y., Zhang, R., et al., J. Cleaner Prod. 233: 23(2019).
https://environmentalpaper.org/2012/10/release-new-wheat-straw- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.069 .
copy-paper-one-of-the-most-environmentally-sustainable-in-
north-america/ <08Jan2020>. 33. Harris, A.T., Riddlestone, S., Bell, Z., et al., J. Cleaner Prod. 16:
1971(2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.02.005 .
18. Conservatree.org, “Comparison of environmental impacts of
dedicated fiber crops, agricultural residues, and tree fibers,” 34. Huang, G., Shi, J.X., and Langrish, T.A.G., Bioresour. Technol. 98(15):
Conservatree, San Francisco, 2019. Available [Online] 2829(2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2006.09.029 .
http://www.conservatree.org/paperlisteningstudy/TreeFree/ 35. Xiao, C., Stevens, R., Fauci, M., et al., Biol. Fertil. Soils 43(6):
q40table1.html <08Jan2020>. 709(2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-006-0153-y.
19. Bowyer, J., “Tree-free paper: A path to saving trees and forests?” 36. Drown, D.C., Edwards, L.L., Mays, J., et al., “Fertilizer production
Dovetail Partners, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2014. Available [Online] from wheat straw pulping: Spent ammonium sulfite liquor,” TAPPI
http://www.dovetailinc.org/report_pdfs/2014/dovetailtreefree0714.
Pulping Conf., Peachtree Corners, 1997.
pdf <08Jan2020>.
38. Vizcarra, A., Lo, V., Bicho, P.A., et al., TAPPI J. 82(2):
20. Fishman, A., “Understanding ‘deforestation-free’,” Yale School of
115(1999).
Forestry & Environmental Studies Blog, New Haven, CT, USA, 5
November 2014. Available [Online] https://environment.yale.edu/ 39. Lam, H.Q., Le Bigot, Y., Denis, G., et al., Appita J. 58(3): 214(2005).
blog/2014/11/tfd-week-2014-understanding-deforestation-free/
40. Delmas, M., Lam, H.Q., Le Bigot, Y., et al., Appita J. 56(2):
<08Jan2020>.
102(2003).
21. Nogueron, R., Laestadius, L., and Lawson, J., “Sustainable pro-
41. Kham, L., Le Bigot, Y., Delmas, M., et al., Ind. Crops Prod. 21(1):
curement of wood and paper-based products,” World Resources
9(2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2003.12.002 .
Institute, Washington, DC, December 2014. Available [Online]
https://www.wri.org/publication/sustainable-procurement-wood- 42. Kham, L., Le Bigot, Y., Benjelloun-Mlayah, B., et al., Appita J. 58(2):
and-paper-based-products <08Jan2020>. 135(2005).
22. Anonymous, “Wood-based paper and non-wood based paper 43. Federal LCA Commons, “Fertilizer, winter wheat straw 2022,”
can be equally sustainable,” Two Sides North America, Chicago, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Available
IL, USA. Available [Online] http://www.npes.org/Portals/0/pdf/ [Online] https://www.lcacommons.gov/lca-collaboration/National_
TwoSidesFacts_Nonwood.pdf <08Jan2020>. Renewable_Energy_Laboratory/USLCI/dataset/PROCESS/14b0912f-
fb6d-321d-8f42-0ea35918689f <08Jan2020>.
23. Boreal Forest Facts, “Non-wood fiber paper versus wood fiber:
Which is better?” Resolute Forest Products, Montreal, QC, 44. National Agricultural Statistic Service, “August Crop Production,”
Canada. Available [Online] https://borealforestfacts.com/?p=539 report, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 10 August
<08Jan2020>. 2012. Available [Online] https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/
Executive_Briefings/2012/08_10_2012.pdf
24. Kimberly-Clark Professional, “Kimberly-Clark Professional launches
innovative GreenHarvest products made with rapidly renewable 45. Aronovsky, S.I., Pap. Ind. Pap. World 30(1-2): 71,244(1948).
plant fiber,” news release, Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Irving, TX,
46. Biermann, C.J., Handbook of Pulping and Papermaking, 2nd edn.,
USA, 28 April 2015. Available [Online] https://kimberlyclark.gcs-
web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/kimberly-clark-pro- Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1996.
fessional-launches-innovative-greenharvest <08Jan2020>. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012097362-0/50026-1.

