PERFORMANCE

Environment

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

We operate in compliance with laws and regulations, with parameters to control indicators, some of which are even stricter than those set forth in legislation. Aspects such as water, energy, air emissions, climate change and biodiversity are considered in all operations, revalidating our commitment to conserve natural resources and control and mitigate environmental impacts.

Objectives and Goals

Goal 2018 Results 2019 Results Medium-term goal
base year 2017 (from 3 to 5 years) – 2020 to 2022
2019 Analysis Analysis of results
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1+2) per ton of product produced 178.677 kg CO2/t product (Klabin S.A.) 185.33 kg CO2/t product (Klabin S.A.) 185 kg CO2 eq/t paper (Klabin S.A.) Goal not yet reached  The 7% posted growth is related to increases in fuel consumption; use of air conditioning gases; use of nitrogen compounds in the forest deployment operation.
Reduce direct emissions of greenhouse gases (Scope 1, absolute value) 6% reduction (direct emission of 669,341.61 tCO2eq) 7% increase (direct emission of 713,885.93 tCO2eq) Reduce by up to 1% Goal not reached
Reduce purchased energy 1,150,437.53 MW-h/year 1,231,454.72 MW-h/year Reduce by up to 5% Goal not reached  There was an increase in the purchase of energy due to a growth in Klabin’s production
Reduce water consumption 109,413.52 m³/year x 1000 109,710.76 m³/year x 1000 Reduce by up to 5% Goal not yet reached There was a reduction of 2% since the base year (2017).
Increase the participation of renewable sources in the energy matrix 89% 90% 88% Goal reached Increased consumption of biomass, black liquor and hydrogen in the energy matrix
Expand self-sufficiency in power generation 77% 74%  75% Goal not yet reached Energy generation available for sale must be equal to or greater than the purchase from the National Interconnected System (SIN). In 2019, self-sufficiency reached 74%
Reuse of solid waste 96.55% 96.55% Maintain waste reuse (reuse and recycling) > 95% Goal reached  Result of the reduction in the generation of hazardous waste, in addition to the increase in the reuse of waste, mainly energy recovery, due to the change in the accounting for biomass waste
Reduction of solid HAZARDOUS waste 0.05%

 

0.04% Maintain hazardous waste generation < 0.50% of total waste generation Goal reached Reduction in the disposal of hazardous waste in all categories

Environmental investments

2016 2017 2018 2019
Waste management (purchase of bins, waste dumpsters, improvements in recycling plants) 42,169,278.68 292,527.43 1,108,059.11 3,685,551.38
Air emissions treatment (maintenance of electrostatic precipitators, gas scrubbers, incinerators and improvements in control equipment) 28,276,213.86 1,315,444.60 17,261,233.82 1,710,982.72
Prevention costs (investments, monitoring, training and environmental education)1 69,683,600.35 13,815,311.41 8,892,954.90 55,173,669.69
Environmental management costs (personnel costs, certification costs and environmental charges) 6,860,123.42 8,027,789.56 11,778,705.33 6,714,347.22
Total 146,989,216.31 23,451,073.00 39,040,953.16 67,284,551.01
Treatment and disposal of solid waste 26,466,032.04 31,489,284.86

Energy

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

EFFORTS TOWARDS ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSUMPTION OPTIMIZATION ARE IMPLEMENTED IN OUR INDUSTRIAL UNITS ON A CONSTANT BASIS.

Environmental and climate change management, as well as energy efficiency promotion and encouragement are expressed in our Environmental and climate change management, as well as energy efficiency promotion and encouragement are expressed in our . At the Puma Unit, we count on the involvement of employees, through the Internal Energy Conservation Committee (CICE), which fosters opportunities to reduce energy, steam and compressed air consumption and the elimination of waste among workers.

The Company is also engaged in energy production and a progressive increase in the renewable energy matrix, produced from biomass and black liquor.

89,54% of the energy matrix is composed of renewable sources.

In this context, the Puma Unit is a highlight for its use of biomass for energy generation. Surplus energy is traded. In 2019, 911,854 Megawatt-hours (MWh) were delivered to the Brazilian Electric System, enough to supply the entire state of São Paulo for two and a half days*. 1.

Holder of the ISO 50001:2018, certification, the Puma Unit maintains a routine of internal and external audits of its Energy Management system. Initiatives such as the installation of piping from the extraction sieve to the top of the eucalyptus digester, contribute to reducing steam consumption in the fiber line production of hot water.

At the Puma Unit, energy-related targets impact the Profit Sharing Program (PPR).

Overall, in 2019, our energy intensity indicator was reduced in almost all businesses, except the Recycled Materials Business.

 

1 *Considering consumption in December 2019, according to the Executive Summary released by the São Paulo State Department of Infrastructure and Environment. Available at: 6th bimester 2019

Internal fuel consumption in 20191

GRI 302-1

8%

increase in the use of fuels from renewable sources, corresponding to 89.54% of the total.

74%

of energy self-sufficiency.

35%

reduction in stationary diesel consumption.

4%

reduction in GLP consumption

3,5%

increase in the use of fossil fuels2.

3%

increase in the sale of energy generated from renewable sources, compared to 2018, contributing to a renewable energy matrix.

* compared to 2018.

**related to the increase of 12% in natural gas consumption (replacement of the fuel oil boiler by a natural gas boiler in the Feira de Santana Unit (BA) and 1% in fuel oil consumption.

Consumption of fuel from non-renewable sources in Gigajoules (GJ)

2016 2017 2018 2019
Natural gas 1,500,832.00 1,544,884.00 1,654,529.93 1,859,677.84
Fuel oil 5,347,095.00 4,695,937.00 4,119,543.39 4,165,393.55
LPG 360,188.00 446,586.00 460,608.87 444,240.63
Stationary Diesel 62,385.00 39,220.00 26,881.62 17,360.52
Non-renewable 7,270,500.00 6,726,627.00 6,261,563.81 6,482,968.14

Fuel consumption from non-renewable sources, in Megawatt-hour (MWh)

  2016 2017 2018 2019
Natural gas 416,897.78 429,134.44 459,591.65 516,577.18
Fuel oil 1,485,304.17 1,304,426.94 1,144,317.61 1,157,053.76
LPG 100,052.22 124,051.67 127,946.91 123,400.18
Stationary Diesel 17,329.17 10,894.44 7,467.12 4,822.36
Non-renewable 2,019,583.33 1,868,507.50 1,739,323.28 1,800,824.48

Consumption of fuel from renewable sources in Gigajoules (GJ)

2016 2017 2018 2019
Biomass 19,829,173.00 21,128,715.00 17,568,544.99 18,627,631.41
Black liquor 25,922,799.00 31,420,144.00 33,096,853.86 36,304,324.98
Hydraulic energy 298,882.00 191,026.00 226,810.26 191,963.62
Tall Oil Tar* 210,117.00 256,008.69 173,187.23
Hydrogen* 152,970.00 148,342.96 161,575.47
Methanol 47,552.76
Renewable 46,050,854.00 53,102,972.00 51,296,560.76 55,506,235.47
2016 2017 2018 2019
Biomass 19.829.173,00 21.128.715,00 17.568.544,99 18.627.631,41
Black liquor 25.922.799,00 31.420.144,00 33.096.853,86 36.304.324,98
Hydraulic energy 298.882,00 191.026,00 226.810,26 191.963,62
Tall Oil Tar1 210.117,00 256.008,69 173.187,23
Hydrogen1 152.970,00 148.342,96 161.575,47
Methanol 47.552,76
Renewable 46.050.854,00 53.102.972,00 51.296.560,76 55.506.235,47

1 With the startup of the Puma Unit, hydrogen started to be considered a fuel. In addition, it became important to isolate tar fuel from black liquor; therefore, the report considers these two items separately as of 2017. Tar is a renewable fuel generated from processing Tail Oil, which is a by-product of the pulp industry.

