Jump to content
ninja

Hemp Plan Text

Recommended Posts

these cards might be of help. there are cards that refer to regulations and why farmers want hemp legalized.

 

 

inherency

 

Hemp is not illegal but rather highly regulated requiring a DEA permit. Jean M. Rawson for the Congressional Research Service march 2007. March 23, 2007. Jean M. Rawson, Specialist in Agricultural Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division “Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity.”

In 1937, Congress passed the first federal law to discourage Cannabis production for marijuana while still permitting industrial uses of the crop (the Marihuana Tax Act; 50 Stat. 551). Under this statute, the government actively encouraged farmers to grow hemp for fiber and oil during World War II. After the war, competition from synthetic fibers, the Marihuana Tax Act, and increasing public anti-drug sentiment resulted in fewer and fewer acres of hemp being planted, and none at all after 1958. The past decade has witnessed a resurgence of interest in the United States in producing industrial hemp. Farmers in regions of the country that are highly dependent upon a single crop, such as tobacco or wheat, have shown interest in hemp’s potential as a high-value alternative crop, although the economic studies conducted so far paint a mixed profitability picture. Beginning around 1995, an increasing number of state legislatures began to consider a variety of initiatives related to industrial hemp. Most of these are resolutions calling for scientific, economic, or environmental studies, and some are laws authorizing the planting of experimental plots under state statutes. Nonetheless, the actual planting of Cannabis, even for state-authorized experimental purposes, is regulated by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) under the authority of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (Title II of P.L. 91-513 (21 U.S.C.§§802 et seq.) Congress adopted in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) the same definition of Cannabis sativa that appeared in the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act. The CSA definition reads: The term marijuana means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds or resin. Such term does not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound ... or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination. The statute thus retains control over all varieties of the Cannabis plant by virtue of including them under the term “marijuana” and making no distinctions between low- and high-THC varieties. The language exempts from control the parts of mature plants — stalks, fiber, oil, cake, etc. — intended for industrial uses. Strictly speaking, the CSA does not make Cannabis illegal; rather, it places the strictest controls on its production, making it illegal to grow the crop without a DEA permit. DEA issued a permit for an experimental plot in Hawaii in the 1990s (now expired), but none since then. All hemp products sold in the United States are imported or manufactured from imported hemp materials. Under a state law passed in 1999, North Dakota became the first state to authorize industrial hemp production within its borders. A North Dakota State University researcher twice applied for, but did not receive, a DEA permit. In January 2007, the North Dakota Department of Agriculture issued final regulations on licensing hemp production. One application for a permit from a state-licensed producer is pending with the DEA.5

regulations make growing hemp functionally impossible

West 02 [Affidavit of DR. David West December 2002. Dr.West is one of the only federally licensed hemp researcher in recent history. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. ALEXANDER “Alex” WHITE PLUME, PERCY WHITE PLUME, TIERRA MADRE LLC, MADISON HEMP AND FLAX COMPANY 1806, and all defendants’ agents, servants, assigns, attorneys, and all others acting in concert with the name Defendants, Defendants.]

In my opinion, it is prohibitively expensive for any fiber-type Cannabis (i.e., “industrial hemp”) grower to comply with the security requirements required by DEA regulations for a license to grow Cannabis. Such security requirements assume that the subject Cannabis will be diverted for use as a drug or in the drug trade. The application of drug related security requirements to fiber-type Cannabis agriculture constitutes the equivalent of a ban on fiber-type Cannabis by virtue of the prohibitive cost of such security mechanisms.

Thus the plan

The USFG will amend all necessary articles of the Controlled Substance Act of 1970, to allow for the deregulation of industrial hemp production throughout the United States. We reserve the right to clarify.

Solvency

 

A. Deregulating Hemp will allow it to be subsidized giving farmers a huge incentive. Smith-Heisters 2008 (Skaidra Smith-Heisters, is a policy analyst at Reason Foundation, a nonprofit think tank advancing free minds and free markets. a graduate of the University of California at Davis program in Nature and Culture. Prior to joining Reason, she worked in habitat restoration, endangered species management and natural resources planning with the California State Parks system. “Illegally Green: Environmental Costs of Hemp Prohibition” Published March 2008 http://www.reason.org/ps367.pdf pg 7)

Fuels derived from crops in the United States are eligible for additional government support in the form of tax breaks and tariffs, as well as state and federal grants and loans for infrastructure development. According to the American Enterprise Institute, “the single largest energy tax expenditure in the U.S. budget is the tax credit for alcohol fuels, with a five-year revenue cost of $12.7 billion,” primarily benefiting corn-based ethanol.32 Canola and soybeans, other competitors in the biofuel market, are also subsidized. In 2007 alone, the U.S. Department of Energy announced $585 million in grants to roughly one dozen companies working to produce cellulosic ethanol.33

Farmers want to grow hemp passing plan solves for the anti-drug perceptual barrier

March 23, 2007. Jean M. Rawson, Specialist in Agricultural Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division. Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity. Congressional Research Service Report.

