Stop Biofuel Lunacy: Effects on Global Food Crisis

[Hurkyl]

The ones I posted showed the US was a net importor or food.

How that is at odds with the fact that, for certain kinds of foods, the US is almost exclusively an exporter?

You can even find the figures you quoted in the 2004 data from that page. Did you look?

 

[esbo]

So, you don't find it at all hypocrticial for you to make lots of comments on side topics and complain when others respond to those comments?

I think it is not very helpful when you igmore the main point of a thread and then take a part of it out of context and use that in the manner it was never intended in the first place it is not very helpful.
I was illustrating the vast ammounts of grain required to create biofuel.
Your comment that we could possible produce more grain than we currently produce, or whatever the point was you were trying to make does not change the fact that
it requires staggering amounts of grain to produce biofuel. You also seemed to be confusing the capacity to produce food with the food actually produced.
Hence it was a pretty pointless comment in that sense.

It would not have been so bad if you had actually addressed rather than ignored the main point raised, especially as it concerns a serious issue such as people dying of starvetion.

Yes I would think I was being hypocritical if I had made posts like that but I don't believe that is the case.

 

[wolram]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/26/food.unitednations

This is the new face of hunger," Sheeran said. "There is food on shelves but people are priced out of the market. There is vulnerability in urban areas we have not seen before. There are food riots in countries where we have not seen them before."

WFP officials say the extraordinary increases in the global price of basic foods were caused by a "perfect storm" of factors: a rise in demand for animal feed from increasingly prosperous populations in India and China, the use of more land and agricultural produce for biofuels, and climate change.

 

[esbo]

How that is at odds with the fact that, for certain kinds of foods, the US is almost exclusively an exporter?

You can even find the figures you quoted in the 2004 data from that page. Did you look?

The issue in question is total food imports/exports
I am sure what you are referring to in "the figures you quoted in the 2004 data".

 

[esbo]

How that is at odds with the fact that, for certain kinds of foods, the US is almost exclusively an exporter?

You can even find the figures you quoted in the 2004 data from that page. Did you look?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/26/food.unitednations

This is the new face of hunger," Sheeran said. "There is food on shelves but people are priced out of the market. There is vulnerability in urban areas we have not seen before. There are food riots in countries where we have not seen them before."

WFP officials say the extraordinary increases in the global price of basic foods were caused by a "perfect storm" of factors: a rise in demand for animal feed from increasingly prosperous populations in India and China, the use of more land and agricultural produce for biofuels, and climate change.

They keep mentioning the prosperous middle classes in China, but the growth is the middle classes is not something whic happens overnight, I somehow doubt they managed to double their middle class population in a year in line with grain prices.
Funny how they don't mention Chinas biofuel production isn't it?
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35905

However at least China seems to have actually recognised the problem.
"China is now clamping down on the use of corn and other edible grains for producing biofuel."

"In China the first thing is to provide food for its 1.3 billion people, and after that, we will support biofuel production"

Whereas in the West the attitude seems to be "sod the people let's use even more food for biofuel to pump into our lovely shiny SUV's."

The really stupid thing is some reasonably wealth people seem think, well it will only effect
the poor nations, it won't effect me. However it is worth reminding them that some of
the countries likey to be seriously effected include China and Pakistan, who have, if you need to be reminded, Nuclear weapons.
Pakistan is already pretty unstable and China cannot afford to let it's 1 billion+ people
starve.

 

[Hurkyl]

I was illustrating the vast ammounts of grain required to create biofuel.

No, you were exaggerating the amounts of grain required to create biofuel.

especially as it concerns a serious issue such as people dying of starvetion.

If you were really serious about it, I would have imagined that you would neither make things up, exaggerate, insult people, nor digress into other topics. (I still don't see how your rant against Vista is on-topic, despite your objection that you are not bringing up side issues)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

esbo, this is a subject that I feel strongly about as you do [though perhaps not quite as much], and I think you are correct that biofuel from crops is not a solution to the energy problem. I also think you are correct, and undeniably so, that if we continue to pursue the crop energy market, eventually the results will be catostrophic for everyone. But, the fact is that biofuels only constitute a few percent of the US energy market as compared to petroleum products, so we are not that far along yet. And we too are beginning to see the rising food prices as a result of corn ethanol in particular, so it won't take long until Americans start complaining about the effects. In the mean time, I suggest that you learn about the algae option as this is a practical solution that eliminates the need for food and energy to compete. Rather than ranting about a problem that will be self-evident to everyone soon enough, why not direct your efforts towards the solution - biofuels from algae?

