Browse

Journals By Subject

Life Sciences, Agriculture & Food
Chemistry
Medicine & Health
Materials Science
Mathematics & Physics
Electrical & Computer Science
Earth, Energy & Environment
Architecture & Civil Engineering
Education
Economics & Management
Humanities & Social Sciences
Multidisciplinary

Books

Publish Conference Abstract Books
Upcoming Conference Abstract Books
Published Conference Abstract Books
Publish Your Books
Upcoming Books
Published Books

Proceedings

Events

Events
Five Types of Conference Publications

Join

Join as Editorial Board Member
Become a Reviewer

Information

For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Conference Organizers
For Librarians
Article Processing Charges
Special Issue Guidelines
Editorial Process
Manuscript Transfers
Peer Review at SciencePG
Open Access
Copyright and License
Ethical Guidelines
Submit an Article
Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry

Tujuba Tamiru Ashetu*,  Sisay Demisse Geda
Published in American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry (Volume 9, Issue 2)
Received: 21 October 2025     Accepted: 28 November 2025     Published: 31 December 2025
Views:       Downloads:
Download PDF
Abstract

The study focuses on analysis of long term stored unknown chemicals and environmental impacts of stored chemicals at Ethiopia's Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Factory. In order to guide safe disposal or reuse, the goal is to identify and evaluate the chemical's qualities, especially its acidity, basicity, and composition. Both survey-based and laboratory methodologies are used in the investigation. While physical and chemical studies, such as pH measurements and cationic ion analysis, are carried out, information on chemical storage conditions is gathered using a standardized questionnaire. Soil samples gathered in the vicinity are examined to assess the environmental impact, and chemical samples are evaluated in water to ascertain their pH and solubility. Accuracy is ensured by multiple tests, the results of which are combined into averages and standard deviations. With pH values ranging from roughly 3.63 to 8.63, the results show that the compounds have a spectrum of weak acidic to weak basic characteristics. Aluminum sulfate is the main component found in the analysis, with traces of starch. Despite chemical contact, soil tests around the stored compounds are mainly neutral, indicating little immediate environmental damage. Sample variations indicate weak basicity or acidity, and the insoluble chemical further indicates intricate chemical interactions. The study confirmed that the stored chemical is mainly aluminum sulfate, a weak acid or base, posing limited environmental danger at current concentrations. The findings support safe disposal or potential reuse by industries, emphasizing the importance of proper chemical handling to mitigate ecological risks. Overall, the study provides a basis for informed management of chemical waste in industrial settings, promoting environmental safety and sustainable practices.

Published in American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry (Volume 9, Issue 2)
DOI 10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16
Page(s) 80-91
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group
Previous article
Keywords