Fuel consumption from renewable sources, in Megawatt-hour (MWh)1

  2016 2017 2018 2019
Biomass 5,508,103.61 5,869,087.50 4,880,151.39 5,174,342.06
Black liquor 7,200,777.50 8,727,817.78 9,193,570.52 10,084,534.72
Hydraulic energy 83,022.78 53,062.78 63,002.85 53,323.23
Tall Oil Tar* 58,365.83 71,113.52 48,107.56
Hydrogen* 42,491.67 41,206.38 44,882.08
Methanol 13,209.10
Renewable 12,791,903.89 14,750,825.56 14,249,044.66 15,418,398.74

1 With the startup of the Puma Unit, hydrogen started to be considered a fuel. In addition, it became important to isolate tar fuel from black liquor; therefore, the report considers these two items separately as of 2017. Tar is a renewable fuel generated from processing Tail Oil, which is a by-product of the pulp industry.

Total energy consumed and sold, in Gigajoules (GJ)

Total energy consumption (in GJ)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
Fuels from non-renewable sources 7,270,500.00 6,726,627.00 6,261,563.81 6,486,682.55
Fuels from renewable sources 46,050,854.00 53,102,972.00 51,296,560.76 55,506,235.47
Energy consumed 11,048,113.04 13,707,541.69 13,972,803.45 14,238,808.56
Energy sold 1,563,474.82 3,077,550.00 3,199,269.71 3,282,673.68
Total 62,805,992.23 70,459,590.69 68,331,658.31 72,949,052.90
Energy consumption (in GJ) 2016 2017 2018 2019
Electricity 11,048,113.04 13,707,541.69 13,972,803.45 14,238,808.56
Energy sold (in GJ) 2016 2017 2018 2019
Electricity 1,563,474.82 3,077,550.00 3,199,269.71 3,282,673.68

1 Fuel data is generated through direct measurements and the conversion to GJ is calculated according to the conversion factors found in the spreadsheet of the Brazilian GHG Protocol, whose source is the IPCC. The conversion factors used are found in the spreadsheet of the Brazilian GHG Protocol, whose source is theIPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

Total energy consumed and sol, in Megawatt-hour (MWh)1

  2016 2017 2018 2019
Fuels from non-renewable sources 2,019,583.33 1,868,507.50 1,739,323.28 1,800,824.48
Fuels from renewable sources 12,791,903.89 14,750,825.56 14,249,044.66 15,418,398.74
Energy consumed 3,068,920.29 3,807,650.47 3,881,334.29 3,955,224.60
Energy sold 434,298.56 854,875.00 888,686.03 911,853.80
Total 17,446,108.95 19,572,108.53 18,981,016.20 20,262,594.03
Energy consumption (in GJ) 2016 2017 2018 2019
Electricity 3,068,920.29 3,807,650.47 3,881,334.29 3,955,224.60
Energy sold (in GJ) 2016 2017 2018 2019
Electricity 434,298.56 854,875.00 888,686.03 911,853.80

1 Fuel data is generated through direct measurements and the conversion to GJ is calculated according to the conversion factors found in the spreadsheet of the Brazilian GHG Protocol, whose source is the IPCC. The conversion factors used are found in the spreadsheet of the Brazilian GHG Protocol, whose source is the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

External energy consumption
GRI 302-2

There was a 21% increase in energy consumption outside the company, in the transportation of wood and delivery of products. This may be explained by the expansion of our forestry operations in Paraná. The fleet supplying the Monte Alegre and Ortigueira plants has nearly doubled and the average distance traveled has also increased compared to 2018.

External energy consumed1

  2016 2017 2018 2019
Gigajoules (GJ) 1,331,268.63 2,484,497.85 2,397,656.83 2,906,892.76

 

Megawatt-hour (MWh) 369,796.84 690,138.29 666,015.79 807,470.21

1 The premise adopted for the report is based on the fuel consumption volume of Scope 3, from the Brazilian GHG Protocol, converted into energy using the IPCC. emission factors. The conversion factors used are found in the Brazilian GHG Protocol spreadsheet, whose source is the IPCC.

Energy intensity 

GRI 302-3

The energy intensity balance in 2019 is the result of our commitment to operate efficiently, aiming to reduce waste and losses. . The Papers, Pulp, Packaging and Bags Businesses posted reductions of 10%, 9%, 9% and 5%, respectively On the other hand, there was a 7% energy consumption increase (self-owned + purchased).

Energy intensity, in Gigajoules (GJ)

Energy intensity 2016 2017 2018 2019
Energy consumption within the organization 62,805,992.23 70,459,590.69 68,331,658.31 72,949,052.90
Energy intensity within the organization 17.46 15.79 16.13 16.70
Energy consumption outside of the organization 1,331,268.63 2,484,497.85 2,397,656.83 2,906,892.76
Energy intensity outside the organization 0.37 0.56 0.57 0.67
Energy consumption – organization total 64,137,260.86 72,944,088.54 70,729,315.15 75,855,945.66
Energy intensity – organization total 17.83 16.35 16.70 17.37
Tons produced – Specific metric – denominator 3,596,836.01 4,461,077.89 4,235,263.86 4,368,164.12

Energy intensity, in Megawatt-hour (MWh)

Energy intensity 2016 2017 2018 2019
Energy consumption within the organization 17,446,108.95 19,572,108.53 18,981,016.20 20,263,625.81
Energy intensity within the organization 4.85 4.39 4.48 4.64
Energy consumption outside of the organization 369,796.84 690,138.29 666,015.79 807,470.21
Energy intensity outside the organization 0.10 0.15 0.16 0.18
Energy consumption – organization total 17,815,905.80 20,262,246.82 19,647,031.99 21,071,096.01
Energy intensity – organization total 4.95 4.54 4.64 4.82
Specific tons – specific metric – denominator 3,596,836.01 4,461,077.89 4,235,263.86 4,368,164.12

Energy intensity by Business Unit, in Gigajoules/ton (GJ/ton)

  2016 2017 2018 2019
Papers 21.70 20.82 18.91 17.06
Pulp 21.18 18.28 17.63 16.02
Packaging 1.15 1.12 1.14 1.04
Recycled Materials 6.61 6.58 7.30 8.26
Sacks* 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.43

1 The difference between the energy intensity of the Bags business is due to a change in the methodology to account for energy in the business.