Integral to the case for algae is the absurdity of allowing food to compete with fuel. And the sooner mass produced algae fuels can hit the market, the sooner other sources [corn, soybean, palm, etc] will cease to be cost competitive as fuel options.

We should certainly stop all subsidies for corn-ethanol farmers, today. That would be a realistic place to start.

 

[esbo]

If you were really serious about it, I would have imagined that you would neither make things up, exaggerate, insult people, nor digress into other topics. (I still don't see how your rant against Vista is on-topic, despite your objection that you are not bringing up side issues)

Well let us look at the origins of the Vista business for starters:-
"the United States has for many years been the greatest supplier of food aid to other countries, in fact many years supplying more free food and technology than the rest of the world combined"

So I was merely mocking a point that the USA was giving away free technology in it's 'benevolence' to the rest of the world, so I did not bring up that topic, I merely responded to a post on the matter.

Vista is not free and it is certaintly not cheap, far from giving away it's technology it is exploiting it's monopoly position, which dates back to IBM historically I believe.
You only have to look at how much Bill Gates is worth, and the embarassing large amount of money he has, some of which he is now giving away, but perhaps if he had not overchargedin the first place he would not need to do that?

Anyway, it is what you might call a side issue, but I did not initially briing it up, I merely used it as an example to ilustrate my point in my response.
Had I not responded to that point no doubt you would have accused me of igoring it!
So I can't win can I?

I will reply to any points about exageration or insulting people when you provide specific examples because I do not recall doing that, same goes for digression but I believe I have explained that for the example which you gave.

 

[esbo]

No, you were exaggerating the amounts of grain required to create biofuel.

No I don't think so I started from the fairly well established premise that the grain required
to fill the fuel tank of an SUV could feed a person (or whatever) for a year.
I then tried to work out using that calculation of how long it would take before SUV's would
consume all the grain used for food.
You then replied with something like well we can produce more grain than that, but that really is not the point is it?
It really is hard to see how grain prices have doubled?? tripled? if we have such a surplus of it.
Also I have read that if it would take the entire USA to produce enough grain to produce
your fuel needs - that does not leave you with any food whatsoever, and I guess it is kinda hard growing grain in the Rockies anyway.

 

[esbo]

esbo, this is a subject that I feel strongly about as you do [though perhaps not quite as much], and I think you are correct that biofuel from crops is not a solution to the energy problem. I also think you are correct, and undeniably so, that if we continue to pursue the crop energy market, eventually the results will be catostrophic for everyone. But, the fact is that biofuels only constitute a few percent of the US energy market as compared to petroleum products, so we are not that far along yet. And we too are beginning to see the rising food prices as a result of corn ethanol in particular, so it won't take long until Americans start complaining about the effects. In the mean time, I suggest that you learn about the algae option as this is a practical solution that eliminates the need for food and energy to compete. Rather than ranting about a problem that will be self-evident to everyone soon enough, why not direct your efforts towards the solution - biofuels from algae?

Integral to the case for algae is the absurdity of allowing food to compete with fuel. And the sooner mass produced algae fuels can hit the market, the sooner other sources [corn, soybean, palm, etc] will cease to be cost competitive as fuel options.

We should certainly stop all subsidies for corn-ethanol farmers, today. That would be a realistic place to start.

Whilst "biofuels only constitute a few percent of the US energy market as compared to petroleum products", that is not the issue, the issue is what percentage of your food/grain is required to produce that energy. It's a lot more than a few percent I'd wager. I don't know the figures but I would hazzard an idle guess that it takes 10% of your grain to produce 1% of your energy, but that's just a guess. You may be able to see a 'sllight' problem when you get to 10% of of you energy requirements - no food whatsoever!