In 1937, Congress passed the first federal law to discourage Cannabis production for marijuana while still permitting industrial uses of the crop (the Marihuana Tax Act; 50 Stat. 551). Under this statute, the government actively encouraged farmers to grow hemp for fiber and oil during World War II. After the war, competition from synthetic fibers, the Marihuana Tax Act, and increasing public anti-drug sentiment resulted in fewer and fewer acres of hemp being planted, and none at all after 1958. The past decade has witnessed a resurgence of interest in the United States in producing industrial hemp. Farmers in regions of the country that are highly dependent upon a single crop, such as tobacco or wheat, have shown interest in hemp’s potential as a high-value alternative crop, although the economic studies conducted so far paint a mixed profitability picture. Beginning around 1995, an increasing number of state legislatures began to consider a variety of initiatives related to industrial hemp.

Inround solvency we raise awareness about the distinction between hemp and pot House of Representatives State of HawaiiState Capitol Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Industrial Hemp [Cannabis Sativa] - Economic Viability and Political Concerns Prepared for: Representative Cynthia Thielen, Minority Floor LeaderBy Gertraude Roth-Li, Minority Research Staff April 17, 1996 Will it take another national emergency to take action on industrial hemp? Elected officials do not want to be seen as being soft on crime and they know that a vote in favor of industrial hemp may be construed in this way. But the political effectiveness of confusing marijuana and industrial hemp depends on a public that has a limited understanding of the issue. In Kentucky public opinion has shifted because of greater awareness. In 1993, the governor convened a task force to explore the viability of hemp for the state. However, for reasons unknown, the chairman disbanded his task force prematurely and issued a hastily assembled report which was not endorsed by many of the task force members.The net effect of the task force’s creation and demise was that the issue of growing industrial hemp received broad publicity in the Kentucky’s media, in the process educating the state’s people about the difference between hemp and marijuana. As a result, a March 1996 survey found 77% of Kentuckians favor reintroducing industrial hemp in their state.

Separating hemp from pot in a business-oriented manner is key to changing the laws as a result our aff is step in the right direction.

Small, E. and D. Marcus. 2002. Hemp: A new crop with new uses for North America. p. 284–326. In: J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.), Trends in new crops and new uses. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA.

Ten years ago hemp cultivation was illegal in Germany, England, Canada, Australia, and other countries. Essential to overcoming governmental reluctance in each country was the presentation of an image that was business-oriented, and conservative. The merits of environmentalism have acquired some political support, but unless there is a reasonable possibility that hemp cultivation is perceived as potentially economically viable, there is limited prospect of having anti-hemp laws changed. Strong support from business and farm groups is indispensable; support from pro-marijuana interests and what are perceived of as fringe groups is generally counterproductive. It is a combination of prospective economic benefit coupled with assurance that hemp cultivation will not detrimentally affect the enforcement of marijuana legislation that has led most industrially advanced countries to reverse prohibitions against growing hemp.

 

Solvency (General)

 

Legalizing empirically increases hemp productino, when hemp was legalized in WWII framers grew 375,000 acres of hemp in one year (this is more then the worldwide total grown in 2002.)

Energy Farming in America by Lynn Osburn 1990

During the Second World War, the federal government faced a real economic emergency when our supply of hemp was cut off by the Japanese. The federal government responded to the emergency by suspending marijuana prohibition. Patriotic American farmers were encouraged to apply for a license to grow hemp. They responded enthusiastically and grew 375,000 acres of hemp in 1943.

The argument against undertaking this massive hemp production effort today does not hold up to scrutiny.

Legalizing hemp will increase market size

By Holly Jessen Feb-2007 “Hemp Biodiesel: When the Smoke Clears” biodiesel magazine.