Energy intensity by Business Unit, in Megawatt-hour/ton (MWh)

2016 2017 2018 2019
Papers 6.03 5.78 5.25 4.74
Pulp 5.88 5.08 4.90 4.45
Packaging 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.29
Recycled Materials 1.84 1.83 2.03 2.29
Sacks1 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.12

1The difference between the energy intensity of the Bags business is due to a change in the methodology to account for energy in the business.

Ratio of energy intensity inside and outside the organization

2016 2017 2018 2019
47.18 28.36 28.50 25.09

The conversion factors used are found in the Brazilian GHG Protocol spreadsheet, whose source is the IPCC

Reduction of energy consumption

GRI 302-4

Reductions posted in 2019 are the result of process optimizations (in businesses such as pulp and paper) for the conservation and upgrade of the units’ equipment. However, there was an increase in the total amount of energy consumption, due to Klabin’s total production growth. Data is laid out on the following table:

Reductions in energy consumption by Business Unit, in Gigajoules (GJ)

 

Reductions in energy consumption obtained directly as a result of improvements in conservation and efficiency (GJ)1 2016 2017 2018 2019
Paper Business Unit 1,748,582.69 4,013,056.93 2,581,437.04
Pulp Business Unit 147,075.74 649,899.90
Packaging Business Unit 894,123.29 65,690.81
Recycled Business Unit
Bags Business unit 670.50 4,019.42

1Columns with “-” indicate that there was no energy reduction in the period.

Reductions in energy consumption by Business Unit, in MWh

Reductions in energy consumption obtained directly as a result of improvements in conservation and efficiency (in MWh)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
Paper Business Unit 485,717.41 1,114,738.04 717,065.84
Pulp Business Unit 40,854.37 180,527.75
Packaging Business Unit 248,367.58 18,247.45
Recycled Business Unit
Bags Business unit 186.25 1,116.50

1 Columns with “-” indicate that there was no energy reduction in the period.

Emissions

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

Technology has become Klabin’s ally to reduce emissions. Truck drivers in the forestry operations in Paraná, for instance, started using the salvage device in vehicles in 2019, helping reduce diesel consumption and, consequently, gas emissions. An application is also under development to show drivers the best route to be taken in the forest area, with suggestions of routes of less fuel consumption or even alternative routes to avoid disturbing neighboring communities.

Seeking new and more efficient technologies in the transport of wood with reduced consumption of fossil fuels, the use of triple semi-trailer trucks was adopted in July 2019, in Paraná. With a higher volume of wood transported per travel, a 25% reduction is estimated in the number of trucks circulating on the highways. This also means a reduction in diesel consumption and emissions.

 

Direct (Scope 1) greenhouse gas emissions

GRI 305-1

With a 3% increase in production, the company increased specific emissions from 158 to 163 CO2eq/t. On the other hand, there was an increase of 7% in Scope 1 emissions, which can be related to increases in fuel consumption (as indicated in GRI 302-1); use of air conditioning gases; use of nitrogen compounds in the forest deployment operation.

With a higher percentage of biomass burning in the boilers, there was also a 4% increase in Scope 1 biogenic emissions, as shown in the table below.

Direct Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, in tons of CO2 equivalent 

Direct Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, (tons of CO2 equivalent)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total gross CO2 emissions 657,265.86 709,560.47 668,952.44 713,885.93
 Biogenic CO2 emissions (in tons of CO2 equivalent) 4,593,412.91 5,272,920.75 5,011,972.26 5,231,190.87

1 The gases included in the calculations above are CO2, CH4, N2O and HFCs Klabin follows the reference and methodology of the Brazilian GHG Protocol Program and used the operational control approach.

Indirect emissions resulting from the purchase of energy (Scope 2)

GRI 305-2

As a result of the increase in total production, in 2019, a 9% increase was posted in the energy purchased under the “location” approach. In the “purchase choice” mode, Scope 2 emissions totaled 39,207.29 tCO2eq. It is worth mentioning that 60% of the energy purchased came from renewable and certified sources.

Indirect emissions from the purchase of energy, in tons of CO2 equivalent

2016 2017 2018 2019
99,865.99 105,828.68 87,791.49 95,674.19

Purchase choice1

2017 2018 2019
Scope 2 emissions based on purchase choice (tCO2eq) 43,664.220 36,448.514 39,207.288
% renewable energy purchase 58.9 60.5 60.6

1 Information included in the report from the 2019 cycle, considering historical data for 2017 and 2018

Other indirect (Scope 3) greenhouse gas emissions

 

GRI 305-3

There was a 21% increase in upstream transport emissions, responsible for supplying the pulp and paper mills. This is a result of the expansion of the forestry operation in Paraná. Besides the fleet having nearly doubled, the average travel distances also increased.

We also recorded a 22% increase in downstream transport emissions, reflecting Klabin’s market expansion in Brazil and Mercosul.

Other Greenhouse Gas emissions, in tons of CO2 equivalent

 

Other Greenhouse Gas emissions (in tons of CO2 equivalent)1 2016 2017 2018 2019
Upstream  
Upstream transportation and distribution 33,054.58 85,539.32 62,558.65 75,417.09
Waste generated in operations 716.50 527.34 435.18 356.18
Business travel 2,493.20 1,256.17 729.74 938.90
Employee transportation 1,614.35 1,983.68 2,363.61 1,944.99
Subtotal 37,878.63 89,306.51 66,087.18 78,657.16
Downstream  
Downstream transportation and distribution 62,997.77 86,061.59 104,378.81 127,330.06
Subtotal 62,997.77 86,061.59 104,378.81 127,330.06
Total 100,876.40 175,368.10 170,465.99 205,987.22

1 Klabin had no upstream emissions related to assets acquired, capital goods, energy-related activities and leased assets. Klabin had no downstream emissions related to the processing and use of products sold, handling of products sold at the end of their shelf life, leased assets, franchises and investments.

Biogenic CO2 in tons of CO2 equivalent

GRI 305-3

2016 2017 2018 2019
2,023.87 12,893.64 15,760.52 21,830.46

Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions

GRI 305-4

Gross emissions increased 10% compared to 2018, reflecting the increased consumption of fossil fuels, presented in GRI 302-1, and the expansion of the forestry operation, registered in GRI 305-3. Due to such factor, the intensity of Scope 1 and Scope 1+2 greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3% and 4%, respectively.

Intensity of Greenhouse Gas emissions, in tons of CO2 equivalent*

Greenhouse gas emissions intensity 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total GHG emission (in tons of CO2 equivalent) 858,008.25 990,757.25 927,209.92 1,015,547.34
Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1+2+3) 238.68 235.17 218.93 232.49
Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1) 182.84 168.42 157.95 163.43
Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 2) 27.78 25.12 20.73 21.90
Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 3) 28.06 41.63 40.25 47.16
Intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1+2) 210.62 193.54 178.68 185.33

1Specific denominator metric, in tons produced: 2016: 3,596,836.01; 2017: 4,461,077.89; 2018: 4,235,263.86; 2019: 4,368,164.12.

Reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases

GRI 305-5

As shown in the topics GRI 305-1, 305-2 and 305-3, there was no emission reduction in 2019. The targets for the topic are listed in GRI 305-4.

Reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions obtained as a direct result of emissions reduction initiatives, in tons per CO2 equivalent

Reductions in GHG emissions obtained as a direct result of emission reduction initiatives (in tons of CO2 equivalent) 2016 2017 2018 2019
Reductions from direct (Scope 1) emissions 0.00 0.00 40,608.03 0.00
Reductions from indirect (Scope 2) emissions from the purchase of energy 40,455.70 0.00 18,037.63 0.00
Reductions from other indirect (Scope 3) emissions 5,901.85 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total GHG emission reductions 46,357.55 0.00 58,645.66 0.00

NOx, SOx and other significant air emissions

GRI 305-7

We applied federal legal requirements to all sources of emissions, except for units where specific state legislation applies and/or emission limits are stipulated in environmental licenses. The selection of emission limits complies with the legislation of the state where the unit is located. Changes in 2019 include:

  • 39% increase in NOx emissions in the Pulp and Paper segment, due to an increase in burning field waste and DNCG.
  • 48% increase in SOx emissions in the Pulp and Paper segment, mainly due to the increased flow of treated Diluted Non-Condensable Gas (DNCG) and the end of the service life of Incinerator 2 at the Monte Alegre unit.
  • 24% reduction in OM emissions in the Pulp and Paper segment.

At the end of 2019, we completed the installation and began operations for the new non-condensable gas incinerator (CNCG and DNCG) at the Monte Alegre unit. With this new equipment, we expanded the GNC treatment system, reducing atmospheric emissions and improving air quality in the region.

Significant air emission reductions, tons

 

Significant air emission reductions (tons)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
NOx 4,685.76 5,437.03 4,374.83 4,654.33
SOx 3,949.68 1,789.18 2,813.06 4,036.17
Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 3.65 87.45 18.05 2.29
Particulate Matter (MP) 6,356.76 5,708.38 5,243.06 5,178.12

1 The source of the emission factors is the sum of the results of the air emissions monitoring campaigns for Klabin emission sources, performed via isokinetic monitoring. This information was obtained from sampling reports carried out by third-party laboratories, certified to provide such service. For these gases, emission is measured directly in the chimneys, obtaining gas concentrations and flow rates. The emission rate is thus calculated and extrapolated for the entire year to obtain the absolute value. Sampling was carried out according to the standards of the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT), using the isokinetic monitoring methodology and in accordance with other CETESB references.

Persistent organic pollutants (POP) and Hazardous air pollutants (HAP) have not been determined as legal constraints to the business.

Climate change

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

WE BELIEVE THAT PRIORITIZING BUSINESS STRATEGIES TAKING OUR STAKEHOLDERS INTO ACCOUNT IS FUNDAMENTAL TO BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE, RESPONSIBLE AND CONSENSUAL FUTURE.

Such an extensive consultation helps to point out priorities that the company should address in its short-, medium- and long-term sustainability strategies. In our last study cycle, in 2019, climate change and the consequent impacts related to water, energy and biodiversity were mentioned by stakeholders as critical points of concern.

One of the goals for the corporate Sustainability area is the daily management of the issue as part of their role to monitor global and national climate agendas and map risks and opportunities. In addition, matters related to air emissions are included in the environmental indices of Klabin’s main units, under monthly monitoring andreview.

The definitions and major action plans to meet the defined goals involve the operational and strategic levels. Risks and opportunities are on the top management’s permanent agenda. The topic is discussed by the Permanent Sustainability Committee, comprised by the Director of Industrial Technology and Sustainability, sponsor, and the directors of the Legal, Forestry, People and Management, and Industrial Papers areas; in addition to the Executive Sustainability and Environment manager. The strategies and actions aligned and defined by the Committee are overseen by the Financial, Legal, Social and Environmental areas. All items taken into account at these meetings are relevant for the definition of the company’s growth strategy, considering the use of new technologies and projects aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Climate management

 

The company has a comprehensive matrix of weather-related opportunities and risks, including the internal mapping of impacts experienced due to weather and main future risks and opportunities, as well as observations from the Climate Conference (COP) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Company also contributes to the NDC Brazil goal of “restoring and reforesting 12 million hectares of forests by 2030, for multiple uses” (a Brazilian commitment to fulfilling the goals of the COP 21 Climate Agreement). Learn more here.

One of the mapped risks, for instance, is temperature rise and the frequency of intense heat waves that may impact the spread of forest pests due to enhanced thermal stress on plantations. Such risk prompted the company to create the Department of Productivity and Forest Ecophysiology, which monitors possible future climate scenarios, developing data modeling related to climate parameters and assessing the impact of planted forests. The Department recommends the necessary measures in case of adverse effects.

Potential mapped risks include increasing temperatures; increased levels of rainfall, which may have negative impacts by accelerating the growth rate of forest pests; the need for more forest irrigation; and changes in the phenology (biological cycle) of pine and eucalyptus species, impacting forest improvement programs.

The constant search for the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions is one of the items in the Sustainability Policy, which guides action planning for the company. The Company’s commitments regarding the topic, therefore, stem from such Policy and the KSDGs:

Continuous investment

to increase the share of renewable sources in the energy matrix and consequent development of products with a lower carbon footprint.

Power generation

from renewable sources such as biomass and black liquor.

Evolution

In recent years, we have gradually replaced fuel oil in the boilers with biomass, plant material from forestry operations. This increased the share of renewable sources in energy generation, exceeding the pre-establish 88% target:

Reduction of GHG emissions

In 2019, we joined the UN Global Business Ambition for 1.5 ºC – Our Only Future campaign. As a result, we took on the commitment to reduce GHG emissions, helping to curb the planet’s temperature increase by 1.5ºC. A total of 200 companies have joined the pact worldwide. In Brazil, we are one of the 11 participants in the initiative.

We also sent a letter of commitment to the Science Based Targets (SBT) initiative to review and define new emission reduction targets.

Klabin’s Water Management, Climate Change and Supplier Engagement Rating programs were recognized by CDP. The company was promoted to Category A, which represents its Leadership in these areas. CDP, an international non-profit organization, analyzes and recognizes the efforts of companies worldwide to manage the environmental impacts of their activities.

Financial implications and other risks and opportunities associated to climate change  

GRI 201-2

The recommendations of the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosure (TFCD) were gradually implemented. We have a survey of climate risks and opportunities, with an understanding of the category and magnitude of the financial impact, considering mitigation measures for risks and actions to enhance opportunities.

Risks and opportunities depend on changing climate variables in future scenarios. Thus, the time o occurrence of such events is still uncertain, but a horizon between 2020 and 2050 can be considered. Find below a summary of the main risks and opportunities mapped.