Now there is a choice phrase "so it won't take long until Americans start complaining about the effects".
Long before "Americans start complaining", places like Pakistan, China and Russia will have
starving desperate populations, we can forget about real third world countries they will
have starved to death long before that, but that does not matter, they are only dead people, no problem for the USA. However the three countries I did name are somewhat
more of a problem.

They have Nuclear weapons, and if they face starvation because the USA is consuming all the worlds food, well, I think you get the picture.

It is not just the USA which consumes biofuels of course, other countires do, including China which already seems to have realized what a dangerous path the world is going down.
"In China the first thing is to provide food for its 1.3 billion people, and *after* that, we will support biofuel"

Now if China cannot provide for it's 1.3 billion people because richer countries are consuming the world food supply as biofuel what do you think it is going to do?

Roll over and die?

 

[esbo]

Another reason I am uncomfortable about this is because I feel Bush's hand is on the tiller
and his track record is, well, for want of a better word - crap.

There are a lot of people in the world who spend more than 50% of their income on food and if you double the price of food well...they are dead.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Whilst "biofuels only constitute a few percent of the US energy market as compared to petroleum products", that is not the issue, the issue is what percentage of your food/grain is required to produce that energy. It's a lot more than a few percent I'd wager. I don't know the figures but I would hazzard an idle guess that it takes 10% of your grain to produce 1% of your energy, but that's just a guess. You may be able to see a 'sllight' problem when you get to 10% of of you energy requirements - no food whatsoever!

Well, let's see: If we assume that the low efficiency of ethanol crops is compensated for with petroleum energy, which it is, we can assume a typical yield of 400 gallons of ethanol per acre-year of corn. We use about 400 million gallons of gasonline per day, or 1.4 E11 gallons per year. I think we are currently supplementing petro with about 2% ethanol, so we need about 7.3 million acres of corn to produce that much ethanol. We currently dedicate about 73 million acres to growing corn, so we are using 10% of our corn to provide 2% of our fuel for autos.
http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ag101/cropmajor.html

Not a very good trade-off. And most important of all, we still needed about 1.3 billion gallons of petroleum fuel [worth of energy] to make the required 3 billion gallons of ethanol. Note also that 3 billion gallons of ethanol only provides as much energy as 1.8 billion gallons of gasoline.

 

[esbo]

Well, let's see: If we assume that the low efficiency of ethanol crops is compensated for with petroleum energy, which it is, we can assume a typical yield of 400 gallons of ethanol per acre-year of corn. We use about 400 million gallons of gasonline per day, or 1.4 E11 gallons per year. I think we are currently supplementing petro with about 2% ethanol, so we need about 7.3 million acres of corn to produce that much ethanol. We currently dedicate about 73 million acres to growing corn, so we are using 10% of our corn to provide 2% of our fuel for autos.
http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ag101/cropmajor.html

Not a very good trade-off. And most important of all, we still needed about 1.3 billion gallons of petroleum fuel [worth of energy] to make the required 3 billion gallons of ethanol. Note also that 3 billion gallons of ethanol only provides as much energy as 1.8 billion gallons of gasoline.

So the 10% for 2% would mean 100% of our food supply could make 20% of out energy.
But that 20% needs to be factored by about a half (1.8/3) or times 0.6. Which gives
12% of our energy.

Also if 1.3 gives 3 which is only 0.6 as good ie 1.3 gives 1.8. then we don't really get
12% we get (1.8-1.3)/1.8 = 0.5/1.8= 27% of the 12% =3%!

So...I have probalby screwed up real bad on the maths, but if I am right, and I hope
I am not, if we used our entire food supply as energy we would only have 3% more
energy! That's madness.

Anyway my gut feeling is that it is a mad idea.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

As you stated, we would need 100% of the corn currently produced to provide for 20% of our fuel demand, by volume. Next, we only get 60% as much energy per volume, so we only add 12% to the energy supply, as you said. The next step basically just factors back in the efficiency of ethanol production, which as a best case is about 30%, so we replace 3.6% of our energy supply for gasoline if we use all of our corn to make ethanol. Of course this assumes that the ethanol process is really 30% efficient. As I mentioned, this is a widely disputed claim that is difficult to quantify. It may be that we gain absolutely nothing, or worse!