Aluminum Sulfate, Chemical Storage, Environmental Impact, Sustainable Practices

1. Introduction
As a driver of economic expansion, technological development, and social progression, industrialization is essential to the advancement of civilization
[1]
. The growth of industries around the world is a prime example of how humans may use natural resources to meet the rising demand for goods and services. However, when hazardous materials are included, environmental issues frequently accompany this progress. Chemicals must be managed, stored, and disposed of properly in order to maintain sustainable industrial practices, safeguard public health, and stop environmental deterioration
[2]
.
Over the past few decades, Ethiopia's industrial sector has grown significantly, especially in the production of pulp and paper. The oldest pulp and paper company in Ethiopia, the Ethiopian Pulp and Paper Share Company, has been in business for more than 60 years. Historically, pulp production and waste paper recycling have been its main priorities in order to produce a variety of paper products, like cartons, Manila paper, and A4 paper. Caustic soda, starch, fillers, and dyes, have been employed by the industry throughout its operational history. These chemicals are essential for guaranteeing both process efficiency and product quality.
However, the long-term storage and management of chemicals, especially in older manufacturing industries, pose significant environmental and safety concerns
[3]
. During recent site assessments, it was observed that a substantial quantity of unidentified chemicals had been stored outdoors within the factory premises, covering a large land. These chemicals had been stored for over 30 years without proper labeling, documentation, or containment measures, raising critical questions about their composition and potential environmental impacts
[4]
. The chemical storage area is directly in contact with surrounding soils and vegetation, like local green grasses and agricultural land, which amplifies the risk of soil and water contamination
[5]
.
The ambiguity surrounding the chemical’s identity has led to conflicts between the industry and the local community
[6]
. Residents have expressed concerns over soil degradation, potential health hazards, and the safety of water resources that may be affected by seepage or runoff from the chemical storage sites. The industry, on the other hand, faces difficulties in managing or disposing of the unidentified chemicals due to the lack of factual data leading to environmental and operational challenges
[7]
. Despite reaching out to local governmental agencies and environmental authorities, no definitive action or guidance has been provided to date. This situation underscores the urgent need for systematic chemical analysis to assess the risks and formulate appropriate mitigation strategies.
The primary challenge in managing this chemical inventory stems from its unknown nature repacked, mixed, and stored for long times in open environments. The absence of labels, records, and expert assessments hampers efforts to evaluate its toxicity, environmental behavior, and safe disposal methods
[8]
. If unmanaged, these chemicals threaten to cause further soil contamination, water pollution, and adverse health effects for nearby communities, thereby intensifying the socio-environmental conflict.
In light of these conditions, the goal of this study is to close the crucial knowledge gap by carefully examining the chemical compounds kept throughout the industrial grounds. The chemical identification, pH properties, ion composition, and possible toxicity will all be ascertained by laboratory research
[9]
. Additionally, controlled tests using plant seedlings will be used to evaluate the effects of these compounds on soil health and plant growth. The results will guide the creation of efficient mitigation techniques, such as strategies for environmental management and safe disposal.
The ultimate goal of this research is to support Ethiopian industrial practices that are sustainable and safe. Policymakers, industrial stakeholders, and local populations can be better prepared to carry out suitable management and cleanup measures by determining the characteristics of the chemical and comprehending its ecological consequences. By ensuring that industrial progress does not come at the expense of environmental stability and public well-being, the effort is in line with more general objectives of environmental conservation, industrial accountability, and community health protection.
Objectives of the Study
1) To conduct comprehensive laboratory analyses to identify the chemical compounds stored at the Ethio-pulp Share Company premises.
2) To evaluate the pH characteristics and potential toxicity of the identified chemicals.
3) To assess the effects of the unidentified chemicals on soil health and plant growth through controlled experiments with plant seedlings.
4) To formulate effective mitigation measures for the safe disposal and management of the identified chemicals.
5) To involve local communities and stakeholders in the research process, ensuring their concerns and insights are considered in the findings and recommendations.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. pH Determination of Stored Chemical Samples and Surrounding Soil
To investigate the acidity and basicity of the stored chemical substances, a systematic laboratory analysis was conducted utilizing a calibrated pH meter. Given the limited sample size of the stored chemicals, the entire available quantity was used for the analysis, and the sampling approach was non-systematic due to the small volume. A total of 26 chemical samples were obtained by extracting 20 grams from each of the chemical packs
[10]
. Additionally, three soil samples were collected from the vicinity of the chemical storage site to assess potential environmental interactions.