Risks and opportunities motivated by climate change1

RISK/OPPORTUNITY ACTION FINANCIAL IMPACT
Category Event Impact Adaptation and investment measures Category Magnitude Potential financial impact
Regulatory Carbon emission regulation of carbon through the market mechanism: taxation and/or emissions trading system Two of Klabin’s industrial units – Puma and Monte Alegre – produce direct emissions above 200,000 tCO2e. This indicates that these units can be regulated by carbon pricing schemes Domestic carbon pricing – adoption of the shadow price for impact and investment analysis. The domestic carbon price is used based on the average carbon price in Latin America – around BRL 40. Sensitivity analyzes are also performed, as well as application scenarios for the regulation instrument. There is no need for additional investment. Operating cost and revenues The company invests in carbon reduction technologies, which decreases carbon cost and exposure to regulation. A regulated carbon market in Brazil is still expected to trade offsets, of forest origin, as a flexibility mechanism, which would generate revenue gains for the Company.
Physical Climate change, such as increased temperature, shortage/excessive rainfall Impact on forest productivity, especially on the growth of planted forest, in addition to changes in the incidence of pests. Creation of the Forest Efficiency and Ecophysiology Department. Investment in forestry research and testing different pine and eucalyptus materials, which are more resistant to water deficit or pests. This investment is inherent to the general investment in the forestry research and development area. Operating cost and revenues Falling forest productivity may have an impact on revenue, with increased operating costs to mitigate such impact. However, an investment in forestry biotechnology may contribute to forest productivity gains.
Chronic Water scarcity. Change in rainfall patterns. A drop in the supply of such input can impact industrial productivity. Some units (Goiana, Jundiaí DI and TP) are located in areas with an expected future climate scenario of water scarcity. Integrated/adaptive management of water resources, with measures to reduce water consumption and increase reuse. Water source diversification assessment, including reuse. Operating cost The water replacement cost analysis (which considers possible new measures for supplying the input) shows an increase in operating cost. However, these measures reduce the probability of water scarcity that interferes with productivity.
Technological Development of industrial technologies for energy efficiency and reduction of carbon emissions. Energy efficiency, bioenergy generation, savings/energy savings are examples of the positive impacts on the deployment of low carbon technologies. The company makes robust investments in low-carbon technologies. Example: Capex of biomass gasification projects – BRL 132 MM; tall oil – BRL 25,4 MM Capital and revenue Low-carbon technologies contribute to reducing operating costs and to revenue gains, due, for example, to the opportunity to sell energy, in addition to reducing operating costs.
Market Increased consumer demand for products/packaging with a low carbon footprint. By offering products manufactured from renewable sources and a predominantly clean energy matrix (89.5%), the Company may benefit from the consumers’ growing awareness on low carbon products. Adoption of methodologies that help map and communicate the carbon footprint of Klabin’s products. Approximately BRL 500,000 were invested in studies. Competitiveness It is not yet possible to estimate the increase in “low carbon” products and the consequent positive impact on Klabin’s product sales. However, the Company is following this market trend, increasing its portfolio of bioproducts.
Reputational Increased stakeholder perception on the importance and valuation of mitigation and adaptation measures to climate change. Recognition of the company’s stakeholders, as well as investors. Klabin responds to reports and questionnaires that acknowledge and communicate the Company’s investments and actions in the climate agenda, such as CDP. Competitiveness Positive return. Klabin is recognized on the market for its investment and good practices in climate management, which enabled part of the issuance of USD 1.2 billion green bonds, which will be allocated to projects directly and indirectly linked to the low carbon economy.

1 The mapping considers the risks and opportunities described above in the 2020 to 2040 panorama, thus configuring short to long-term risks.

Water and effluents

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

Water is one of the most important inputs for our processes, mainly in the production of paper and pulp.

The resource is also used in the entire value chain: from the manufacture of chemical inputs to the road and sea transport of final products. Whether by reducing captured water or reusing effluents, our focus is on reducing consumption.

As described in items 7 and 12 of our Sustainability Policy, all units operate in compliance with current environmental laws and regulations, at the local, state and national levels. In addition, we seek continuous improvement in all processes, valuing the conservation of natural resources and fostering water reuse.

In addition to internal guidelines and policies, federal and state legislation on effluents and water resources are constantly monitored:

  • CONAMA Resolution No. 430/2011 – Conditions and standards for effluent discharge;
  • CONAMA Resolution No. 357/2005 – Classification of water bodies and framework environmental guidelines;

We participate in the Tibagi River Basin Committee, in Paraná; the Canoas River Basin Committee, in Santa Catarina; and the Piracicaba, Capivari and Jundiaí Rivers Hydrographic Basins Committee, in São Paulo. We also participate in other committees in the regions where our plants are located (Angatuba/SP and Goiana/PE). Company representatives actively participate in discussions on water use, water resource plans and the establishment of mechanisms for water use pricing/charging.

Management and assessment  

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

One hundred percent of the effluents are treated at the Effluent Treatment Plants (ETP), before discharge to the water bodies.  Treatment is monitored both internally and by a third party, in compliance with all legal requirements.

The units periodically undergo internal and external audits to assess the Management System, including the Water and Effluent System. In some units, water-related targets impact the Profit Sharing Program (PPR). 

The Puma II Project, started in 2019, will feature new technologies for the treatment of water and effluents, including the tertiary treatment of 100% of the generated effluent.

Water footprint

In 2019, Klabin participated in the El Água nos Une initiative, a Latin American network that operates in the business management of water resources from the water footprint. In Brazil, the network is implemented by the Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGVCES). In partnership with the institution, we have developed the Puma Unit’s pulp water footprint, according to ISO 14046: 2014.

Interactions with water as a shared resource  

GRI 303-1

In addition to participating in Hydrographic Basin Committees in Paraná and Santa Catarina, we monitor potential conflicts with stakeholders due to increased pressure on natural resources.

Based on international best practice references and the SDGs, our goal is to keep water abstraction below 105,000.00 m³/year x 1000 until 2022.

Hydrosolidarity

 

In 2019, the work Planejamento Florestal – Microbacias e Hidrossolidariedade [Forestry Planning – Microbasins and Hydrosolidarity] was awarded by Diálogo Florestal, an initiative that brings together forest-based companies, environmental organizations and social movements. The project consists of verifying the best forest management practices to extinguish or minimize impacts on tertiary basins. Based on the studies, it is established whether it is more appropriate to plant eucalyptus or pine, for instance, considering the local water supply.

The work was also presented at the XXV IUFRO World Congress (the International Union of Forest Research Organizations), which took place in 2019 in Curitiba. The event, organized and coordinated by the Brazilian Forest Service (SFB) and the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa) is an important forum for exchanging experiences and knowledge on technological innovations in the sector.

Management of impacts related to water discharge

 

The minimum effluent disposal standards are based on municipal, state, and federal legislation for each unit. Klabin also compares its results with IFC/IPCC indicators, which are a benchmark for the pulp and paper sector. In order to determine the maximum discharge limits, the responsible environmental body requests studies on water dispersion and self-depuration of the water body to assess and determine the limits that do not change the quality and volume of the water body.

Improvements in Rio Negro

 

In 2019, investments were allocated to restructure the Effluent Treatment Station in the Rio Negro Unit, in Paraná. Based on the implemented improvements, it was possible to reduce the generation of hazardous waste by over 100 tons. Treated effluents, thus, can also be used in Unit’s glue production, closing the cycle.