At least one of the barriers to hemp biodiesel could potentially be reduced if farmers in the United States were able to grow it, thereby increasing production numbers overall. Rather than fearing the competition for Canadian farmers, Hanks would love to see that become a reality. Though the hemp debate is over in Canada, the crop still has a connection to marijuana in the minds of many in the United States, he says. If hemp production was allowed in the United States, the unfair stigma directed toward the crop would dissipate, Hanks says. That would be good for the whole industry. “It would help regularize hemp in America, and help to increase markets,” Hanks says.

Federal law is the barrier to hemp biofuel production in the US and Canada.

By Holly Jessen Feb-2007 “Hemp Biodiesel: When the Smoke Clears” biodiesel magazine. Today, high demand within the food market, limited production and low yields per acre make industrial hemp unattractive as a viable option for biodiesel production. That could change, however, if states like North Dakota can overcome federal road blocks to produce industrial hemp in the United States.

The only crop more profitable for kentuky farmers than hemp is tobacco

DRUG WAR FACTS Compiled and updated by Douglas A. McVay for Common Sense for Drug Policy, http://www.csdp.org/ Updated: May 2007

In a July 1998 study issued by the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Kentucky, researchers concluded that Kentucky hemp farmers could earn a net profit of $600 per acre for raising certified seeds, $320 net profit per acre for straw only or straw and grain production, and $220 net profit per acre for grain only production. The only crop found to be more profitable was tobacco.

legalizing hemp = incentive because restrictive laws in developed nations have dissuaded hemp research around the world. [Roth-Li, 1996]Gertraude [researcher for Representative Cynthia Thielen, Minority Floor Leader of Hawaii House of Representatives] April 16th, “Industrial Hemp [Cannabis Sativa] - Economic Viability and Political Concerns”

Could industrial hemp [if its cultivation is legalized] lead to a thriving industry, creating employment and profits? Theoretical potential and economic realities are two different things. So far, legal constraints have prevented industrial hemp from being grown on a large scale in most developed nations, so that there has been little incentive to develop new technology that would maximize hemp’s profitability. Community Development The bottom line of growing hemp is the cost of transportation to a processing center. Since hemp is a bulky crop, it is not cost-effective to ship hemp far for processing. In terms of economies of scale this would appear to be a disadvantage. However. in terms of community economic development, hemp’s bulkiness means that, if successful, hemp cultivation will lead to local processing centers and jobs in small weaving factories or seed crushing facilities, and pulp mills. Hemp holds the promise to revitalize certain agricultural communities. Research & Development Technology to turn hemp into usable fiber and fiber into desired products is available and new technological developments are under way. Silsoe College in Bedforshire, Great Britain, for example, has developed a machine comparable to the cotton gin machine, which over two hundred years ago helped reduce the price of cotton a hundred fold. This ‘decorticator,’ which is able to extract fiber from the stems of crops such as hemp and flax cheaply, is now undergoing commercial trials. In Belgium a ‘scutching’ machine normally used to extract linen-grade fibers from flax, can also extract fiber from hemp. The primary focus in hemp technology has been on fiber processing. Work coming out of German flax programs is now being applied to hemp, leading to processes which include a steam explosion/cottonization process to produce cotton-like short fiber. Further technological modifications or innovations will be needed for full-scale processing of hemp. Some researchers in U.S. Department of Energy laboratories are studying microorganisms that will detach crude cellulosic fibers from lignin, the natural glue which holds plants together. The results could be applicable to hemp by making a larger part of the plant usable as biomass for energy production.

