China Jushi FY2022: Site operations and environmental evidence

Jushi reports CNY 289.22 million of environmental funding invested during FY2022, originally stated as CNY 28,922 ten-thousand. This identifies a financial commitment to environmental protection alongside expansion and normal manufacturing. The annual table does not allocate the amount to individual factories or projects, distinguish all capital assets from operating expense, or provide a reconciliation to cash paid. It should therefore be read as the issuer’s reported environmental investment measure, not automatically as a cash-flow line, the cost of a specific abatement plant or independently verified permit compliance. The environmental section supplies separate disclosures about wastewater, air emissions and energy reuse; those operational disclosures explain the manufacturing context without attributing every outcome to this one aggregate amount.

Reported environmental investment / 2022 / Issuer annual environmental investment table; not cash flow reconciliation or plant allocation.

RMB 289,220,000

The table labels this operation Jushi Group and describes wastewater pretreated before delivery to Tongxiang’s Shenhe sewage-treatment plant. It lists two wastewater outlets in the northwestern part of the factory. FY2022 actual wastewater chemical oxygen demand, or COD, is 105.79 tonnes against a stated approved annual amount of 1,200.425 tonnes; ammonia-nitrogen is 2.00 tonnes against 84.03 tonnes per year. COD and ammonia-nitrogen are different pollutant measures, not quantities of wastewater to add. For treated furnace air emissions the table lists fourteen outlets, one per production line: dust is 24.85 tonnes against an approved 222.974 tonnes per year, sulfur dioxide 113.55 against 215.059, and nitrogen oxides 388.62 against 803.336. The table marks these entries as not exceeding standards. Its concentration column contains applicable standard limits, not observed concentration readings; pH and smoke-blackness entries have no mass total. These are attributed annual disclosures for this named operation, not all Jushi factories worldwide, proof of every permit condition or a remaining capacity allowance for another project.

Wastewater chemical oxygen demand actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Group operation in annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or consolidated total.

105.79 tonnes

Wastewater ammonia-nitrogen actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Group operation in annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or consolidated total.

2 tonnes

Air dust actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Group operation in annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or consolidated total.

24.85 tonnes

Air sulfur dioxide actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Group operation in annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or consolidated total.

113.55 tonnes

Air nitrogen oxides actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Group operation in annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or consolidated total.

388.62 tonnes

Jushi Chengdu’s wastewater is described as pretreated before entering the industrial park’s sewage-treatment plant, with one outlet in the southeastern part of the factory. The table reports actual FY2022 wastewater COD of 22.82 tonnes versus an approved 338.22 tonnes, and ammonia-nitrogen of 0.56 versus 30.44 tonnes. It separately lists three treated-air outlets, one per production line. Actual sulfur dioxide is 12.25 tonnes versus an approved 115.7959 tonnes, nitrogen oxides 22.93 versus 258.1736, and dust 0.55 versus 104.2364. The issuer marks each row as not exceeding standards. These actual mass totals and stated approved amounts retain the Chengdu scope; they are not measured concentration readings, global group totals or separately verified evidence that every construction or operating licence was in force. The outlet description supplies limited physical context, but an outlet’s corner within a factory is not an exact factory address or a coordinate for automatic project matching.

Wastewater chemical oxygen demand actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Chengdu annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or independent permit verification.

22.82 tonnes

Wastewater ammonia-nitrogen actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Chengdu annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or independent permit verification.

0.56 tonnes

Air sulfur dioxide actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Chengdu annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or independent permit verification.

12.25 tonnes

Air nitrogen oxides actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Chengdu annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or independent permit verification.

22.93 tonnes

Air dust actual annual discharge / 2022 / Named Jushi Chengdu annual table; actual pollutant mass, not concentration limit or independent permit verification.