Post-collection, each chemical and soil sample was labeled sequentially as Sample 1 through Sample 26, and the soil samples as Soil Sample 1, 2, and 3, respectively. To determine the solubility profile, all samples were tested for water solubility by dissolving a small quantity in distilled water and observing the mixture
[11]
. The samples demonstrated water solubility, indicating their likely inorganic nature or the presence of hydrophilic functional groups.
Subsequently, pH measurements were performed on each sample using a portable pH meter. The device was calibrated prior to measurements to ensure accuracy. For each sample, the solution was stirred gently to ensure homogeneity before immersing the calibrated electrode. The pH was recorded once a stable reading was achieved. The collected data were then documented systematically for further analysis. This methodology provided insights into the chemical properties of the stored substances and their potential environmental impacts based on acidity or alkalinity.
2.2. Anionic and Cationic Determination
The determination of cations and anions within the chemical samples was conducted through qualitative inorganic analysis, utilizing standard reagent tests and observation of precipitate formation
[12]
. For cationic analysis, approximately 20 g of each chemical sample was dissolved in distilled water to produce a clear, colorless solution, which was then filtered to remove insoluble impurities
[13]
. The filtrate served as the test solution for cation identification. A series of reagent tests were performed systematically: hydrochloric acid (HCl) was added to detect the presence of heavy metals such as silver (Ag⁺), lead (Pb²⁺), and mercury (Hg²⁺), with the absence of white precipitates indicating their likely absence. Hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) in acidic media was employed to identify metal sulfides, which appear as characteristic precipitates. The addition of carbonate buffers was used to detect carbonate ions (CO₃²⁻), while barium chloride (BaCl₂) solution was introduced to confirm sulfate ions (SO₄²⁻) through the formation of a white barium sulfate precipitate. The presence or absence of specific precipitates, along with their solubility properties, enabled the qualitative identification of the cations involved
[13]
.
For anionic analysis, the same prepared solutions were subjected to tests for sulfate and carbonate ions. Acidic addition of dilute hydrochloric acid (HCl) facilitated the detection of carbonate ions, evidenced by effervescence due to carbon dioxide gas evolution. To confirm sulfate ions, barium chloride solution was added, which resulted in the formation of a characteristic white precipitate of barium sulfate. The observed reactions precipitate formation or gas evolution provided qualitative evidence of the specific anions present in the samples.
2.3. Impact of Stored Chemicals on Plant Growth and Seedling Development
The purpose of this research is to study the gradual effect of chemicals stored in the environment on plant growth by observing the development of seedlings. This is accomplished by preparing soil samples and applying chemical solutions at various concentrations, such as 10 g, 20 g, 50 g, and 100 g, dissolved in water. Experimental pots are filled with approximately 1 kg of soil, with different chemical concentrations added to each, including a control sample with water only. Healthy seeds, such as corn, are then planted in each pot, and the respective chemical solutions are thoroughly mixed into the soil to ensure even distribution. The pots are maintained under controlled environmental conditions with adequate sunlight, temperature, and consistent watering to facilitate seed germination and seedling growth over a period of more than four months
[14]
. Regular observations are made to record germination rates, seedling height, leaf development, and overall health, with photographic documentation at consistent intervals. The collected data are analyzed to evaluate the impact of different chemical concentrations on seedling development, identify signs of toxicity, and assess environmental risks associated with chemical storage and disposal practices
[15]
. This approach aims to provide insights into how stored chemicals, particularly aluminum sulfate and related compounds, may affect plant growth and the surrounding ecosystem, thereby informing safe management and disposal strategies.
2.4. Effects of Chemical Treatment on Soil and Seedling Growth
In this study, six identical pots were prepared, each containing 1 kg of the same soil type, to investigate the effects of varying chemical treatments on soil and seedling growth. Each pot received specific amounts of a chemical, either 10 g, 20 g, 50 g, or 100 g, which were dissolved in water before application. In the first pot, 50 g of the chemical was added to the 1 kg of soil, followed by water to ensure proper dissolution. The second pot also contained 1 kg of soil with 50 g of chemical, but in this case, water was added along with a seedling to assess growth potential. The third pot received a more substantial treatment of 100 g of chemical, followed by water and the placement of a seedling. In the fourth pot, 20 g of chemical was introduced to the 1 kg of soil, along with water and a seedling. The fifth pot contained 10 g of the chemical with water and a seedling. Finally, the sixth pot, which also included 1 kg of soil and 50 g of chemical, differed by incorporating a different seedling type alongside water to analyze its response to the chemical treatment. This systematic approach allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the effects of chemical amendments on soil properties and plant growth outcomes.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. pH Determination of Stored Chemical Samples and Surrounding Soil
Table 1. pH Values of Chemical and Soil Samples.

