neg - industrial hemp legalization con

8/9/2019 NEG - Industrial Hemp Legalization CON

1/36

NEG Industrial Hemp Legalization CON P a g e | 1

NEG Industrial Hemp Legalization CON

TOPICALITY .........................................................................................................................5INHERENCY .........................................................................................................................7

1. States Already have Authority over the Legality of Hemp .............................................. 71. States have passed legislation to allow limited research or cultivation of industrial hemp;

growing hemp is legal....................................................................................................... 7

2. Nineteen states have introduced hemp legislation, while nine others have allowed the

production of hemp ..........................................................................................................7

3. Hemp is already a state policy ........................................................................................7

SOLVENCY ...........................................................................................................................81. DEA Regulations ...........................................................................................................8

While states have made the cultivation of hemp legal, the DEA still regulates it to death ........... .8

2. Processing ....................................................................................................................91. The largest obstacle for profitable industrial hemp production in the United States is

technological................................................................................................................... 9

2. Hemp processing is still more expensive than processing for alternatives ..............................9

3. It is unclear if hemp can be economically processed in the U.S............................................ 9

4. There is some question as to whether hemp fibers can be profitably processed in the United

States ..........................................................................................................................10

5. Processing for hemp remains more expensive than alternatives, and processing technology is

antiquated .....................................................................................................................10

3. No Market ..................................................................................................................111. The world hemp market is contracting ...........................................................................11

2. Hemp exports (from other countries) and U.S. imports have fallen (i.e. demand has fallen) ...11

3. The market for hemp is insufficient and its potential is closer to the lower end .....................11

4. Monitoring Costs ........................................................................................................121. Any lifting of restrictions on cultivation of industrial hemp will be accompanied by regulations

governing licensing and certification, cultivation, testing and monitoring of hemp cultivation .. .. .12

2. Hemp monitoring, licensing, or regulating costs are massively enormous ............................12

3. Issues of legality increases incumbency .........................................................................12

5. Treaties Block .............................................................................................................131. Link: The UN Convention on Narcotic Drugs Bans Hemp Production ....................................13

2. Impact: The Affirmative teams plan would not pass treaties are the supreme law in the

United States; even if the Affirmative plan was passed, it would not go into effect because of the

treaty violation ..............................................................................................................13

ADVANTAGE RESPONSES ...................................................................................................141. A2: Hemp helps the Environment ................................................................................14

1. It is a faulty assumption that hemp and the hemp industry will be less harmful to the

environment than the status quo ......................................................................................14

2. Cannabis hemp is not a unique, environmentally friendly crop ...........................................14

3. Hemp requires abundant moisture ................................................................................14

4. Hemp requires soils with high fertility ............................................................................15

5. Hemp is not environmentally beneficial hemp yields prove .............................................15

Black/Samelson/VoellPSDC/Catalyst/Vector


2/36


6. Over a wide range of soil and environmental conditions, hemp has been shown to require

liberal fertilization for maximum production ........................................................................15

2. A2: Hemp helps the Economy .....................................................................................161. The claimed advantages of cannabis hemp over other raw materials are false .....................16

2. Hemp is a financially irresponsible plant predicted to return net losses in the US ..................16

3. It seems questionable that U.S. producers could remain profitable at the low end of theestimated net returns .....................................................................................................16

4. The market for hemp products might easily be oversupplied .............................................17

5. Uncertainty about demand for hemp and the potential for oversupply discounts the prospects

for hemp as an economically viable ...................................................................................17

6. The U.S. market for hemp fibers is, and will likely remain, a small, thin market ...................17

7. A domestic hemp industry will face tough competition from better-established U.S. industries

................................................................................................................................... 18

8. Hemp is not economically beneficial paper proves .........................................................18

9. Hemp is not economically beneficial plastic and synthetic fibers proves ............................18

10. Hemp is not economically beneficial vegetable oil/fuel proves .......................................18

11. Hemp is not economically beneficial food and cosmetic products proves .........................19

3. A2: Hemp Legalization is Key to Solving the Energy Crisis ...........................................201. Hemp faces many innovated developments before becoming a viable biofuel.......................20

2. No single alternative energy can hope to solve the countrys energy needs .........................20

3. There is no silver bullet for solving our nations energy problems .......................................20

4. Study: Turning plants into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting biodiesel generates

................................................................................................................................... 21