Technological advances create incentives for investors

Tim Castleman © Fuel and Fiber Company, 2001, 2006 HEMP BIOMASS FOR ENERGY

Lignin has long been viewed as a problem in the processing of fiber, and detailed studies have revealed numerous methods of removal and degradation; commonly it is burned for process heat and power generation. Advances in gasification and turbine technologies enable on-site power and heat generation, and should be seriously considered in any full-scale proposal. Additionally, by full chemical assay and careful market evaluation numerous co-product and value-adding opportunities exist. Such assay should include a NIRS (Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy) analysis, with as many varieties and conditions of material as can be gathered. Reductions in lignin achieved by cultivation and harvest techniques, germplasm development and custom enzyme development will optimize processing output and efficiency. Incremental advances in system efficiencies related to these production improvements create a significant financial incentive for investors. The Fuel and Fiber Company Renewable Resource System will process 300,000 to 600,000 tons of biomass per year, per facility; 25% to 35% of this will be high-value grades of core-free bast fiber. The remaining 65% to 75% of biomass will be used for the conversion process. Each facility will process input from 60,000 to 170,000 acres. Outputs are: Ethanol: 10-25 MGY (Million Gallons per Year), Fiber: 67,000 to 167,000 tons per year, and other co-products; fertilizer, animal feed, etc. to be determined. Hemp production will average 3.9 tons per acre with average costs of $520 per acre. Capital costs not included. Estimated capital costs are $135 to $150 million per facility, plus crop payments. To add a pulping operation will require an additional $100 million and adds $117 per ton of fiber processed for pulp, which has a market value of up to $2,500 per ton. The most conservative estimates possible were used for this study. A full-scale feasibility study is needed to validate assumptions and projections. An additional $35 per ton environmental impact benefit should also be factored into future projections[xv].

Farmers want hemp

 

Farmers want to grow hemp.

West 02 [Affidavit of DR. David West December 2002. Dr.West is one of the only federally licensed hemp researcher in recent history. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. ALEXANDER “Alex” WHITE PLUME, PERCY WHITE PLUME, TIERRA MADRE LLC, MADISON HEMP AND FLAX COMPANY 1806, and all defendants’ agents, servants, assigns, attorneys, and all others acting in concert with the name Defendants, Defendants.]

44. Farmers are concerned with industrial hemp because it fosters bioregional sustainability and the return to the possibility of a carbohydrate economy based on the notion that anything that can be made of a hydrocarbon (plastics, etc.) can be made from a carbohydrate. The bulkiness of hemp stalks and hemp fiber demands local processing which fosters local economies. Hemp’s leaves return nitrogen back to the soil, i.e. they convert nitrogen fertilizer into organically bound nitrogen, which improves soil fertility.

Farmers need substitute and rotation crops

Small, E. and D. Marcus. 2002. Hemp: A new crop with new uses for North America. p. 284–326. In: J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.), Trends in new crops and new uses. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA.

Will hemp commercial cultivation resume in the US in the foreseeable future? This is difficult to judge, but the following considerations suggest this might occur: (1) increasing awareness of the differences between industrial hemp and marijuana; (2) growing appreciation of the environmental benefits of hemp cultivation; (3) continuing demonstration of successful hemp cultivation and development in most of the remaining western world; all the G8 countries, except the US, produce and export industrial hemp; and (4) increasing pressure on state and federal governments to permit hemp cultivation by farmers, particularly wheat, corn, and tobacco farmers in desperate need of substitute crops, but also for rotation crops to break pest and disease cycles.

Farmers want to grow hemp as rotation crop

Small, E. and D. Marcus. 2002. Hemp: A new crop with new uses for North America. p. 284–326. In: J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.), Trends in new crops and new uses. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA.

Will hemp commercial cultivation resume in the US in the foreseeable future? This is difficult to judge, but the following considerations suggest this might occur: (1) increasing awareness of the differences between industrial hemp and marijuana; (2) growing appreciation of the environmental benefits of hemp cultivation; (3) continuing demonstration of successful hemp cultivation and development in most of the remaining western world; all the G8 countries, except the US, produce and export industrial hemp; and (4) increasing pressure on state and federal governments to permit hemp cultivation by farmers, particularly wheat, corn, and tobacco farmers in desperate need of substitute crops, but also for rotation crops to break pest and disease cycles.

Hemp biofuel would be boon for farmers

Energy Business Reports PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release Press Contact: Barbara Drazga Press@EnergyBusinessReports.com Tel 800-304-0345 www.energybusinessreports.com accessed march 27, 2008.

It is becoming increasingly clear that reliance on oil as the principal source of fuel is unsustainable over the long-term. A shift towards any alternative fuel is going to require a governmental commitment to emerging technologies. In addition, integrating alternative fuels into the mass market will have broad impacts on existing policies. This is why biofuel has caught the eye of scientists and governments alike. The short term supply of biofuel is coming mainly from corn and soybeans, but the long-term goal is liquid fuel from cellulose. It would be a boon for farmers, who could add crops like switchgrass, hemp and kenaff on fallow ground.

US ag community is interested in hemp.

Small, E. and D. Marcus. 2002. Hemp: A new crop with new uses for North America. p. 284–326. In: J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.), Trends in new crops and new uses. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA.