O trabalho também foi apresentado no XXV Congresso Mundial da IUFRO (sigla em inglês para União Internacional de Organizações de Pesquisa Florestal), ocorrido em 2019 em Curitiba. O evento, organizado e coordenado pelo Serviço Florestal Brasileiro (SFB) e pela Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa) é um importante fórum de troca de experiências e conhecimento em inovações tecnológicas do setor.

Water withdrawal

GRI 303-3

Even with a 3% production increase, water abstraction from 2018 to 2019 rose only 0.3%, which demonstrates the units’ water efficiency. In units with water stress, which represents 1% of the total water withdrawn by Klabin in the period, water abstraction grew 23%. This is due to the change in the classification of the Jundiaí Distrito Industrial and Jundiaí Tijuco Preto Units, in São Paulo, which are now featured in the water stress list.

Water management in the supply chain

Also in 2019, we started evaluating suppliers through the EcoVadis platform. A total of 110 companies were selected in the first cycle of social and corporate responsibility assessment, including water-related mapping and evidence. Of the total, over 72% promote water management initiatives.

Total water withdrawal, in Megaliter (Ml)

Total water withdrawal, broken down by the following sources (in Ml – Megaliter)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
Surface water, including wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans 92,413.75 0.00 111,151.20 830.20 108,177.69 955.86 108,306.42 1,110.84
Groundwater/water tables 91.96 0.00 80.57 21.21 89.99 20.64 49.87 69.00
Third-party water 179.55 0.00 186.12 0.00 169.34 0.00 153.06 21.57
Total 92,685.26 0.00 111,417.89 851.42 108,437.02 976.50 108,509.34 1,201.42

1All withdrawn water is from freshwater sources (≤1,000 mg/L of total dissolved solids). Klabin does not withdraw produced water (water retained in underground formations, brought to the surface).

Total water withdrawal, in cubic meters (m³)1

Total water withdrawal, broken down by the following sources (in Ml – Megaliter)* 2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
Surface water, including wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans 92,413,753.00 0.00 111,151,197.10 830,202.90 108,177,687.79 955,860.00 108,306,415.30 1,110,841.00
Groundwater/water tables 91,962.00 0.00 80,574.14 21,212.86 89,988.57 20,640.00 49,870.43 69,004.80
Third-party water 179,547.00 0.00 186,117.00 0.00 169,342.76 0.00 153,055.76 21,570.00
Total 92,685,262.00 0.00 111,417,888.24 851,415.76 108,437,019.12 976,500.00 108,509,341.49 1,201,415.80

1 All withdrawn water is from freshwater sources (≤1,000 mg/L of the total dissolved solids). Klabin does not withdraw produced water (water retained in underground formations, brought to the surface).

Discharge of effluents

 

Manufacturing units follow the limits established by the legislation in force in each state and country for reference and monitoring of effluents. Parameters such as Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and BOD5 removal efficiency are priorities. In the pulp and paper mills, the concentrations of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and phosphorus in effluents are also of great importance. Indices are often compared with global benchmarks, such as the IPPC and IFC.

Between 2018 and 2019, there was an increase in the discharge of effluents by only 2%. In the units with water stress, the rate grew 36% due to the inclusion of the Jundiaí Distrito Industrial and Jundiaí Tijuco Preto Units.

There are no defined goals for the topic, since the target set for water consumption decrease directly impacts the reduction of effluent generation.

A good example

 

A unidade Puma, em Ortigueira, no Paraná, possui um dos maiores montantes de descarte de água no Rio Tibagi. Isso porque seu processo de tratamento é um dos mais sofisticados e robustos da Klabin. Com tratamento terciário, o efluente lançado no corpo receptor apresenta qualidade superior aos limites ambientais exigidos. Devido à ótima qualidade do efluente tratado, a Unidade faz a captação de água a jusante do ponto de lançamento de efluente.

Total water discharge 1 in megaliters (Ml)

Total of water discharge, broken down by the following destinations (Ml – megaliter) 2 2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
Surface water, including wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans 74,195.94 0.00 99,251.94 661.86 89,888.04 686.90 91,389.50 914.70
Third-party water, and the volume of this total sent for use in other organizations, if applicable. 0.00 0.00 100.70 0.00 102.61 0.00 99.31 17.22
Total 74,195.94 0.00 99,352.64 661.86 89,990.65 686.90 91,488.82 931.92

1 Effluent discharge data are monitored in all units. The company uses its own platform to compile and analyze all indicators of environmental performance and sustainability.

2Klabin does not dispose of effluent into groundwater. All discharge is of freshwater (≤1,000 mg/L of total dissolved solids). The Goiana/PE, Jundiaí TP and Jundiaí DI units are located in areas with water stress.

Total water discharge, in cubic meters (m³)

Total water discharge, broken down by the following destinations (Ml – megaliter) 2 2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
Surface water, including wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans 74,195,940.18 0.00 99,251,940.00 661,860.00 89,888,040.00 686,900.00 91,389,502.40 914,702.00
Third-party water, and the volume of this total sent for use in other organizations, if applicable. 0.00 0.00 100,700.00 0.00 102,609.64 0.00 99,314.17 17,216.00
Total 74,195,940.18 0.00 99,352,640.00 661,860.00 89,990,649.64 686,900.00 91,488,816.57 931,918.00

1 Effluent discharge data are monitored in all units. The company uses its own platform to compile and analyze all indicators of environmental performance and sustainability.

2Klabin does not dispose of effluent into groundwater. All discharge is of freshwater (≤1,000 mg/L of total dissolved solids). The Goiana/PE, Jundiaí TP and Jundiaí DI units are located in areas with water stress.

Water consumption

GRI 303-5

The lower consumption recorded in 2019 shows that we are focused on reducing impacts on water resources, returning more water to water bodies and further increasing reuse of such resource in the plants. Reported water consumption indicators refer to water abstraction minus the discharge of treated effluents.

Total water consumption1, in Megaliters (Ml)

2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
18,489.32 0.00 12,065.25 189.56 18,446.37 289.61 17,020.52 269.50

1We use the following equation to calculate Klabin’s water consumption: Water consumption = Total water withdrawal – Total water discharge. The Goiana/PE, Jundiaí TP and Jundiaí DI units are located in areas with water stress. The total water consumed by these three units in 2019 was 269.5 megaliters.

Total water consumption1, in millions of cubic meters (m³)  

2016 2017 2018 2019
All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress All areas Areas with water stress
18.49 0.00 12.07 0.19 18.45 0.29 17.02 0.27

1We use the following equation to calculate Klabin’s water consumption: Water consumption = Total water withdrawal – Total water discharge. The Goiana/PE, Jundiaí TP and Jundiaí DI units are located in areas with water stress. The total water consumed by these three units in 2019 was 269.5 megaliters

Specific water consumption by business and by unit, in m3 per ton (m3/t)

Water consumption reported in the indicators below refers to water capture less the discharge of treated effluents (advisory use).

