Keep Baikal Alive!

We consider that it is possible, but it is necessary to make the Government understand that irrationality of their Decision is clear for many thousands of people and these people are not going to yield up. Among the methods there are signatures collection, public meetings, all forms of allowed by law protests. And of course people's creative activities, such as Baikalsk residents' initiatives that must be upheld by all the citizens.

Indeed BPPM is not the only Baikal enemy. There are a lot of problems connected with transport of air pollution from Angarsk's and Shelehov's industrial hub, main Baikal confluent - river Selenga pollution etc. Nevertheless it is absolutely unacceptable to compare BPPM and these agents: neither by volume nor by drains and discharges composition. The BPPM is the biggest chemical combine and it is situated right on the lake's margin and for dozens of years Baikal has been used as a noxious wastes clarifying tank.

For example, a BPPM part in discharges to superficial water objects of the Baikal Nature Area Central Ecological Zone was in 2007 (before closing) 80%. Mill's emissions zone of impact extends to hundreds of square kilometers. The result of the BPPM work is several million tones of the most hazardous wastes right on Baikal's shore. Ground waters around BPPM site are polluted by hazardous substances that gradually penetrate into the lake.

Viscose sulfate bleached pulp is used to produce carbonic threads and carbonic fiber from which heat-resistant materials required by the army are made. But such kind of pulp could be produced not only in the BPPM and it is proved by the data from the public sources. As well it is no secret that this BPPM product was of poor quality. And moreover almost all of it was exported to China.

It is obvious that the army can't have only one producer of the "key raw material" especially situated as close to the border as the BPPM does. It is also hard to believe that the only and non-alternative source of military materials was given to the bad-faith owner who completely ruined it.

Sulfate unbleached wood pulp, viscose sulfate pulp, sulfate bleached pulp from softwood, brown paper, paper for corrugating, cardboard for flat layers of corrugated cardboard, sulfate terebenthene, raw tall oil.

More than 2000 people used to work at BPPM.

Actually the BPPM doesn't have its own forest raw material base. Last years timber delivered from hundreds of kilometers had to be used. Wood is also delivered from Buriatia, the Zabaikalsky Kray etc. The materials are mostly of low standard and it makes the processing more difficult and more expansive.

Equipment replacement took place from time to time. But according to the data from the mills' workers, equipment replacement practically stopped after mill's passing into "Continental Management" ownership. In general deprecation of the plant can be estimated as 90%. It is impossible to estimate technical and ecological safety of the mill because its owners militate against independent expert estimation.

In addition to the fact that BPPM closed water cycle turned out to be a mare's nest it has nothing to do with mills loss ratio. The mill always has losses and it was especially noticeable in 2005 when the World Bank came out of the mill's converting project because of its running at a loss. In 2008 September 29 "the mock start of the mock water cycle" where minister of Nature Resources Trutnev was present luckily coincided with the financial crisis and great cheeping of unbleached pulp. Since that time closed water cycle has been used by the BPPM owners as a cover-up to hide the failure of their management.

It is still difficult to develop alternative business in Baikalsk because the State doesn't support it. Nevertheless a lot of people have alternative income for a long period of time. A good many people involve in production and sale of food: berries, mushrooms, pine nuts etc. Quite a number of people work in travel industry. Some guide tourists up the mountains; some arrange boat trips on Baikal or organize rafting. In this regard it is worth to recall such effective and noticeable projects as ski resort "Sobolinaya Gora" (Sable Mountain), Museum of minerals, "Irida Garden", souvenirs production, Angarsk Economy and Law College branch, strawberry festival "Victoria".

Here it is better to speak not only about Baikalsk but at least about Sludyanka District which includes the town. There is everything here to develop the tourist industry: mild climate (cool summers and soft winters), rich nature: Baikal, mountains, lakes; well-developed infrastructure: railroad, highways, restaurants and eateries, hostels, port, ski resort, ecological paths etc; historical and cultural points of interest: old villages, famous all round Baikal railroad, museums... According to the tour operators this region has enormous potential that could hardly be developed because of the unsolved BPPM problem.

Even extremely general government statistics shows that the mill is not able to recycle even the newly forming wastes ? 120 000 ? 150 000 tones a year. In theory (that as you know almost never coincides with reality) the mill can reprocess just a half of this mass. In practice the situation is even worse. For example in 2007 the BPPM managed to recycle only one sixth of the produced wastes. Assurances that the BPPM in several months or several years will be able to liquidate many millions of hazardous wastes are absolutely groundless.

The BPPM start adherents claim that none of the scientists engaged in the Baikal researches was able to answer the Prime Minister Putin's question if the mill threatened Baikal. It has nothing to do with the real state of matters. The scientific community has large amount of data which give clear evidence that the BPPM damages Baikal. Here it is appropriate to quote famous scientists M.I.Kuzmin (Director of the SB RAS Geochemistry Institute, Chairman of the Scientific Council on questions concerning Lake Baikal, Academician) and M.A. Grachev (Director of the SB RAS Limnology Institute, Academician). These scientists are called the main experts on Baikal even by the mill start adherents.

M.I. Kuzmin: "On August 21st when Putin was here and we had a meeting after his diving I actually stood for the point that the BPPM had not to be started that it would do damage in many ways".

M.A. Grachev: "As it is pointed by some bodies of the government, town Baikalsk authorities and the mill's owners closed water cycle cancel is possible because the mill doesn't threaten Baikal. And altogether they refer to me and the other RAS members who allegedly confirmed that the mill didn?t threaten the lake at all. In actual fact we have never declared it".