Ironically, a couple of days ago I filled my tank with E10 for the first time. I had no choice.

 

[wolram]

esbo, i think or hope that every one knows that using good land to grow bio fuels is just not on, if they do they are idiots, so far the only probable scheme i know to produce biofuel is algae. my biggest worry is over population, there has to be a limit to the people Earth can support in relative comfort, we all ready spend billions supporting people that can not feed them self's, how much of your income would you be willing to give to support (non productive people) 10% 50% ? it will be an ever increasing spiral, until the money just dries up, each country has its own problems, and the people of those countries will only give so much, that is a political fact.

 

[vanesch]

esbo, i think or hope that every one knows that using good land to grow bio fuels is just not on, if they do they are idiots, so far the only probable scheme i know to produce biofuel is algae. my biggest worry is over population, there has to be a limit to the people Earth can support in relative comfort, we all ready spend billions supporting people that can not feed them self's, how much of your income would you be willing to give to support (non productive people) 10% 50% ? it will be an ever increasing spiral, until the money just dries up, each country has its own problems, and the people of those countries will only give so much, that is a political fact.

I wouldn't be so pessimistic. There are many examples that show that if the quality of life and economic wealth reaches a threshold, the population growth drops dramatically, to almost stabilize the population, as is the case in most of Europe and the US.

So the real issue is to bring 3/4 of the world to a relative state of prosperity, and the spiral will be broken. Asia is well on its way. Northern Africa and South-America too. The only place that is in deep doodoo is central Africa. They don't seem to make it.

Of course, this rise in prosperity will also mean a serious rise in energy consumption, until a certain level of wealth is reached, after which also energy use levels off.

All this is encouraging: it means that we don't have to fight exponentially growing numbers (people, energy consumption, food) for ever, which would indeed not be possible. But for the moment we're still on a steep slope. Shall we win until we stabilise, or shall humanity loose the battle ?

So I guess the 21st century is going to be a very determining part in human history.

 

[Andre]

I wouldn't be so pessimistic. There are many examples that show that if the quality of life and economic wealth reaches a threshold, the population growth drops dramatically, to almost stabilize the population, as is the case in most of Europe and the US.

So the real issue is to bring 3/4 of the world to a relative state of prosperity, and the spiral will be broken. Asia is well on its way. Northern Africa and South-America too. The only place that is in deep doodoo is central Africa. They don't seem to make it.

Of course, this rise in prosperity will also mean a serious rise in energy consumption, until a certain level of wealth is reached, after which also energy use levels off.

All this is encouraging: it means that we don't have to fight exponentially growing numbers (people, energy consumption, food) for ever, which would indeed not be possible. But for the moment we're still on a steep slope. Shall we win until we stabilise, or shall humanity loose the battle ?

So I guess the 21st century is going to be a very determining part in human history.

Spot on

But to get there, it's very important to have a crystal clear picture of reality and avoid personal bias and groupthink for taking the right decisions on our way to a sustainable society. Onfortunately, we do have a very poor historical record on that.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A little more math worth considering:

Scenario A: Chevron sells 1.8 billion gallons of gasoline

Scenario B: Chevron sells 3 billion gallons of ethanol and 1.3 billion gallons of petro.

The net energy gain is the same, but which is the most enticing scenario for Chevron?