25. Ringstrom, A., “Essity to try making pulp from wheat straw to 47. Bleier, P. and Judt, M., “Alternative pulping processes,” Seminar on
stem rising costs,” Reuters, London, 24 May 2019. Available Comparative Pulping Processes Including the Monopulp Process, United
[Online] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-essity-strategy/ Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna, Austria,
essity-to-try-making-pulp-from-wheat-straw-to-stem-rising-costs- 1986, p. 137. Available [Online] https://open.unido.org/api/docu-
idUSKCN1SU0M5 <08Jan2020>. ments/4813257/download/REPORT%20OF%20THE%20SEMINAR%20
ON%20COMPARATIVE%20PULPING%20PROCESSES%20
26. Wang, X., Ni, Y., Zhang, H., et al., Environ. Sci. Technol. 46(21): INCLUDING%20THE%20MONOPULP%20PROCESS%20(16159.en)
12234(2012). https://doi.org/10.1021/es303373b. <08Jan2020>.

JANUARY | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | TAPPI JOURNAL 51

NONWOOD PULPING
48. Franzén, T., “The NACO Process—A selective pulping process
for annual fibre raw material,” Seminar on Comparative Pulping
Processes Including the Monopulp Process, United Nations Industrial ABOUT THIS PAPER
Development Organization, Vienna, Austria, 1986, p. 137.
Cite this article as:
Available [Online] https://open.unido.org/api/documents/4813257/
download/REPORT%20OF%20THE%20SEMINAR%20ON%20 Hart, P., TAPPI J. 19(1): 41(2020).
COMPARATIVE%20PULPING%20PROCESSES%20INCLUDING%20 https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ19.1.41
THE%20MONOPULP%20PROCESS%20(16159.en) <08Jan2020>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ19.1.41
49. Li, H., Song, M., Yang, J., et al., U.S. pat. 8,303,772 B2 (Nov. 6,
ISSN: 0734-1415
2012).
50. Mustajoki, S., Leponiemi, A., and Dahl, O., BioResources 5(2): Publisher: TAPPI Press
808(2010). Copyright: ©TAPPI Press 2020
51. Sharp, S., Paper Age, November/December 2014, p. 18.
About this journal
52. Sharp, S., Paper Age, January/February 2019, p. 19.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR wheat straw at a low substitu-

WestRock is interested in sustainable papermaking. tion rate, it would wipe out the
Several news articles have suggested that the use of total potential supply of the en-
annual crop fiber is as or more sustainable than tire Coastal Plain region. The
using wood fiber. The current work evaluated these lack of infrastructure to collect,
claims and also evaluated the suitability of wheat store and process these annual
straw pulp as a partial wood fiber replacement in tra- crop fibers is also woefully in-
ditional packaging materials. adequate for a typical packag-
The current work evaluated several life cycle anal- ing mill’s needs.
yses (LCA) that have been conducted both in favor or The current work outlines
and against annual fiber crops as fiber sources. It re- several operational issues that Hart
views several assumptions that impact these analy- need to be addressed before
ses (both positive and negative). using an annual crop fiber. The
LCA are extremely sensitive to the starting and physical property evaluation suggests that wheat
ending conditions used for a comparison. There are straw fiber would be good for tissue and towel appli-
several ways to make an LCA appear better or worse cations, but poor for inclusion in traditional packag-
than it actually is, and interpretation of LCA data ing grades. We will continue to monitor the develop-
must be done carefully to fully understand the value ments in annual crop processing and re-evaluate as
they offer. processes improve.
Obtaining a sample of straw pulp for laboratory
analysis was the most difficult part of the current
Hart is director, Fiber Science and Innovation, for
work. A surprising finding was the lack of availability
WestRock, Richmond, VA, USA. Email Hart at
of annual crop fiber. If only a few mills started using peter.hart@westrock.com.

52 TAPPI JOURNAL | VOL. 19 NO. 1 | JANUARY 2020

View publication stats