0.55 tonnes

The same environmental table includes Lianyungang Zhongfu Lianzhong’s blade factory, pipe-and-tank factory and fifth blade factory. The investment disclosures identify Zhongfu Lianzhong as a 32.04%-owned associate, so the inclusion of its environmental rows does not make its sites wholly owned or turn their discharges into a consolidated Jushi glass-fiber-plant total. For the blade factory, actual versus approved amounts in tonnes are volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, 3.0575 versus 4.3678; styrene 0.01 versus 0.194; particulate matter 0.4373 versus 0.6245; domestic-sewage COD 6.65 versus 9.499; and suspended solids 4.911 versus 7.016. The pipe-and-tank factory reports VOCs 6.239 versus 9.175, styrene 3.3935 versus 4.9901, particulate matter 2.043 versus 3.004, COD 6.84 versus 9.12, and suspended solids 5.148 versus 6.864. The fifth blade factory reports VOCs 2.55 versus 3.751, particulate matter 0.086 versus 0.127, COD 1.215 versus 1.62 and suspended solids 0.81 versus 1.08. Domestic sewage is described as routed through the municipal network to Dapu Industrial Park’s treatment plant. The issuer marks the rows as not exceeding standards. Some outlets are shared between pollutant rows, so outlet counts should not be summed as independent stacks. The suspended-solids rows pair a wastewater limit with GB/T14675-1993, described in the source as a three-point comparative odor-bag method. This apparent standard-reference mismatch is retained as a source inconsistency, not silently replaced with a guessed standard. The disclosure does not provide an independently verified current compliance conclusion.

Jushi says existing pollution-control facilities at the company and its subsidiaries operated normally in FY2022, discharged within standards and had no environmental violations. Its explanation describes pretreated wastewater reuse, air treatment before high-level release, equipment noise control and separate handling of hazardous and general solid waste. These processes relate directly to manufacturing costs and the ability to keep factories operating, but the passage supplies no quantified savings or independent inspection results. Management also describes supervising environmental-impact assessment and construction-completion acceptance, and observing the requirement for environmental facilities to be designed, built and put into use alongside the main project. That is an attributed process description, not a list of individual permit numbers, validity dates or all site-specific conditions. The company says principal outlets had automatic monitoring and other outlets were tested periodically by external environmental-testing organizations, with manual comparisons of online and self-monitoring data. Primary monitoring logs and individual acceptance documents are not supplied here. Emergency plans and drills are condensed as operating context; general environmental slogans are omitted. The distinction leaves concrete treatment and monitoring information available without turning the annual report into certification of every plant or project.

Jushi reports 58,187,200 kilowatt-hours of self-used distributed photovoltaic electricity in FY2022, originally expressed as 5,818.72 ten-thousand kilowatt-hours. It also reports 1,711,779.7 gigajoules of steam energy generated using recovered heat. The second figure is an energy quantity in GJ, not tonnes of steam, and cannot simply be added to the electricity figure. The annual explanation describes a newly developed low-carbon product formulation, energy-saving fans and bushings, automatic furnace-pressure control, rooftop solar development and equipment-efficiency reviews at three domestic locations. These identify process and energy actions relevant to glass-fiber manufacturing, while design claims do not establish a measured saving for each machine or product. The table attributes an avoided-emissions figure of 229,231 tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalent to the company’s reduction measures. It does not show the calculation baseline, emission factors, allocation by measure or independent assurance. That reported avoidance is not the company’s total Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions, proof of a zero-carbon factory, or a basis for adding claimed solar and heat savings again. Meetings, quizzes and publicity activities are omitted. The annual report says a separate ESG report is issued regularly; this explanation covers the annual section only and does not claim review of that separate report.

Self-used photovoltaic electricity / 2022 / Annual reported distributed photovoltaic electricity self use; no independently verified emissions conversion.

58,187,200 kWh

Recovered-heat steam energy / 2022 / Annual reported waste heat generated steam energy in gigajoules, not tonnes of steam.

1,711,779.7 GJ

Reported avoided carbon-dioxide equivalent / 2022 / Issuer reported emissions avoidance; baseline/factors and independent assurance not supplied in annual table.

229,231 tonnes CO2e