No of samples

Test numbers

Results of Tests

Average

Remark

Sample 1

Test 1

7.78

7.883±0.092915732

Weak base

Test 2

7.96

Test 3

7.91

Sample 2

Test 1

3.76

3.6266±0.105830052

Weak acid

Test 2

3.54

Test 3

3.58

Sample 3

Test 1

3.94

4.1133±0.158219257

Weak acid

Test 2

4.25

Test 3

4.15

Sample 4

Test 1

7.93

8.6333±0.618088451

Weak base

Test 2

9.09

Test 3

8.88

Sample 5

Test 1

4.69

4.646±0.083864971

Weak acid

Test 2

4.70

Test 3

4.55

Sample 6

Test 1

5.12

5.1866±0.065064071

Weak acid

Test 2

5.19

Test 3

5.25

Sample 7

Test 1

5.02

4.963±0.049328829

Weak acid

Test 2

4.93

Test 3

4.94

Sample 8

Test 1

6.34

6.496±0.146401275

Weak acid

Test 2

6.63

Test 3

6.52

Sample 9

Test 1

6.20

6.173±0.030550505

Weak acid

Test 2

6.14

Test 3

6.18

Sample 10

Test 1

5.19

5.21±0.068068593

Weak acid

Test 2

5.29

Test 3

5.16

Sample 11

Test 1

4.54

4.39±0.13453624

Weak acid

Test 2

4.35

Test 3

4.28

Sample 12

Test 1

5.17

5.456±0.295352896

Weak acid

Test 2

5.76

Test 3

5.44

Sample 13

Test 1

5.16

5.226±0.058594653

Weak acid

Test 2

5.25

Test 3

5.27

Sample 14

Test 1

5.81

6.013±0.176729549

Weak acid

Test 2

6.13

Test 3

6.10

Sample 15

Test 1

6.36

6.42±0.065574385

Weak acid

Test 2

6.49

Test 3

6.41

Sample 16

Test 1

5.96

6.00±0.036055513

Weak acid

Test 2

6.03

Test 3

6.01

Sample 17

Test 1

6.53

6.62±0.08326664

Weak acid

Test 2

6.65

Test 3

6.69

Sample 18

Test 1

6.92

7.12±0.205182845

Weak base

Test 2

7.11

Test 3

7.33

Sample 19

Test 1

7.17

7.126±0.045092498

Weak base

Test 2

7.08

Test 3

7.12

Sample 20

Test 1

It is insoluble chemical

Is not additive and not soluble

Test 2

Test 3

Sample 21

Test 1

5.76

5.493±0.231804515

Weak acid

Test 2

5.34

Test 3

5.38

Sample 22

Test 1

5.53

5.53±0.02

Weak acid

Test 2

5.55

Test 3

5.51

Sample 23

Test 1

4.20

4.00±0.176162803

Weak acid

Test 2

3.95

Test 3

3.86

Sample 24

Test 1

6.32

6.89±0.397030645

Weak acid

Test 2

6.97

Test 3

7.04

Sample 25

Test 1

7.37

7.36±0.105356538

Weak base

Test 2

7.25

Test 3

7.46

Sample 26

Test 1

7.07

7.066±0.015275252

Weak base

Test 2

7.05

Test 3

7.08

Soil Sample 1

Test 1

7.08

7.08±0.01

Weak base

Test 2

7.07

Test 3

7.09

Soil Sample 2

Test 1

7.03

7.026±0.025166115

Weak base

Test 2

7.05

Test 3

7.00

Soil Sample 3

Test 1

6.97

6.96±0.01

Weak acid

Test 2

6.96

Test 3

6.95
The Table 1 presents the results of pH measurements conducted on various chemical and soil samples to determine their acidity or basicity and assess their potential environmental impact. A total of 26 chemical samples and 3 soil samples were analyzed through three trials each to ensure accuracy and repeatability.
The chemical samples exhibited a broad range of pH values from strongly acidic to weakly basic, classified into weak acids, weak bases, and an insoluble chemical
[16]
. Specifically, samples such as Sample 2 (pH ≈ 3.63) and Sample 3 (pH ≈ 4.11) demonstrated weak acidity, indicative of the presence of acidic compounds like aluminum sulfate. Conversely, samples such as Sample 1 (pH ≈ 7.88) and Sample 26 (pH ≈ 7.07) displayed weak basic properties, suggesting the presence of basic compounds or impurities.
Particularly, some samples showed variability across trials, but calculated averages with standard deviations provided a reliable estimate of their typical pH. For example, Sample 17 had an average pH of 6.62 ± 0.083, indicating a weak acid, whereas Sample 18 recorded an average of 7.12 ± 0.205, indicating a weak base. An exception was Sample 20, which was identified as insoluble and was not suitable for pH measurement, highlighting the chemical's insolubility and potential distinct impact on the environment.
The soil samples consistently demonstrated neutral to slightly acidic or basic pH values, with Soil Sample 1 neutral (pH ≈ 7.08), Soil Sample 2 slightly alkaline (pH ≈ 7.03), and Soil Sample 3 slightly acidic (pH ≈ 6.97). These findings suggest that despite the presence of stored chemicals, the surrounding soil maintains near-neutral pH, indicating minimal immediate impact on soil acidity or alkalinity
[17]
.
3.2. Anionic and Cationic Determination
The scheme is prepared based on analytical techniques. Cationic analysis carried-out based on the reagents HCl, H2S, CO32-, SO42- These anions are important reagents to determine the presence of group; I. II, III, IV and V cations based on their degree of solubility
[12]
.
From Figure 1, the first step was identification of heavy metals- for this analysis hydrochloric acid (6M) was used. Here the chemical samples collected are solid rocky and soluble in water. This implies that the probability of being organic is less and hence the samples are under the category of inorganic compounds. Therefore, for further confirmation of being inorganic is to carry out cationic analysis. The major expected cations are alkaline earth metal, or aluminum and its family. Not all 26 chemical samples have been analyzed for cation analysis but only sample whose pH=3.66 and 8.9 were selected. These two samples were then dissolved in water and filtered with filter paper to obtain transparent colorless solution. After the solution of the two was prepared, HCl was added to observe the formation of white precipitate followed by centrifugation. Then 6M of HCl solution was added to the solution of chemical sample whose pH=3.66 and 8.9; unfortunately, there was no white precipitate or no milky cloudy was formed. This most probably indicated that chemical samples didn’t contain any of the heavy metals such as Ag+, Pb2+, Hg2+