In the US, a substantial trade in hemp products has developed, based on imports of hemp fiber, grain, and oil. The American agricultural community has observed this, and has had success at the state level in persuading legislators of the advisability of experimental hemp cultivation as a means of evaluating the wisdom of re-establishing American hemp production. However, because of opposition by the federal government, to date there has only been a small experimental plot in Hawaii.

American farmers want to grow hemp and will support legislators who advocate for hemp.

On a high | SEATTLE
From The Economist print edition Is weed the new green? Jun 21st 2007

American farmers would love to grow hemp. North Dakota, which in 1999 became the first state to allow industrial hemp farming, has taken the lead. This week two farmers from the state filed a lawsuit to force the DEA to issue permits to grow hemp; the farmers had applied for permits back in February, thus far to no avail. Ron Paul, a Texas congressman and presidential candidate, could win over farmers in Iowa because of his pro-hemp lobbying. In February he introduced a bill in Congress that would allow Americans to grow it. If hemp grows so easily, what about using the crop as a biofuel? A Mercedes-Benz “hemp car” did make its way across America six years ago. (Among other uses in cars, “Pimp My Ride”, an MTV show, recently featured a 1965 Chevy Impala that runs on biodiesel and has hemp upholstery.) Perhaps this is just the niche for Willie Nelson. He already has his own biodiesel line, called BioWillie, and is not unfamiliar with other uses of the cannabis plant.

Corporate interest is key to passing legislation and small-scale development will feed into capitalism/agro-business (there are other cards above demonstrating Corp interest) House of Representatives State of Hawaii
State Capitol Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Industrial Hemp [Cannabis Sativa] - Economic Viability and Political Concerns Prepared for: Representative Cynthia Thielen, Minority Floor Leader
By Gertraude Roth-Li, Minority Research Staff April 17, 1996

There is no guarantee for a future of hemp in the U.S. or in Hawaii, but given hemp’’s versatility there is a fair chance of success. Legislators, seeking to minimize the political risk associated with the hemp issue, are looking for commitments by large and respectable companies interested in investing in the new industry. That, however, may be putting the cart before the horse. What is needed first is a better understanding of the issues involved and small scale experimental cultivation to generate some of the data that businesses would like to have in hand before committing themselves.

Corporations and Large Farming interests support hemp legalization

House of Representatives State of Hawaii
State Capitol Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Industrial Hemp [Cannabis Sativa] - Economic Viability and Political Concerns

Prepared for: Representative Cynthia Thielen, Minority Floor Leader
By Gertraude Roth-Li, Minority Research Staff April 17, 1996

“The effort to legalize hemp is a ruse to legalize the drug.”
There is an increase in the number of groups, companies and individuals who are supporting the cultivation of industrial hemp. In January 1996, the American Farm Bureau Federation, representing 4.6 million members, endorsed industrial hemp by stating: “We recommend that American Farm Bureau Federation encourage research into the viability and economic potential of industrial hemp production in the United States. We further recommend that such research includes planting test plots in the United States using modern agricultural techniques.” The Colorado and Kentucky farm bureaus, along with other farming associations, are also in support, while environmental groups see hemp as an alternative for trees for paper. Companies such as International Paper, Masonite, and Inland Container Corporation have expressed an interest in hemp as an alternative fiber source. The International Paper Company (IP), which has 72,000 employees and annual revenues of $513 billion, sent four representatives to participate in the founding session of the North American Industrial Hemp Council in Minneapolis [October 1995]. Half a year earlier [March 1995], the Bioresource Hemp Symposium, the largest-ever such meeting and trade show was held in Frankfurt, Germany. Two hundred and forty participants from 20 countries attended, predominantly researchers including scientists, engineers, and developers of hemp-based products. Influential political leaders have gone on record in support of industrial hemp cultivation. Canada’s Health Minister Diane Marleau called hemp “an excellent commercial and industrial type of crop” with “a great deal of potential.” In Germany, Health Minister Horst Seehofer supported lifting the ban on hemp cultivation, saying “we now have strains of hemp which contain such small amounts of the drug THC that they cannot be used for drug production. The principal argument against a continuing ban on hemp cultivation is therefore no longer valid.” Additional evidence that the current movement pushing for legal hemp cultivation is not tied to marijuana advocates lies in the fact that those countries which have legalized industrial hemp have not changed their drug and marijuana laws.

