Snarkpit Forum Index » General Banter » It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
1
Post Reply
Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Stadric on Sat Jan 6th at 9:13am 2007

Put aside your agendas pertaining to marijuana before reading this

For as long as I can remember, this has been the way of thinking that has been forced down my throat about hemp:
"You can't use that, it's illegal."
This is indicative of the type of close-minded thinking that made Hewlett Packard reject Steve Wozniak's personal computer. But that's a bad analogy
But what if:
-It could be used to make 80 times as much paper as a subsequent amount of trees?
-Its could be used to make cheap oil, suitable for engines?
-It's fibers could be used to make fabric?
Well it can. It's seeds contain an oil that can be harvested and used for fuel, and the fibers that compose the plant can be used to make cloth and paper.

At this point you may be saying to yourself that all this is great, in theory only, and that practical application is nigh on impossible. Well if that were the case I wouldn't be reading your minds right now, I'd just be blocking it out.
As early as the 1930s, there have been practical and efficient means for extracting the oil (Henry Ford experimented with this) and fibers (the 'decorticator').

So why isn't this incredible plant being used to make clothing and fuel, and changing the world? Because in the 1930s, Dupont, the company responsible for around two thirds of the US textile industry would rather make more money from it's blooming synthetic fiber division, the products of which were rapidly gaining industrial popularity, then lose money to natural fiber in the form of cheaper hemp fabric.
Wouldja look at that, The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, the dealings of which put enough legal technicalities on marijuana sale, prescription, and use as to dissuade anyone from doing any of the above, thereby decreasing the plants overall popularity.

It seems to me that the illegalization of marijuana is not due to it's psychoactive properties, as we would be led to believe, but because seventy years ago, a synthetic fiber company didn't want to lose it's stranglehold on this market.

But you don't have to trust me, you can ask all these people.


Also change the texture of the dock. Docks are rarely tile. -Facepunch
As I Lay Dying



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by reaper47 on Sat Jan 6th at 11:11am 2007

Isn't the sort of hemp used in fibers a different one than the sort we all smoke?


Why snark works.



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Gwil on Sat Jan 6th at 11:34am 2007

It is, reaper. The argument against hemp probably has some basis in corporate strangleholds being maintained, but it has little or nothing to do with marijuana as a recreational drug.

There's dozens more reasons as to why marijuana is prohibited - certainly sources such as erowid are only painting drugs in a positive light. I'm a reformed character of a heavy user of all drugs (bar heroin) and used to believe blindly in the arguments "for" presented in science and philosophical debate. Reality often is the greatest counter measure for pro-legalisation arguments.




Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by French Toast on Sat Jan 6th at 5:50pm 2007

But at the same time, information coming from the DEA is also skewed to only show the negative aspects, using gross exaggerations of facts. It's nearly impossible to debate the legalization issue since it's nearly impossible to get real numbers.

And hemp is a close cousin of cannabis that essentially looks the same without the psychoactive effects. Another cousin of cannabis is used in the making of beer.



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Tracer Bullet on Sat Jan 6th at 8:26pm 2007

? quoting Stadric
Put aside your agendas pertaining to marijuana before reading this

For as long as I can remember, this has been the way of thinking that has been forced down my throat about hemp:
"You can't use that, it's illegal."
This is indicative of the type of close-minded thinking that made Hewlett Packard reject Steve Wozniak's personal computer. But that's a bad analogy
But what if:
-It could be used to make 80 times as much paper as a subsequent amount of trees?
-Its could be used to make cheap oil, suitable for engines?
-It's fibers could be used to make fabric?
Well it can. It's seeds contain an oil that can be harvested and used for fuel, and the fibers that compose the plant can be used to make cloth and paper.

At this point you may be saying to yourself that all this is great, in theory only, and that practical application is nigh on impossible. Well if that were the case I wouldn't be reading your minds right now, I'd just be blocking it out.
As early as the 1930s, there have been practical and efficient means for extracting the oil (Henry Ford experimented with this) and fibers (the 'decorticator').

So why isn't this incredible plant being used to make clothing and fuel, and changing the world? Because in the 1930s, Dupont, the company responsible for around two thirds of the US textile industry would rather make more money from it's blooming synthetic fiber division, the products of which were rapidly gaining industrial popularity, then lose money to natural fiber in the form of cheaper hemp fabric.
Wouldja look at that, The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, the dealings of which put enough legal technicalities on marijuana sale, prescription, and use as to dissuade anyone from doing any of the above, thereby decreasing the plants overall popularity.

It seems to me that the illegalization of marijuana is not due to it's psychoactive properties, as we would be led to believe, but because seventy years ago, a synthetic fiber company didn't want to lose it's stranglehold on this market.

But you don't have to trust me, you can ask all these people.

Don't be a fool.

1. Fuel: Biomass of any sort is an incredibly inefficient means of producing energy. It can be done, and in certain incarnations it is likely to comprise a small but important facet of the post fossil-fuel energy economy, but don't kid yourself. You can't get enough energy out of it to "change the world", and anyone who tells you different is either deluded or lying to you.

2. Fabrics: Natural fibers are no threat to synthetics. Both have their place in the market, and they each have properties that the other cannot duplicate. Synthetics are prised for their hydrophobic nature and mechanical flexibility. Natural fibers for the exact opposite reasons! Hemp is not different in this respect. It is another hydrophilic, rigid fiber.

3. Paper: This is the only one that sounds plausible, but I'm not convinced. Trees are one of the most efficient classes of plant in terms of converting sunlight and nutrients into biomass. However, the idea of a yearly crop that could be used for paper rather than our forests sounds like a worthy goal.

Lastly, I refer to the comments of others. Hemp is not marijuana.





Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Jan 6th at 9:26pm 2007

Society has a niche for every class of person. Even a burnout.





The best things in life, aren't things.



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Stadric on Sat Jan 6th at 10:23pm 2007

I apologize for any confusion, I should have cut the clear line between non-potent cannabis: hemp and potent cannabis: marijuana. I can see how confusion could've come out of it, but the association of hemp and marijuana is evident by how little hemp is used in the US

I never stated that in today's world hemp fiber (or any natural fiber) could replace synthetic fibers (I'm actually quite fond of rayon). But when synthetics were just starting to take hold in the market, natural fibers were a strong competitor, even to the point of necessitating foul play at the time. The consequences of such continue to this day.

I'll confess I don't really like the biofuel arguments, in fact, I'm against growing corn for such programs, but using it as a substitute for oils used to make plastics seems promising to me.

On the subject of paper, one acre of hemp can make as much paper as four acres of trees can, and it only takes one season to harvest, as opposed to 20 years for trees. That's really nice any way you slice it, the only drawback I can see is if the crop depletes the soil, of which I have no idea.


Also change the texture of the dock. Docks are rarely tile. -Facepunch
As I Lay Dying



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by Naklajat on Sat Jan 6th at 11:06pm 2007

Hemp harvested for paper is many times more productive than trees, and you could rotate it with any other seasonal crop (try that with trees). Hemp fiber is softer and stronger than cotton.

Hemp is associated so heavily with marijuana because that's how it got demonized in the first place. They just lumped it all together and made it out to be danger to society using gross exaggerations and outright lies.


=o



Quote
 Re: It's Another One of Those Blunder Things
Posted by fishy on Sun Jan 7th at 12:01am 2007

it makes slaves lazy, so our pharaohs have banned it. simple as that.


i eat paint




1
Post Reply