[18]
.
Figure 1. Cationic and Anionic Determination Procedure.
Figure 2. After Addition of 6M HCl on Samples with pH=3.66 and 8.66.
Cationic Analysis using H₂S
The chemical sample whose pH=3.66 and 8.9 were dissolved in water and then followed by filtration. The colorless solution of both sample were mixed with H2S solution in acidic media. After the addition of the acidic solution white milky cloud was observed as shown in Figure 2 and it indicates the presence of one of the expected cations. To further confirm which cation is probably present in the sample we have further investigated in basic media by mixing the chemical sample whose pH= 3.66 with NaOH and thus white milky cloud was appeared in the solution which is the indication of the presence of Al3+ as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Formation of Milky cloud Suspension After Addition of H2S in Acidic Media.
Figure 4. Formation of Milky Cloud Suspension After Addition of NaOH in Basic Media.
Further investigation was carried out by preparing the solution of chemical samples in water. The chemical sample solution was then mixed with Na2CO3 and (NH4)2CO3. After the addition there was no precipitate is formed only clear solution was appeared. This implies that there is no group II cations found in the sample Figure 4.
Figure 5. No White Precipitate Was Formed When Na2CO3 and (NH4)2CO3.
For further confirmation the experiment was carried out by changing the reagents and add into chemical samples with different pH= 3.66 and 8.9. In both cases no white precipitate was formed which is the indication of no group II cations present at all. Figure 5.
Figure 6. No White Precipitate Was Formed When Na2CO3 and (NH4)2CO3.
3.3. Impact of Stored Chemicals on Plant Growth and Seedling Development in Varying Concentrations of Chemical Solutions
Figure 7. Seedlings Grow in the Mixture of Soil and Chemical.
The experiment demonstrated that varying chemical treatments significantly impacted soil pH levels, thereby influencing seedling growth
[19]
. In pots treated with higher chemical doses, such as the third pot with 100 g, the pH dropped drastically to 4.07, posing severe risks to seedling health and potentially stunting growth. Meanwhile, both pots one and two, which received 50 g of chemical, displayed similar trends of increased acidity, with pH levels falling to 4.55 and 4.67, respectively. In contrast, the fourth pot with 20 g of chemical exhibited a more moderate reduction in pH to 5.94, suggesting that lower concentrations may be less harmful and could support healthier seedling growth. The fifth pot, treated with only 10 g of chemical, experienced the least change in pH, thereby creating a more favorable environment for development. The sixth pot, which used 50 g of chemical but involved a different seedling type, indicated that plant responses can vary under identical chemical conditions. These findings focus the necessity of considering chemical concentrations and their effects on soil acidity, which are critical for optimizing both soil quality and seedling performance in future agricultural practices
[13]
.
3.4. Comparison of Seedling Placed in pH 3.66 and 8.9
In Table 2, which records the pH levels for soil samples with a starting pH of 3.66, the measurements remain consistently acidic across the study period. For instance, Sample 1, which consists of 1 kg of soil with 50 g of chemical and water, maintains a pH of 6.35 throughout the seven weeks, indicating a shift towards less acidity but remaining below neutral (pH 7). Other samples exhibit similar patterns, with the pH values ranging from 4.67 to 6.35, confirming the predominance of acidic conditions in the soil over time.
Table 2. pH Data After Seedling Placed in the Soil and Chemicals of pH 3.66.

S. N

Sample test

PH

Remark

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

1

1 kg of soil, 50 gram of chemical and water

6.35

6.35

6.35

6.35

6.35

6.35

6.35

Acid

2

1 kg of soil, 50 gram of chemical, seedling and water

4.55

4.55

4.55

4.55

4.55

4.55

4.55

Acid

3

1 kg of soil, 50 gram of chemical, with different seedling and water

4.67

4.67

4.67

4.67

4.67

4.67

4.67

Acid

4

1 kg of soil, 10 gram of chemical, seedling and water

5.94

5.94

5.94

5.94

5.94

5.94

5.94

Acid

5

1 kg of soil, 20 gram of chemical, seedling and water

5.30

5.30

5.30

5.30

5.30

5.30

5.30

Acid

6

1 kg of soil, 100 gram of chemical, seedling and water

3.76

3.76

3.76

3.76

3.76

3.76

3.76

Acid
Table 3. pH Data After Seedling Placed in the Soil and Chemicals of PH =8.9.