Specific water consumption/water intensity (m3/t), by business 2017 2018 2019
Papers 6.53 3.64 4.22
Pulp 3.49 8.32 6.23
Packaging 0.26 0.25 0.21
Recycled Materials 1.55 1.63 1.29
Sacks 0.03 0.00 0.02
Specific water consumption/water intensity (m3/t), by unit 2017 2018 2019
Angatuba 1.34 1.27 2.48
Betim 0.25 0.24 0.22
Correia Pinto 8.33 6.92 2.96
Feira de Santana 0.13 0.20 0.15
Goiana 0.63 0.91 0.72
Itajaí 0.29 0.23 0.22
Jundiaí DI 0.18 0.22 0.21
Jundiaí TP 0.14 0.28 0.34
Lages 1 0.01 0.00 0.00
Manaus 0.68 0.62 0.54
Monte Alegre 8.90 4.25 6.06
Otacilio Costa 0.87 1.18 0.64
Piracicaba KE 0.23 0.15 0.16
Piracicaba KR 2.32 1.63 1.29
Puma 3.49 8.32 6.23
Rio Negro 0.20 0.38 0.01
São Leopoldo 0.25 0.25 0.22

Waste management

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

Items 6, 7, 10 and 12 of our Sustainability Policy encompass pollution prevention through the reduction of the impacts of solid waste generation; the search for the most efficient technologies and solutions; guidance by the SDGs; and compliance with legislation and standards applicable to the product, environment, health and safety. Environmental management is also based on the guidelines set forth by ISO 14001, in which most of our units are certified.

In addition to internal guidelines and policies, federal (Law No. 12.305/2010 – National Policy on Solid Waste), state and municipal legislation related to solid waste are constantly monitored, accompanied by actions to demonstrate compliance with the guidelines of these standards.

Environmental indicators are a pillar considered when calculating bonuses for employees and senior management. The restructuring of the Sustainability area, mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, also strengthens management of the issue.

Waste broken down by type and disposal method

GRI 306-2

We reduced hazardous waste generation by approximately 10% when compared to 2018, driving the hazardous waste percentage down from 0.11% in 2018 to 0.04% in 2019. In addition, the percentage of non-hazardous waste reuse is at 96.7%, reinforcing the commitment and focus on achieving the goal of maintaining waste reuse > 95% until 2022.

It is worth stressing that there was a significant increase in the amount of forestry residues (bark, branches, chips) for energy reuse due to changes in their accounting method (barks were previously not considered as waste for energy use).

Disposal of hazardous waste, in tons

Destination 2016 2017 2018 2019
Reuse 10.32 73.82 41.19
Recycling 152.82 185.78 219.22 196.86
Recovery (including energy recovery) 37.42 38.73 22.62 31.93
Incineration (mass burn) 0.45 9.90 9.21 0.00
Other (class I landfill) 378.28 318.89 620.20 576.26
Other (decontamination) 56.22 47.42 0.00 0.00
Total 625.19 611.03 945.07 846.24

Disposal of non-hazardous waste, in tons

Destination 2016 2017 2018 2019
Reuse 134,661.72 103,526.98 81,683.49 146,818.67
Recycling 74,737.58 215,958.75 220,816.15 229,456.70
Composting 95,453.06 133,301.74 139,788.52 148,678.14
Recovery (including energy recovery)1 1,344,362.55 1,414,677.67 1,448,094.02 1,574,435.08
Incineration (mass burn) 0 167 0 0
Class II-A landfill 62,246.01 112,770.43 67,405.53 72,620.91
On-site storage 14,457.89 19,433.57 15,998.40 12,367.61
Total 740,112.02 956,181.04 852,619.13 2,184,377.11

1As of 2019, we began to consider as waste all the barks generated and burned in the boilers as biomass.

Total weight of treated hazardous waste, in tons

Total weight of each of the following types of waste (in tons)1 2016 2017 2018 2019
Treated hazardous 625.19 608.04 945.07 846.24

1 Waste is classified according to the NBR 10004 standard.
Klabin does not use chemicals controlled by international Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) standards

Materials used by weight or volume
GRI 301-1 

Reduction of

1.07%

consumption of materials from non-renewable sources

6%

caustic soda consumption

12%

sodium sulfate consumption

Increase of

54%

in paper chip purchases when compared to the previous year, a significant result for the reverse logistics of paper waste in the post-consumption stage, as established by the National Policy on Solid Waste

We maintained

above 98%

Use of materials from renewable sources

Total volume or weight of materials that are used in production and packaging, in thousands of tons

Total volume or weight of materials that are used to produce and package the primary products and services (in thousands of tons):
Source Material 2016 2017 2018 2019
Renewable source Wood for processing 10,697.00 12,400.00 12,076.48 12,284.77
Chips purchased on market (recycled) 173.00 116.00 217.00 335.06
Purchased pulp (cellulose and CTMP) 26.00 32.00 14.00 26.41
Non-renewable source Sulfuric acid 24.15 32.91 36.33 37.19
Caustic soda 47.48 66.19 64.77 61.12
Sodium sulfate 15.25 14.05 19.35 16.94
Aluminum sulfate 36.58 48.54 43.10 47.47
Lime 49.84 36.18 93.61 93.21
Kaolin 17.63 20.57 18.76 17.03
Total renewable 10,896.00 12,548.00 12,307.48 12,646.23
Total non-renewable 190.93 218.44 275.92 272.96

Biodiversity management

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3 

Conserving biodiversity is a value applied across all our operations..

This care gains even more strength in forestry activities. All procedures include items that help preserve biodiversity and minimize environmental impacts.

Forestry units are audited annually by Sustainable Forest Management standards. We are certified by FSC ® in our three units: Paraná, Santa Catarina and São Paulo; and also by CERFLOR in the Paraná unit. Audits are also conducted on clients and financing institutions. The Company’s commitments to the issue are widely publicized and evaluated by its own team in internal inspections and monitoring of action plans, when appropriate.

Several actions include minimizing the risks to biodiversity. One of them is the analysis of operational processes and the establishment of rules to avoid or mitigate damage (learn more in Hydrosolidarity). Fauna and flora are monitored by a specialized third party for the purpose of maintaining a sustainable forest management system.

Nature Interpretation Center

 

GRI 103-1, 103-2, 103-3

The inauguration of the Nature Interpretation Center in March 2019 strengthened support for biodiversity research. The space, located at a strategic point of the Natural Heritage Private Reserve (RPPN) in the Serra da Farofa Complex of Santa Catarina, has the capacity to accommodate up to 40 researchers. With over 420 species of flora and 190 of fauna identified throughout 5,000 hectares of Atlantic Rainforest and High Altitude Fields, the Conservation Unit is an essential location for developing studies.

We are signatories to the Global Compact, CDP, Companies for the Climate, GHG Protocol, Brazilian Forest Dialogue and different international agreements maintained based on annual forest management certifications. For the CDP Forest program, we aim to be recognized as a leading company (A +). In 2019, Klabin received the “A-” score.

Adoption of the mosaic concept: mixing planted and native forests and forming ecological corridors, which contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and the protection of water resources.

Planting and harvesting periods are different and phased.