5. The US needs a liquid fuel replacement for oil in the near future, but not from plant biomass 21

6. Hemp is unimportant as a fuel source in the EU, despite being legal there ...........................21

4. A2: Hemp Saves Trees ................................................................................................221. Paper usage creates trees that wouldnt otherwise be there ..............................................22

2. Nothing can compete with forests for pulp as far as saving energy and using the carbon dioxide

in the atmosphere ..........................................................................................................22

3. Not using paper in order to save trees is like not eating salad to save vegetables ..............22

DISADVANTAGES ...............................................................................................................231) Hypoxic Dead Zones ...................................................................................................23Shell: .............................................................................................................................23

A. Link: The Affirmative Teams Plan Increases Hemp Production ..........................................23

B. Internal Link: Hemp Requires Plenty of Fertilizer ............................................................23

Over a wide range of soil and environmental conditions, hemp has been shown to require liberal

fertilization for maximum production .................................................................................23

C. Impact: Hypoxic Zones ..............................................................................................23

Increased fertilizer use increases fertilizer runoff which creates hypoxic dead zones .................23

Extension: ......................................................................................................................241. Example: Fertilizer runoff has contributed to the Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone .........................24



3/36


2. A majority of the US fishing industry will be harmed if the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxic Zone

continues ......................................................................................................................24

3. The Gulf of Mexico dead zone is the largest example of a human-caused hypoxic zone .........24

2) Water Quality .............................................................................................................25A. Link: The Affirmative Teams Plan Increases Hemp Production ..........................................25

B. Internal Link #1: Hemp Requires Plenty of Herbicides for Ideal Production .........................25

C. Internal Link #2: Hemp Also Requires Pesticides for Ideal Production ................................25

2. The introduction of new crops and their increased production can and may result in unforeseen

pest problems these problems should be anticipated with hemp .........................................25

D. Impact: Poisoned Water .............................................................................................26

Pesticides and herbicides from farms infiltrate drinking water ...............................................26

3) War on Drugs Failure .................................................................................................27Shell: .............................................................................................................................27

A. Uniqueness: The U.S. is Currently Winning the War on Drugs ...........................................27

B. Link: The Affirmative Teams Plan Increases Hemp Production ..........................................27

C. Internal Link: Legalizing Hemp would Undermine U.S. Efforts ...........................................27

D. Impact #1. Hegemony ...............................................................................................27

The war to prevent the illegal drug trade preserves U.S. hegemony .......................................27

E. Impact #2: Terrorism .................................................................................................28

1. The terrorists benefit from the lucrative trade of illegal drugs ............................................28

2. Terrorists make money on drugs and create weapons with that money ...............................28

Extension: ......................................................................................................................29A. We are Winning the War on Drugs ...............................................................................29

1. For almost all drugs, there are signs of overall stability whether we speak of production,

trafficking or consumption ...............................................................................................29

2. Across America, workplace drug tests suggest that meth use has been falling .....................29

3. The top U.S. drugs official has said anti-drug efforts are having the best results of the past 20

years ............................................................................................................................29

B. Legalizing Hemp Hinders the War on Drugs ...................................................................31

1. Legalizing hemp would undercut the governments drug enforcement effort ........................31

2. Its hard to distinguish hemp from marijuana ..................................................................31

C. Terrorism is Linked to Drugs .......................................................................................32

1. There are links between terrorism and illegal drug trafficking ............................................32

2. Three African terrorists are accused of being Al Qaeda associates and conspiring to smugglecocaine .........................................................................................................................32

3. Western and African investigators have pointed to concrete signs of the convergence of drugs

and terrorism ................................................................................................................32

4) Covert Production of Marijuana ..................................................................................33A. Link: The Affirmative Team Legalizes the Production of Industrial Hemp ............................33

B. Internal Link: Hemp Legalization Increases the Likelihood of Covert Production of Marijuana

by Making it Harder for the DEA to Enforce Existing Drug Laws .............................................33



4/36


C. Impact: Marijuana is BAD ...........................................................................................33

1. Marijuana in itself is bad for humans .............................................................................33

2. Marijuana is a gateway drug ......................................................................................33

MISCELLANEOUS ...............................................................................................................351. The Evidence for Hemp is Misleading ..........................................................................35

1. Many of the problems with hemp are seldom mentioned ...................................................35

2. The pro-drug lobby has made a wide array of false, misleading, and unsubstantiated claims

about hemp ...................................................................................................................35