Farmers want to make biodiesel because it does not require a distiller’s license

Hemp and the new energy technologies By Jon Gettman 1995 5/6/08 10:46am

http://www.ukcia.org/research/HempAndTheNewEnergyTechnologies.htm

Farmers are intrigued because unlike ethanol, vegetable-oil extraction requires no distiller's license. The process requires less water and energy than ethanol production, and produces a high-protein meal as a byproduct. Oilseed fuels have a low sulfur content, are safe to store and do not cause skin ailments.

Hemp oil can made into biodiesel that can operate farm tractors

Hemp and the new energy technologies By Jon Gettman 1995 5/6/08 10:46am

http://www.ukcia.org/research/HempAndTheNewEnergyTechnologies.htm

Large tractors tend to be DI engines, while IDI engines are more elaborate and quieter.

Indirect-injection engines run on vegetable-oil fuels without significant problems. South African engineers have run unmodified Deutz tractors with IDI engines for 3,000 hours, with some attention to fuel filtration. Quick also reports similar results with Caterpillar tractors in Brazil. The two manufacturers have qualified their warranties in those countries, respectively, for machines operated on vegetable fuels.

Australian engineers have confirmed that even highly unsaturated linseed oil will fuel an IDI engine without problem, after testing an engine for 200 hours. Hemp oil, used as a biodiesel fuel, should be capable of operating indirect-injection engines without abnormal component wear to the engine.

Hemp can offset ag-industries petroleum diesel consumption

Hemp and the new energy technologies By Jon Gettman 1995 5/6/08 10:46am

http://www.ukcia.org/research/HempAndTheNewEnergyTechnologies.htm

Price is thus the limiting factor. In 1992, biodiesel cost about $2 per gallon, diesel about 70 cents. Still, development continues. The Italian Ferruzzi-Montedison industrial conglomerate completed a 17-million-gallon-per-year biodiesel plant in Italy in 1992, and also set up a demonstration program in South Dakota.

According to the USDA, peanuts, sunflowers and rapeseed produce 75 gallons of oil per acre; soybeans give 40 gallons and cottonseed 20 gallons. Hemp yields 30 gallons of oil per acre. Over 50 million acres would be needed to supplant the 3 billion gallons of petroleum diesel fuel used every year for agricultural purposes.

American growers have environmental advantage over competitors

Tim Castleman © Fuel and Fiber Company, 2001, 2006 HEMP BIOMASS FOR ENERGY

Industrial hemp can be grown in most climates and on marginal soils. It requires little or no herbicide and no pesticide, and uses less water than cotton. Measurements at Ridgetown College indicate the crop needs 300-400 mm (10-13 in.) of rainfall equivalent. Yields will vary according to local conditions and will range from 1.5 to 6 dry tons of biomass per acre[iii]. California's rich croplands and growing environment are expected to increase yields by 20% over Canadian results, which will average at least 3.9 bone dry tons per acre. Grown for oilseed, Canadian grower's yields average 1 tonne/hectare, or about 400 lbs. per acre. Cannabis seed contains about 28% oil (112 lbs.), or about 15 gallons per acre. Production costs using these figures would be about $35 per gallon. Some varieties are reported[iv] to yield as much as 38% oil, and a record 2,000 lbs. per acre was recorded in 1999. At this rate, 760 lbs.of oil per acre would result in about 100 gallons of oil, with production costs totaling about $5.20 gallon. This oil could be used as-is in modified diesel engines, or be converted to biodiesel using a relatively simple, automated process. Several systems are under development worldwide designed to produce biodiesel on a small scale, such as on farms using "homegrown" oil crops.

Hemp biofuel is inexpensive and improves farm land while decreasing input costs

Lynn Osburn 1994 “Energy Farming”

Hemp is planted inexpensively from seed sown directly in the field; hemp actually improves the soil in which it is grown, without chemical fertilizers; hemp chokes out weeds by virtue of its fast dense growth; hemp biomass harvesters (modified hay cubers) are cheaper to operate and are much quieter than wood chippers. And according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, over a twenty year period one acre planted in hemp produces as much pulp as 4.1 acres of trees.15