S. N

Sample test

PH

Remark

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Weak Basic

1

1 kg of soil, 5 gram of chemical and water

8.59

8.59

8.59

8.59

8.59

8.59

8.59

Weak base

2

1 kg of soil, 10 gram of chemical, seedling and water

8.19

8.19

8.19

8.19

8.19

8.19

8.19

Weak base

3

1 kg of soil, 20 gram of chemical, different seedling and water

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.4

Weak base

4

1 kg of soil, 25 gram of chemical, seedling and water

7.27

7.27

7.27

7.27

7.27

7.27

7.27

Weak base

5

1 kg of soil, 50 gram of chemical, seedling and water

7.57

7.57

7.57

7.57

7.57

7.57

7.57

Weak base
Conversely, Table 3 illustrates the pH levels for soil samples with an initial pH of 8.9, indicating basic conditions. Measurements for Sample 1, consisting of 1 kg of soil with 50 g of chemical and water, show stability, remaining at 8.59 through Weeks 1 to 3 but slightly decreasing to 8.19 by Week 7. The other samples, such as those with varying amounts of chemical and water, generally maintain a pH range from 7.27 to 8.19, clearly reflecting a basic condition throughout the observation period.
Generally, the findings from these tables stress a significant distinction between the pH behavior of acidic versus basic soil samples in response to the application of chemicals and water. The acidic soils in Table 2 demonstrate gradual increases in pH but do not reach neutrality, while the basic soils in Table 3 maintain their alkaline characteristics within a relatively stable range.
Figure 8. Seedlings of Corn Grown from Seed in Different Chemical Concentration.
Further justification of the toxicity of the chemical was tested with corn seed. According to Figure 8 the corn seed grown in different concentration of chemicals for over 4 months is shown. The seedlings were grown similarly although the concentration was different. Furthermore, the corn seed was placed in the mixture of chemicals and soil.
4. Conclusions
The comprehensive investigation of the stored chemical sample at Ethiopia pulp and paper S.Co shown that it predominantly comprises aluminum sulfate, characterized as a mixture of weak acids and weak bases, with trace impurities of organic resins contributing to its basicity. The pH range of 26 samples, spanning from 3 to 9, indicates the presence of both acidic and basic compounds within the chemical, while analysis of three soil samples in contact with the chemical environment showed neutral pH values. This neutrality suggests that acidic chemicals have interacted with the soil, effectively neutralizing their acidity.
Environmental impact assessments further demonstrated that seedlings of various species, grown in soil supplemented with different concentrations of the chemical (ranging from 5 g to 100 g per kilogram of soil), exhibited no adverse effects or growth abnormalities over more than four months. The seedlings' unaffected growth across diverse chemical concentrations and species underscores the chemical’s low toxicity and environmental stability, implying minimal risk to surrounding flora during such exposure.
Generally, these findings suggest that the chemical, mainly aluminum sulfate, poses limited environmental hazards under current storage and exposure conditions. Its weak acidic and basic properties, coupled with demonstrated biological safety over the tested period, support the potential for safe disposal or reuse within industry processes. However, continuous monitoring and proper management practices are recommended to prevent long-term environmental impacts, ensuring sustainable handling of stored chemicals in industrial settings.
5. Recommendation
The Ethiopian Pulp and Paper Factory must establish and adhere to systematic chemical management practices. This includes labeling, documentation, and regular audits of stored chemicals to prevent mismanagement and ensure safe handling.
The company must implement continuous environmental monitoring around the chemical storage sites. This includes assessing soil and water quality to detect any potential contamination and ensuring that any changes in pH or chemical composition are addressed promptly.
Industries must develop safe disposal methods or recycling processes for the identified chemicals, particularly aluminum sulfate. Utilizing these chemicals in other industrial applications, where feasible, minimizes waste and promotes sustainable practices.
The company must engage local communities in the study of chemical impacts to encourage transparency and build trust. Educational programs must be organized to inform residents about the safety measures taken and the findings of the chemical analyses to alleviate concerns regarding health and environmental risks.
The findings indicate that the predominant composition of the waste is aluminum sulfate, which is not considered hazardous. Therefore, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must implement strategies for effective management and mitigation of these chemicals to ensure environmental safety.
Abbreviations