2. DEA Concerns about Commercial Hemp Cultivation .....................................................36Commercial cultivation of hemp would increase the likelihood of covert production of high-THC

marijuana, significantly complicate DEAs surveillance and enforcement activities, and send the

wrong message to the American public concerning the governments position on drugs ........... .36

Contributors: Preston Black [PB], Zack Voell [ZV] and Joseph Samelson [JS]



5/36


TOPICALITY

A. Interpretation

1. Resolution

The United States Federal Government should significantly reform its environmental policy

2. Definitions

a. Reform

- Reform is defined by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary as:

To amend or improve by change of form.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 2009, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reform

b. Environmental Policy

- According to Dr. Natalia Mirovitskaya, and Dr. William Ascher, environmental policy is:

A government policy that explicitly intends to promote environmental protection, conservation, and rational use ofnatural resources.

Dr. Natalia Mirovitskaya [Ph.D. in Economics from the Russian Academy of Sciences; visiting Professor of Environmental Policy at Duke

University] & Dr. William L. Ascher [Ph.D. in Political Science from Yale University; Professor of Government and Economics at Claremont

McKenna College], The Guide to Environmental Policy and Sustainable Development, Book Published by the Duke University Press, 2001,

pg. 186 [Google Books]

3. Conclusion

In order for the affirmative teams plan to be Topical, it must be a reform of environmental policy meaning thatthe policy the reform was passed with the intent of helping the environment. If the intent was rather to regulate theproduction or use of drugs, the affirmative team is obviously reforming a drug policy, and their plan is not Topical.

B. Standard

Brightline

Unlike the Affirmative, our interpretation provides a clear bright line that determines without a doubt whether theaffirmative is upholding the resolution. If they reform a policy that was intended to help the environment, theyretopical. If the policy was intended to regulate drugs, theyre not topical. A bright line provides clarity and clash, andavoids confusion over the meaning of the resolution.



6/36


C. Violation

The violation of the affirmative team is clear. Their plan reforms the regulations on hemp. These regulations werenot passed with the intent of helping the environment, but to limit the production of a substance that the governmentdeemed to be a drug. Vote Hemp, a website promoting industrial hemp, cemented this fact when they said in 2009that:

The current government policy [on hemp] comes from the White House Office of National Drug Control PolicysNational Drug Control Strategy Annual Reports from 1999, 2000 and 2001.This policy was set under the Clinton Administrationand continued into the Bush administration, which culminated in the Drug Enforcement Agency trying unsuccessfully tobanhemp foods.

Vote Hemp, How did the current U.S. policy on industrial hemp come to be? 2009, http://www.votehemp.com/faqs.html [PB]

Notice several things. First of all, the current policy on hemp is a result of the Office of National Drug ControlPolicys attempts to control hemp. Also, the Drug Enforcement Agencys regulations on hemp stem from thispolicy, which was passed notwith the intent of helping the environment, but the intent of regulating drugs. Thatbeing said, the affirmative teams plan is not Topical.

D. Impact

Fiat Power

The resolution states that the affirmative team must be resolved to reform as U.S. federal government environmentalpolicy. This means that their fiat power only extends to the realm of USFG environmental policy. Fiat power is thetool that the affirmative team uses to assure you as the judge that if you vote for their plan then it will beimplemented in the imaginary world of debate. However, if the affirmative teams plan is not a reform ofenvironmental policy, then even if you vote affirmative at the end of this round, they do cannot implement their planeven in the imaginary world of debate. Since the regulations on hemp are drug policy, the affirmative team has nofiat over that policy, and they cannot change it. Therefore, there is no reason for you to vote affirmative.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/99ndcs/iv-a.html#9http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/99ndcs/iv-a.html#9http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/ndcs00/chap3.html#15http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/ndcs01/chap3.html#15http://www.votehemp.com/legal_cases_DEA.htmlhttp://www.votehemp.com/legal_cases_DEA.htmlhttp://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/99ndcs/iv-a.html#9http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/ndcs00/chap3.html#15http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/policy/ndcs01/chap3.html#15http://www.votehemp.com/legal_cases_DEA.htmlhttp://www.votehemp.com/legal_cases_DEA.html