... the President touted his massive ethanol mandate as a success, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary--[continued]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm1897.cfm


However

... Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Friday that the growing emphasis on corn-based ethanol has contributed to higher food prices, and he said the nation should begin "moving away gradually" from ethanol made from food such as corn.[continued]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120856165709227927.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

[Dale]

There are two primary biofuels: ethanol and biodiesel. Both can be made from food (corn, soybeans) and both can be made from inedible biomass (cellulosic ethanol, algae biodiesel). I think everyone agrees that we shouldn't burn our food, but that should lead to a rejection of specific biofuel technologies not a rejection of biofuels in general.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Battling Ethanol-Propelled Food Prices

Food prices worldwide have risen dramatically in the past few years, due in part to a similarly dramatic rise in the amount of corn used for ethanol production in the United States. Now, in an effort to make food less expensive, experts are calling for limits on ethanol production, subsidies for corn, and more incentives for biofuels made from nonfood sources.[continued]

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=4683795&page=1

 

[mheslep]

I see the price of corn just hit 6$/bushel. The silly thing is that the US still subsidizes corn farmers. $57B in corn subsidies 1995-2006. Stop the madness.
http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=corn

Meanwhile DOE's Bodman says:

"As we pursue diversity in our overall energy mix, we must also pursue diversity in our biofuels," Mr. Bodman said at a conference in Alexandria, Va. "This means moving away gradually from ethanol produced from foodstocks like corn."...

"The reason that cellulosic fuels like ethanol are not on the market in large volumes is not because we don't know how to make it in commercial quantities," Mr. Bodman said. "The production process at present is too complex and too costly, but I am confident that we can find the way forward."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120856165709227927.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

NBC did a report on the food crisis tonight.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#24261496

They report that this year, 28% of the grain harvest will go towards biofuel production. But they also report that increased demand from India and China, the price of oil, adverse weather conditions, and biofuels, have combined to make a "perfect storm" that is creating a "silent tsunami of hunger".

 

[mheslep]

PBS NOVA "Car of the Future"

Aired tonight 4/22; the episode will be available online tomorrow 4/23.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html

Hosted by NPR's Car Guys, Click and Clack so it was entertaining, but I was hoping for more detail on the technology. It hit many of the points and subjects discussed in PF vehicle / alt. energy threads:
-Hydrogen cars
-Iceland's H demonstration buses.
-Fuel Cells. FC's still too expensive, too fragile.
-Ethanol
-All Electric cars: Obligatory visit to the Tesla E care shop w/ test drive; Chevy Volt.
-MIT's Sloan on engine efficiency
-Cellulosic. Dartmouth's Lynd has been on this since time began, so he gets the Mr Cellulosic title and caught the camera for this one.
-Rocky Mountain Institute - car energy efficiency

Dings:
-No Algae!
-Ye Olde Hindenburg clip shown to scare everyone away from self serve H stations. (Everybody knows now the Hindenburg explosion was due to the flammable paint/coating and not the H, right?)
-Obligatory do it now commentary or we're all doomed by AWG

http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/15-10/ff_plant?currentPage=2
http://www.wired.com/cars/futuretransport/news/2008/01/lutz_volt_qa

 

[esbo]

I heard on the radio today that the UK is to review its biofuel policy, ie stop it or reduce
it, and try to get the EU to do the same.

28% of grain to biofuel is a shocking figure.]

Maybe I will have to start eating oil in retaliation?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

"Instead of making ethanol out of corn, let's make it out of something that no one eats, like broccoli" - Ali Velshi, CNN

 

[W3pcq]

I watched something on C-span about the food prices and shortages. One major problem is that we are using corn instead of other plants like rapeseed, or , I think they said, switchgrass. It appears that rapeseed oil as a diesel additive is a good idea, but the corn farmers are getting all the subsides, and other plants are as a result are being ignored. Rapeseed oil is much easier to refine, and it grows easy, and in arid regions.

Personally, I don't know enough about rapeseed, and about farmland use etc to make judgements. It seams to me that growing tons of rapeseed would take up land that could have been used to grow other arid liking plants like wheat.

One major problem outlined in the program on C-span was that many countries, especially poor nations in Africa, have been pressured to privatize their farming industries, and have subsequently caused them to rely on foreign foods like powdered milk, grains, etc. This can be a good thing when prices are low, but at times like now, when prices have been raised, they are now forced to buy at unreasonable prices when they would otherwise be able to feed themselves if the privatization hadn't taken place. They are as a result forced to buy crops from the corporations who own the rights, to feed them, and if the corporations have a tight enough grip, they can raise prices and the people will have little choice in the matter.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Another factor contributing to the price of food globally is speculation in the commodities markets. Some people are even suggesting that this is playing a key role the current food prices.