States and Farmers want to grow hemp. [by Holly Jessen Feb-2007 “Hemp Biodiesel: When the Smoke Clears” biodiesel magazine.] With the hope of industrial hemp production dashed in California, proponents are turning their attention to North Dakota, the next state in line with a shot at legally growing hemp. Over the past 10 years, North Dakota has passed a half half-dozen laws that favor hemp production, North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson says. However, without the cooperation of the DEA, progress has been slow. “We’ve never been able to implement any of [the hemp laws],” he says. Now, a set of rules has been put in place that should take care of that issue. At press time, the agency planned to have license applications available for North Dakota producers by Jan. 1, Johnson says. However, farmers still must apply for and receive permission from the DEA, so hemp seeds probably won’t be planted in the 2007 growing season. The best case scenario is that the DEA will grant North Dakota farmers permission to grow industrial hemp, Eidinger says. However, if the federal agency chooses instead to reject the applications or simply refuses to acknowledge them, the next step could very well be a federal courtroom. North Dakota has been ignored by the DEA in the past, Johnson says. When the state provided funding for hemp research at North Dakota State University a few years ago, the DEA stopped communicating with the researchers, effectively ending the project. The DEA’s actions have caused frustration among farmers who want to add hemp to their farming operations. North Dakota hemp supporters just want a chance to show the federal government they’re not “wackos,” Johnson says, adding that the farmers are just interested in growing a legitimate crop, not being a part of a drug conspiracy. David Monson, who farms more than 700 acres of cropland in northeastern North Dakota, concurs. Monson, a member of the North Dakota House of Representatives, planned at press time to be first in line in January to apply for a license to grow hemp in North Dakota. solid, respectable citizen, Monson goes a long way toward dispelling the myth that hemp supporters secretly want to light up. Among his many responsibilities, Monson is the superintendent of schools in Osnabrock, N.D., as well as a member of the North American Industrial Hemp Council. As a state legislator, he’s labored since 1997 to make hemp farming legal in North Dakota, he says. It’s frustrating for Monson to see farmers in Canada, just 25 miles north of his Cavalier County farm, earning $300 to $600 an acre for growing hemp. That’s a much higher value than the wheat, barley, soybeans and pinto beans Monson is growing. Hemp would also be valuable as a rotational crop. In the northeastern corner of the state where Monson farms, it’s been difficult to break the hold of fusarium head blight, or scab—a crop disease that attacks cereal crops and reduces yields. Other crops, such as sugar beets and potatoes, can’t be produced in that area due to the rocky soil. Growing hemp would also provide significant environmental advantages, Johnson says. The crop grows rapidly with little or no need for pesticides. Considering all the positives and the fact that there is a demand for hemp, Johnson doesn’t understand why North Dakota farmers shouldn’t have the option to grow it.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DEA hates giving those permits, so what would be a good thing about giving permits instead of legalization.

 

plus, Permits to grow it won't excatly help you do better in the T debates.

 

giving permits gets you around some petty args like a spec and non inherent stuff, and it's advantageous when answering the WOD DA and if you put legalizing they'll misconstrue

 

 

how will it hurt you in a t arg or why it matters that the dea doesnt like giving them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ugh find a new aff

 

decriminalizing hemp is prob a good idea and all, but it's not a good case on this topic. there's just no defense of "hemp subsidies just for alt energy". your advantages are either reasons why alt energy is good, which is solved by a nonhemp cp, or reasons why hemp decriminalization is good, which is solved by doing it in a non-alt energy area.

 

obviously the best version of this case wouldn't defend subsidies, but just argue for decriminalizing. the trouble you run into is tacking on "for alt energy" in the plan. you have to do it so it seems more topical, but then that just doesn't solve your decriminalization adv, another loophole just adds to the confusion/hypocrisy.

 

This is actually a really strategic aff. It doesn't link to nearly any da's and is one of the only K's on this topic that doesn't really link to cap. Not many people are running it so not a lot of teams are that prepped out for it, so they end up running generics.

 

Yeah, you run into huge T problems since it's not topical most of the time but if you write good T blocks, there are legit answers, and it's not hard to win. We've lost maybe 3 rounds (two legit) out of six tournaments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is actually a really strategic aff. It doesn't link to nearly any da's and is one of the only K's on this topic that doesn't really link to cap. Not many people are running it so not a lot of teams are that prepped out for it, so they end up running generics.

 

Yeah, you run into huge T problems since it's not topical most of the time but if you write good T blocks, there are legit answers, and it's not hard to win. We've lost maybe 3 rounds (two legit) out of six tournaments.

 

very true. if you're smart, you can also link turn federalism easy, because federal hemp prohibition steals states rights. 50 States doesn't really work either, theres tons of lit on why it wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...