7/36


INHERENCY

1. States Already have Authority over the Legality of Hemp1. States have passed legislation to allow limited research or cultivation of industrial hemp; growing hemp is

legal

Skaidra Smith-Heisters [an economic policy analyst for the Reason Foundation; herresearch is part of the Reason Foundations NewEnvironmentalism program, which develops innovative solutions to environmental problems and emphasizes the benefits of local decisions;formerly worked in habitat restoration, endangered species management and natural resources planning with the California State Parks system],

Illegally green: Environmental Costs of Hemp Prohibition,Article Published by the Reason Foundation [a non-profit think tankwhose mission is to advance a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free

markets, and the rule of law],March 2008,http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdf [JS]

A growing number of states have passed legislation to allow limited research or cultivation of industrial hemp.Typically these laws do three things: (1) re-define marijuana as Cannabis sativa containing specified threshold levels of the controlledsubstance THC, (2) define industrial hemp as Cannabis sativa with below-threshold levels of THC, and (3) create alicensing structure for researchers or primary industrial hemp producers. Although growing industrial hemp in theUnited States is technically legal, it requires a permit from the DEA. In 1994, the Hempstead Company grew just over a half acre ofindustrial fiber and seed hemp under a license with the U.S. Department of Agricultures Imperial Valley Research Station in Brawley,California. Before the crop was fully mature, state officials destroyed it under orders from the state Attorney Generals office. The first permitissued by the DEA in recent history was to the Hawaii Industrial Hemp Research Project in 1999. Despite some early success, that project wasterminated four years later due to security and legal complications (the research plot was vandalized and seed imports were lost due toadministrative delays in DEA licensing and inspection). The DEA has also seized and destroyed hemp crops grown on Native American triballands.

2. Nineteen states have introduced hemp legislation, while nine others have allowed the production of hemp

The Economic Research Service [a primary source of economic information and research in the U.S. Department of Agriculture],

Industrial Hemp in the United States: Status and Market Potential,Article Published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,

January 2000,http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf[JS]

Since 1995, a total of 19 States (Arkansas, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri,

Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin) have introduced hemplegislation. In 1999, nine States (Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Virginia)passed legislation concerning the research, study, or production of industrial hemp as a crop (Nelson, 1999). Thelegislation in Minnesota and North Dakota permits the production of industrial hemp, provided farmers obtainlicenses from DEA. Farmers are looking for alternative crops, particularly for tobacco, but also for rotation crops tobreak pest and disease cycles.

3. Hemp is already a state policy

The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007Text of the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007, Published by Govtrack, 2007,http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1009[ZV]

SEC. 3. INDUSTRIAL HEMP DETERMINATION TO BE MADE BY STATES. Section 201 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.

811) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: (i)Industrial Hemp Determination To Be Made by States

In

any criminal action, civil action, or administrative proceeding, a State regulating the growing and processing of industrial hempunder State law shall have exclusive authority to determine whether any such plant meets the concentration limitation set forth insubparagraph (B) of paragraph (16) of section 102 and such determination shall be conclusive and binding.

http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1009http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1009http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1009


8/36


SOLVENCY

1. DEA RegulationsWhile states have made the cultivation of hemp legal, the DEA still regulates it to death

Skaidra Smith-Heisters [an economic policy analyst for the Reason Foundation; herresearch is part of the Reason Foundations NewEnvironmentalism program, which develops innovative solutions to environmental problems and emphasizes the benefits of local decisions;

formerly worked in habitat restoration, endangered species management and natural resources planning with the California State Parks system],



A growing number of states have passed legislation to allow limited research or cultivation of industrial hemp. Typically these laws do threethings: (1) re-define marijuana as Cannabis sativa containing specified threshold levels of the controlled substance THC, (2) define industrialhemp as Cannabis sativa with below-threshold levels of THC, and (3) create a licensing structure for researchers or primary industrial hemp

producers. Although growing industrial hemp in the United States is technically legal, it requires a permit from theDEA. In 1994, the Hempstead Company grew just over a half acre of industrial fiber and seed hemp under a licensewith the U.S. Department of Agricultures Imperial Valley Research Station in Brawley, California. Before the crop

was fully mature, state officials destroyed it under orders from the state Attorney Generals office. The first permitissued by the DEA in recent history was to the Hawaii Industrial Hemp Research Project in 1999. Despite someearly success, that project was terminated four years later due to security and legal complications (the research plotwas vandalized and seed imports were lost due to administrative delays in DEA licensing and inspection). The DEAhas also seized and destroyed hemp crops grown on Native American tribal lands.