The price of oil is also affecting food prices.

Also, a mill in Australia that processed rice for 20 million people has closed due to a lack of supply; due to drought.

 

[esbo]

Aired tonight 4/22; the episode will be available online tomorrow 4/23.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html

Hosted by NPR's Car Guys, Click and Clack so it was entertaining, but I was hoping for more detail on the technology. It hit many of the points and subjects discussed in PF vehicle / alt. energy threads:
-Hydrogen cars
-Iceland's H demonstration buses.
-Fuel Cells. FC's still too expensive, too fragile.
-Ethanol
-All Electric cars: Obligatory visit to the Tesla E care shop w/ test drive; Chevy Volt.
-MIT's Sloan on engine efficiency
-Cellulosic. Dartmouth's Lynd has been on this since time began, so he gets the Mr Cellulosic title and caught the camera for this one.
-Rocky Mountain Institute - car energy efficiency

Dings:
-No Algae!
-Ye Olde Hindenburg clip shown to scare everyone away from self serve H stations. (Everybody knows now the Hindenburg explosion was due to the flammable paint/coating and not the H, right?)
-Obligatory do it now commentary or we're all doomed by AWG

http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/15-10/ff_plant?currentPage=2
http://www.wired.com/cars/futuretransport/news/2008/01/lutz_volt_qa

When I tried to watch that it would not work because I am outside the US.
However, I got a proxy server from here and it worked!
http://www.aliveproxy.com/us-proxy-list/
First time I have ever managed to use a proxy successfully!

 

[mheslep]

When I tried to watch that it would not work because I am outside the US.
However, I got a proxy server from here and it worked!
http://www.aliveproxy.com/us-proxy-list/
First time I have ever managed to use a proxy successfully!

Hmm, had no idea PBS video was blocked outside the US. I suppose they need to restrict the load somehow.

 

[esbo]

Hmm, had no idea PBS video was blocked outside the US. I suppose they need to restrict the load somehow.

I was quite surprised to find it blocked too, and I thought maybe I had something
else configured wrong however, it came up with some message saying it was not
available outside the US and there was something for Canadians to do to get it.
However The proxy I used is transparent, I am not too sure what that means
but when I do a "what is my IP" most give my real IP (one gave the proxy (and real))
so they obviously don't try too hard to check your location. It did cause a few problems
with my google search bar though (thought I had a virus or something).

I will try some of the non-transparent and annomymous ones next, however
in my previous experience they never work.

It's is a very good quality program though, however I found it difficult to understand
Tom in part 5 occasionallylike when he said 0-50 in 4 seconds and also something
about lithium batteries (still can't make that bit out), was something to do with it
not being a heavy metal.

 

[mheslep]

...
Tom in part 5 occasionallylike when he said 0-50 in 4 seconds and also something
about lithium batteries (still can't make that bit out), was something to do with it
not being a heavy metal.

Zero to 60 in 4 seconds.
http://www.teslamotors.com/performance/perf_specs.php
Uses Li Ion batteries and yes Lithium is not a heavy metal so its easy on the environment.

 

[CrazyAnarcho]

the ultimate boifuel

I read this artical a little while back anout spme people in texas working on using cultured algi as a biofuel. This would make a lot of sense because they don't affect the food market and large quantities of it can be grown in green houses without even using soil.

 

[mheslep]

I read this artical a little while back anout spme people in texas working on using cultured algi as a biofuel. This would make a lot of sense because they don't affect the food market and large quantities of it can be grown in green houses without even using soil.

Algae to the rescue
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=211274

 

[H8wm4m]

Biomass from industrial hemp cultivation can be used to create methanol, and far more than corn can per acre.
The oil from hemp seeds can also bo used for biodiesel.
(interestingly, the first diesel engine was ran on plant oils, more specifically hempseed oil)

While providing energy needs, hempseed oil has amazing nutritional attributes (http://raskin8500-226.rutgers.edu/~alexanderpoulev/HempOil.pdf )

Industrial hemp can also be used to make any grade of paper, and hemp paper will not turn yellow over time. Why use rainforests?