EPA

Environmental Protection Agency

HCl

Hydrochloric Acid

H2S

Hydrogen Sulfide

NaOH

Sodium Hydroxide

S.co

Share Company
Author Contributions
Sisay Demisse Geda: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
[1] Ajong, N., Hodu, F., Emmanuel, M. Industrialization and environmental sustainability in Africa: The moderating effects of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption. Heliyon. 2024, 10(4), e25681.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25681

[2] Sharma, B. M., Muncke, J., Boucher, J. M., Zimmermann, L., Brunner, T. A., Arora, P. Complementing global chemicals management through shaping consumer behavior. ISCIENCE. 2025, 28(6), 112700.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.112700

[3] Braxton, M. Industrial Environmental Hazards: Understanding the Impact and Mitigation Strategies. 2024, 8, 4–5.

https://doi.org/10.37421/2684-4923.2024.8.243

[4] Vo, O., Abdelrahim, R. Unlocking the impact of chemicals on the health and safety of pharmaceutical workers: A concise review. 2024, 14(3), 424–435.
[5] Nalley, E. A., Youngblood, S., Fornah, A. Effects of Toxic Chemicals on Plants. 2021, 7–8.

https://doi.org/10.33552/WJASS.2021.07.000654

[6] Khuong, M. N., An, N. K. T., Doanh, T. N., Tri, L. D. M., Phuong, N. N. D., Thanh, T. L. The impact of legal environment on business success through the practices of corporate social responsibility. Manag. Sci. Lett. 2020, 10(13), 3033–3040.

https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.5.021

[7] Wójcik, M., Masztalerz, M., Lew, G., Lulek, A., Sadowska, B. The Impact of Chemical Companies on the Environment and Local Communities in the Aspect of Business Model. 2021, XXIV(2), 548–563.
[8] Lai, A., et al. The Next Frontier of Environmental Unknowns: Substances of Unknown or Variable Composition, Complex Reaction Products, or Biological Materials (UVCBs). 2022,

https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c00321

[9] Gunjyal, N., Rani, S. A review of the effects of environmental hazards on humans, their remediation for sustainable development, and risk assessment. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2023,

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11353-z

[10] Taro Ikeda. Chemical Characterization Techniques: Identifying Composition and Structure. Journal of Environmental & Analytical Toxicology. 2024, 13(4), 5–6.

https://doi.org/10.4172/2320-0812.13.4.003

[11] Plant, J. A., Korre, A., Reeder, S., Smith, B., Voulvoulis, N. Chemicals in the Environment: Implications for Global Sustainability. Environmental Technology. 2005, 114(June).

https://doi.org/10.1179/037174505X62857

[12] Silvia, O., et al. Identification of Cation Reaction and Separation of Group I Cations. 2024, 2(1), 27–35.
[13] El-khateeb, A. Y. Metal Ions of Cations and Anions Separation and Detection Approach. 2020, 3(3), 202–220.

https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/PCBR.2020.3.3

[14] Mahmoodi, Z., Gherekhloo, J., Ghaderi-far, F., Ansari, O., Hassanpour-bourkheili, S. The effect of environmental factors on seed germination and emergence of cutleaf geranium. 2022, 1-8.
[15] Ertekİn, E. N., Ertekİn, İ., Bilgen, M. Effects of Some Heavy Metals on Germination and Seedling Growth of Sorghum. 2021, 3(6), 1608-1615.

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.v23i54846.722592

[16] Wang, C., et al. Effects of autotoxicity and allelopathy on seed germination and seedling growth in Medicago truncatula. 2022, 1-11.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.908426

[17] Wang, F., et al. Emerging contaminants: A One Health perspective. Innov. 2024, 5(4), 100612.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2024.100612

[18] Ol, J., Aburumman, N., Popp, J., Khan, M. A. Impact of Industry 4.0 on Environmental Sustainability. 1900, 1-21.
[19] Palma, D., Hodgett, R. Barriers to Sustainable Manufacturing in the Chemical Industry: A Qualitative Study. Sustainability. 2025, 17, 3241.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su17073241

Cite This Article
Plain Text BibTeX RIS

  • APA Style

    Ashetu, T. T., Geda, S. D. (2025). Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry. American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry, 9(2), 80-91. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Ashetu, T. T.; Geda, S. D. Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry. Am. J. Appl. Ind. Chem. 2025, 9(2), 80-91. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Ashetu TT, Geda SD. Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry. Am J Appl Ind Chem. 2025;9(2):80-91. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16