http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdf


9/36


2. Processing1. The largest obstacle for profitable industrial hemp production in the United States is technological




Most experts agree that, legal questions aside, the largest obstacle for profitable industrial hemp production in theUnited States is technological. Many of the same properties that make hemp perform so well in industrialapplications for instance, its durability and light weight also make it expensive to process. In some countries, processinghemp for industrial use is accomplished with abundant manual labor and methods that would be environmentallyunacceptable in the United States. Like many other fiber crops, long distances between the field and processinglocations are often uneconomical. The entry of smaller regional processors into the market can be very difficult in the United States,where highly centralized and mechanized processing is the norm. Thats a reason why, for instance, domestic virgin paper pulp is derived almostexclusively from trees. Improved environmental and economic performance is a double dividend for the large wood mills that enjoy this economyof scale.

2. Hemp processing is still more expensive than processing for alternatives

Wendy R. Holm [Consulting Agrologist; named the Rosemary Davis Award for BC and Alberta (April 2009); was named one of thenine UBC Agricultural Sciences Alumni to receive the Centenary Award for Outstanding Service to the Faculty, to UBC and to the Community],

Blowin smoke - the hype on hemp, Country Life in B.C. [the agriculture news source in British Columbia since 1915],referring to hempproduction in Canada, 1998, http://www.theholmteam.ca/col55.blowin'_smoke.pdf [PB]

While hemp possesses some superior qualities for fiber and oil uses,processing remains relatively expensive as compared toother alternatives. Outside of grain/oil seed applications, there exists little infrastructure to process industrial hemp in Canada.Undeniably a crop with many valuable properties, the technology necessary to process hemp is expensive; without markets,capital investment in infrastructure is unlikely.

3. It is unclear if hemp can be economically processed in the U.S.

Dr. Mark J. Cochran et. al. [Professor of Agricultural Economics at the University of Arkansas; Ph.D. from Michigan StateUniversity; head of the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness at the University of Arkansas], Dr. Tony E. Windham [Ph.D. in

Agricultural Economic from Mississippi State University (1988); Associate Vice President for Agriculture-Extension and Director of the

Cooperative Extension Service at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture; Assistant Director of Agriculture and Natural Resourcesand Community and Economic Development at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture] & Billy Moore [Area Extension Agent of

Alternative Agriculture both with Cooperative Extension Service and the University of Arkansas], Feasibility of Industrial Hemp Production in

Arkansas, University of Arkansas,May 2000, http://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdf[brackets added for clarity] [PB]

In addition to the uncertainties about the farm level profitability and overall size of the hemp market, [the USDAs]Economic Research Service concludes that it is unclear if hemp can be economically processed in the U.S. Thetechnology of hemp processing has not advanced much in recent years and remains capital and labor intensive. Whileresearch is underway to streamline the processing, few technological advances have yet to occur. Labor costs in the U.S. might impedethe ability to compete with established producers in countries such as China, Hungary, Poland and Romania. However, oilseedcrushing facilities could accommodate hemp seed (ERS) and some lumber and paper mills could be remodeled to handle hemp materials (The

Boulder Hemp Initiative Project).

http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdf


10/36


4. There is some question as to whether hemp fibers can be profitably processed in the United States




In addition to the uncertainty about yields, there is some question as to whether hemp fibers can be profitablyprocessed in the United States. As was outlined earlier, the technologies used to process hemp fiber have not changedmuch and they require capital investment and knowledgeable workers. Research is under way to streamlineharvesting, retting, and fiber separation, but those technological breakthroughs have yet to occur. Traditional rettingand fiber-separation processes both labor and resource intensive could limit the ability of U.S. hemp producersto compete against major suppliers such as China, Hungary, Poland, and Romania.