Hemp fibre (the longest and strongest natural fibre known) can also be used to strong beams and other construction materials, which would also lessen the need for deforestation.

The roots of a hemp plant will (and do) grow almost anywhere and replenish the soil with nitrogen, making it perfect for use between crop rotations.

 

[H8wm4m]

Wikipedia - Hemp:

Industrial hemp has thousands of potential uses, from paper to textiles to biodegradable plastics to health food to fuel but it has not been the great commercial success that the enthusiast hoped for in countries where it is legal to harvest. It is one of the fastest growing biomasses on the planet, and one of the earliest domesticated plants known. It also runs parallel with the "Green Future" objectives that are becoming increasingly popular. Hemp
requires little to no pesticides, replenishes soil with nutrients and nitrogen, controls erosion of the topsoil, and produces lots of oxygen, considering how fast it grows. Furthermore, Hemp could be used to replace many potentially harmful products, such as tree paper (the process of which uses bleaches and other toxic chemicals, apart from contributing to deforestation), cosmetics (which often contain synthetic oils that can clog pores and provide little nutritional content for the skin), plastics (which are petroleum based and cannot decompose), and more.

I know it is wikipedia...

Popular Mechanics - 1938 - New Billion Dollar Crop:

Hemp is the standard fiber of the world. It has great tensile strength and durability. It is used to produce more than 5,000 textile products, ranging from rope to fine laces, and the woody "hurds" remaining after the fiber has been removed contain more than seventy-seven per cent cellulose, and can be used to produce more than 25,000 products, ranging from dynamite to Cellophane.

From the farmers' point of view, hemp is an easy crop to grow and will yield from three to six tons per acre on any land that will grow corn, wheat, or oats. It has a short growing season, so that it can be planted after other crops are in. It can be grown in any state of the union. The long roots penetrate and break the soil to leave it in perfect condition for the next year's crop. The dense shock of leaves, eight to twelve feet above the ground, chokes out weeds. Two successive crops are enough to reclaim land that has been abandoned because of Canadian thistles or quack grass.

However, the connection of hemp as a crop and marijuana seems to be exaggerated. The drug is usually produced from wild hemp or locoweed which can be found on vacant lots and along railroad tracks in every state. If federal regulations can be drawn to protect the public without preventing the legitimate culture of hemp, this new crop can add immeasurably to American agriculture and industry.

And that was back when a billion dollars meant something.

The Composition of Hemp Seed Oil
and Its Potential as an Important Source
of Nutrition:

Introduction
Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) seed oil is valued primarily for its
nutritional properties as well as for the health benefits associated with
it. Although its fatty acid composition is most often noted, with oil
content ranging from 25-35%, whole hemp seed is additionally comprised
of approximately 20-25% protein, 20-30% carbohydrates, and
10-15% fiber, along with an array of trace minerals (Deferne and Pate,
1996). With a complete source of all essential amino and fatty acids,
hemp seed oil is a complete nutritional source. In addition, constituents
exist within the oil that have been shown to exhibit pharmacological
activity (Deferne and Pate, 1996; Erasmus, 1999).

Hemp seed oil contains linoleic acid (LA) and alpha-linolic acid
(LNA) as its major omega-6 and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids
(PUFA), respectively. These fatty acids comprise the most desirable
contents of the oil, especially due to the ratios in which they exist. The
3:1 ratio of LA to LNA is alleged to be optimal for nutrition (Deferne
and Pate, 1996; Callaway, Tennila & Pate, 1996; Erasmus, 1999). The
additional presence of gamma-linolenic acid (GLA) in hemp seed oil
ultimately makes its nutritional value superior to most comparable
seed oils. The myriad of benefits reported to be attributable to omega-
3 PUFA include anticancer, anti-inflammatory, and anti-thrombotic
properties. In addition, dietary omega-3 PUFA help to increase general
metabolic rates and promote the burning of fat (Erasmus, 1999; Simopoulos,
1994)

You absolutely must read this paper!
[http://raskin8500-226.rutgers.edu/~alexanderpoulev/HempOil.pdf]