    Copy | Download 

  • @article{10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16,
  author = {Tujuba Tamiru Ashetu and Sisay Demisse Geda},
  title = {Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry},
  journal = {American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {80-91},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajaic.20250902.16},
  abstract = {The study focuses on analysis of long term stored unknown chemicals and environmental impacts of stored chemicals at Ethiopia's Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Factory. In order to guide safe disposal or reuse, the goal is to identify and evaluate the chemical's qualities, especially its acidity, basicity, and composition. Both survey-based and laboratory methodologies are used in the investigation. While physical and chemical studies, such as pH measurements and cationic ion analysis, are carried out, information on chemical storage conditions is gathered using a standardized questionnaire. Soil samples gathered in the vicinity are examined to assess the environmental impact, and chemical samples are evaluated in water to ascertain their pH and solubility. Accuracy is ensured by multiple tests, the results of which are combined into averages and standard deviations. With pH values ranging from roughly 3.63 to 8.63, the results show that the compounds have a spectrum of weak acidic to weak basic characteristics. Aluminum sulfate is the main component found in the analysis, with traces of starch. Despite chemical contact, soil tests around the stored compounds are mainly neutral, indicating little immediate environmental damage. Sample variations indicate weak basicity or acidity, and the insoluble chemical further indicates intricate chemical interactions. The study confirmed that the stored chemical is mainly aluminum sulfate, a weak acid or base, posing limited environmental danger at current concentrations. The findings support safe disposal or potential reuse by industries, emphasizing the importance of proper chemical handling to mitigate ecological risks. Overall, the study provides a basis for informed management of chemical waste in industrial settings, promoting environmental safety and sustainable practices.},
 year = {2025}
}

    Copy | Download 

  • TY  - JOUR
T1  - Identification and Environmental Consequences of Long-term Stored Chemicals in Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Industry
AU  - Tujuba Tamiru Ashetu
AU  - Sisay Demisse Geda
Y1  - 2025/12/31
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16
T2  - American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry
JF  - American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry
JO  - American Journal of Applied and Industrial Chemistry
SP  - 80
EP  - 91
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2994-7294
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajaic.20250902.16
AB  - The study focuses on analysis of long term stored unknown chemicals and environmental impacts of stored chemicals at Ethiopia's Ethiopia Pulp and Paper Factory. In order to guide safe disposal or reuse, the goal is to identify and evaluate the chemical's qualities, especially its acidity, basicity, and composition. Both survey-based and laboratory methodologies are used in the investigation. While physical and chemical studies, such as pH measurements and cationic ion analysis, are carried out, information on chemical storage conditions is gathered using a standardized questionnaire. Soil samples gathered in the vicinity are examined to assess the environmental impact, and chemical samples are evaluated in water to ascertain their pH and solubility. Accuracy is ensured by multiple tests, the results of which are combined into averages and standard deviations. With pH values ranging from roughly 3.63 to 8.63, the results show that the compounds have a spectrum of weak acidic to weak basic characteristics. Aluminum sulfate is the main component found in the analysis, with traces of starch. Despite chemical contact, soil tests around the stored compounds are mainly neutral, indicating little immediate environmental damage. Sample variations indicate weak basicity or acidity, and the insoluble chemical further indicates intricate chemical interactions. The study confirmed that the stored chemical is mainly aluminum sulfate, a weak acid or base, posing limited environmental danger at current concentrations. The findings support safe disposal or potential reuse by industries, emphasizing the importance of proper chemical handling to mitigate ecological risks. Overall, the study provides a basis for informed management of chemical waste in industrial settings, promoting environmental safety and sustainable practices.
VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

    Copy | Download

Author Information
Download PDF
Submit an Article
  • Abstract
  • Keywords

  • Document Sections

    1. 1. Introduction
    2. 2. Materials and Methods
    3. 3. Results and Discussion
    4. 4. Conclusions
    5. 5. Recommendation
    Show Full Outline
  • Abbreviations
  • Author Contributions
  • Conflicts of Interest
  • References
  • Cite This Article
  • Author Information

About Us

Science Publishing Group (SciencePG) is an Open Access publisher, with more than 300 online, peer-reviewed journals covering a wide range of academic disciplines.

Learn More About SciencePG

Products

Information

Important Link

Copyright © 2012 -- 2026 Science Publishing Group – All rights reserved.