Operational sites owned, leased, managed in, or adjacent to protected areas and areas of high biodiversity index outside protected areas

GRI 304-1

Farofa Complex

State Natural Heritage Private Reserve (RPPNe) located in Santa Catarina, in an ​​extractive operation area of 49.87 km2.  With araucaria and high altitude forests, it houses the springs of the Caveiras and Canoas rivers. It is devoted to scientific research, the management of natural resources and the upholding of climatic and ecological equilibrium.

Monte Alegre RPPN

Located at Fazenda Monte Alegre in Telêmaco Borba, Paraná, in an area of ​​45.23 km2, it is also a space for scientific research and protection of local biodiversity and water resources.

Ecological park

 

Klabin’s Ecological Park, which spans 9,852 hectares and is located at Fazenda Monte Alegre (PR), promotes biodiversity conservation, rehabilitation and animal welfare activities. Created in the 1980s, the space is closed to leisure and recreation activities, specifically intended for the development of scientific research and support for environmental education projects.

91,6% of the Park is made up of native forests.

Units with a high biodiversity index

Category Serra da Farofa Complex (RPPNe) RPPN Monte Alegre AAVCs
Geographic location SC PR In the 3 Forestry units
Surface and underground land that may be owned, leased or managed by the organization Owned – surface Owned – surface Owned – surface
Position in relation to the protected area (in the area, adjacent to, or containing portions of the protected area) or the ​​high biodiversity value area outside protected areas Within the area Within the area Within the area
Type of operation (office, manufacturing/production or extractive operation) Extractive operation Extractive operation Extractive operation
Size of the operating unit in km² 49.87 km² 45.23 km² Variable*
Biodiversity value characterized by the attribute of the protected area or area of high biodiversity value outside the protected area (terrestrial, freshwater or maritime ecosystem) Terrestrial Ecosystem Terrestrial Ecosystem Terrestrial Ecosystem
Biodiversity value characterized by listing of protected status (such as IUCN Protected Area Management Categories, Ramsar Convention, national legislation) IUCN/National legislation IUCN/National legislation Proforest

1The public summaries of the management plans contain further information.

Significant impacts of activities, products and services on biodiversity

GRI 304-2

We have identified a series of direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity that are particularly managed by the company’s Forestry Area. The impacts are detailed below:

 

Aspect Description of impacts
Construction or use of manufacturing plants, mines and transport infrastructure The forestry units build and maintain rural roads. In all cases, there are procedures to mitigate the impacts resulting from this operation. In specific cases, these procedures were associated to environmental monitoring tools.
Pollution (introduction of substances that do not naturally occur in the habitat from point and non-point sources) We have a survey of associated environmental aspects and impacts on the forestry operations. These documents also include mitigation actions.
Introduction of invasive species, pests and pathogens We use exotic species for commercial plantations. Native species are used in plantations for area restoration. A dedicated team is in charge of eliminating invasive exotic species from permanent preservation areas.
Reduction of species Periodic surveys are conducted with specialized consultants for the purpose of identifying any changes in the environments (fauna and flora) resulting from the adopted forest management. There were no negative changes in the evaluated parameters.
Habitat conversion Not applicable, except for cases of conversion from planted forests to environmental recovery areas. This activity may occur to restore ecological functions, maximize the positive impacts of ecological corridors and enhance water resource maintenance procedures.
Changes in ecological processes outside the natural range of variation, such as salinity or changes in groundwater level The concept of “hydrosolidarity” is being improved and implemented. This process considers a forest’s water consumption throughout its productive cycle to avoid negatively affecting neighboring river basins. That is, water availability, especially in small neighboring rural properties.

The following are the significant direct and indirect impacts, both positive and negative, in relation to the following aspects:

Aspect Description of impacts
Species affected In the forest management scenario, native flora species can be negatively impacted due to competition for light and nutrients when exotic species invade the Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs) and Legal Reserves (RLs). We can cite the connectivity of the forest fragments as a positive impact, allowing movement of the fauna.
Extent of areas impacted The Klabin forest area totals 557,034 hectares. Although it is susceptible to impacts arising from the operation, its management is guided by the mosaic forest concept, with the planting of pine and eucalyptus interspersed with areas of native forests, preserving the fauna, flora and water resources.
Duration of impacts Continuous.
Reversibility or irreversibility of the impacts. When a non-conformity is identified in the field, the operation is notified to provide the primary solutions, analysis of the incident and the need for review or design of an operational procedures.

Protected or restored habitats
GRI 304-3

We hold 29.26 km² in protected or restored areas. Conservation areas where interventions were conducted are considered, such as control of exotic species and planting of native species. Check out the details below:

Areas protected or restored

Aspect Paraná Santa Catarina São Paulo
Size of habitat areas protected or restored (km²) 14.49 km² 13.12 km² 1.65 km²
Location of habitat areas protected or restored; Permanent Preservation Areas of farms under the company’s management Permanent Preservation Areas of farms under the company’s management Permanent Preservation Areas of farms under the company’s management
Have restoration measures been approved by independent external professionals? Yes. Third-party company Casa da Floresta Yes. Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina  (UDESC) Yes. Third-party company Casa da Floresta
Partnerships with third parties to protect or restore habitat areas distinct from where the organization has overseen and implemented restoration or protection measures Good Forests Program Good Forests Program Good Forests Program
Condition of each area at the close of the reporting period In different stages of recovery Initial recovery In different stages of recovery
Standards, methodologies, and assumptions used Abandonment and follow-up, as well as occasional planting of native species Abandonment and follow-up Abandonment and follow-up, as well as occasional planting of native species

IUCN red list species and national conservation list species with habitats located in areas affected by the organization’s operations

GRI 304-4

In 2019, 918 fauna and flora species with conservation status recognized by the IUCN were identified in areas affected by Klabin’s operations. The variation is due to the updating of the IUCN list, as well as technical variations (nomenclature changes) and adjustments related to the updating methodology.

Extinction risk level 2016 2017 2018 2019
Fauna Flora Fauna Flora Fauna Flora Fauna Flora
Critically endangered (CR) 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1
Endangered (EN) 4 7 3 11 2 8 3 8
Vulnerable (VU) 21 17 49 21 21 16 20 16
Near threatened (NT) 54 8 84 2 52 11 50 11
Least concern (LC) 643 55 1,211 73 652 72 642 165
Total 723 88 1,349 110 728 108 716 201

An accumulated total of 844 species of fauna (including the puma, little red brocket and howler monkeys) and 1,889 species of flora had been identified through 2019 in Klabin areas. Among these, 25 fauna and 25 flora species are threatened with extinction (CR, EN and VU), according to the IUCN List.

Environmental compliance

GRI 307-1

In 2019, Klabin received Infraction Notice No. 46001324 (CETESB) in the amount of BRL 12,071.15, regarding the emission of water effluents from the Angatuba plant above the legal limits, with respect to the sulfide parameter, as well as a non-monetary sanction.

Significant fines and non-monetary sanctions

Significant fines and non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations 2016 2017 2018 2019
Monetary value of significant fines BRL 0.00 BRL 0.00 BRL 18,589.57 BRL 12,071.15
Total number of non-monetary sanctions 0 0 1 1
Total number of cases resolved through arbitration mechanisms 0 0 0 0