5. Processing for hemp remains more expensive than alternatives, and processing technology is antiquated

Valerie Vantreese [an Agricultural Economistwith the Department of Agricultural Economics at the College of Agriculture at the

University of Kentucky], Industrial Hemp: Global Markets and Prices,June 1997, http://www.votehemp.com/PDF/hemp97.pdf [PB]

Many have argued the merits of hemp fiber and oil superior fiber length and strength, excellent oil quality for both industrial andfeed uses, and a myriad of other applications. Importantly, processing remains relatively expensive as compared to otheralternatives and processing technology remains antiquated. However, new innovative fiber separation techniques are being tested,

particularly in western Europe.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf


11/36


3. No Market1. The world hemp market is contracting

Wendy R. Holm [Consulting Agrologist; named the Rosemary Davis Award for BC and Alberta (April 2009); was named one of thenine UBC Agricultural Sciences Alumni to receive the Centenary Award for Outstanding Service to the Faculty, to UBC and to the Community],Blowin smoke - the hype on hemp, Country Life in B.C. [the agriculture news source in British Columbia since 1915],referring to hemp

production in Canada, 1998, http://www.theholmteam.ca/col55.blowin'_smoke.pdf [PB]

Although industrial hemp production has remained legal throughout most of the world and the private sector hasbeen free to invest in production research and processing facilities, the world hemp market continues to contract andis dominated by many low-cost producers. Hemp fiber production is only one-sixth the volume of the early 1960s (China, SouthKorea and the Former Soviet Union produce about 70% of world supply) and hempseed production has fallen by half during thisperiod (China alone produces about three-fourths of world supply). Although the hemp industry is heavily subsidized in theEuropean Union, production there remains negligible.

2. Hemp exports (from other countries) and U.S. imports have fallen (i.e. demand has fallen)

Wendy R. Holm [Consulting Agrologist; named the Rosemary Davis Award for BC and Alberta (April 2009); was named one of thenine UBC Agricultural Sciences Alumni to receive the Centenary Award for Outstanding Service to the Faculty, to UBC and to the Community],

Blowin smoke - the hype on hemp, Country Life in B.C. [the agriculture news source in British Columbia since 1915],referring to hempproduction in Canada, 1998, http://www.theholmteam.ca/col55.blowin'_smoke.pdf [PB]

Similarly, world hemp fiber exports have fallen from more than $12 million ($US) in the early 1960s to currently lessthan $5 million ($US). In 1996, the US imported $1.4 mil of hemp and hemp products. Of that amount, nearly all($1.3million)was value-added hemp goods (woven fabrics and yarn).

3. The market for hemp is insufficient and its potential is closer to the lower end



Cooperative Extension Service at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture; Assistant Director of Agriculture and Natural Resources

and Community and Economic Development at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture] & Billy Moore [Area Extension Agent of



The report from the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture assesses the potentialmarket for industrial hemp in the United States and concludes that it will be unlikely that markets will be able tosustain adequate profit margins for a large production sector to develop. While the range of acreage possibly required to meetmarket demand for hemp fiber, yarn and fabric extends from 2,000 to 250,000 acres, this reports suggests that the current potential [forhemp] is closer to the lower end. The demand for hemp seeds and flour will likely remain a niche market similar to those for poppy andsesame seeds. Demand for hemp oil may be constrained by processing and regulatory problems related to color, unsaturated fatty acid levels,shelf life and prices of competing materials (ERS).

http://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdf


12/36


4. Monitoring Costs1. Any lifting of restrictions on cultivation of industrial hemp will be accompanied by regulations governing

licensing and certification, cultivation, testing and monitoring of hemp cultivation

T. Randall Fortenbery [Ph.D. in economics; Masters of Science Degree in economics], & Dr. Michael Bennett, M.D., IsIndustrial Hemp Worth Further Study in the U.S.? A Survey of the Literature, University of Wisconsin-Madison,July 2001, Staff Paper No.443, http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap443.pdf, [ZV]

In the past, DEA has granted no registrations for the cultivation of hemp for industrial purposes, and under the Controlled Substances Act

determination needs to be made that such production is in the public interest (Industrial Hemp Taskforce, 2000). Consequently, any lifting ofrestrictions on cultivation of industrial hemp will most certainly be accompanied by strict regulations governinglicensing and certification, cultivation, testing and monitoring of hemp cultivation (this is currently the case in Canada).Compliance will likely be primarily born by individual producers. Given the potential political and regulatory costs, combinedwith the broader tasks of stimulating the levels of investment in research, market development and domesticprocessing capacity needed to make hemp a viable U.S. crop, an important consideration in determining its long-term feasibility isthe level of collective state government interest in the crop. The broader the degree of interest, the less the burden will be on individual stateefforts. Though an in-depth discussion of this is beyond the scope of this paper, the current situation regarding state efforts to legalize productionis documented in Appendix I for reference.

2. Hemp monitoring, licensing, or regulating costs are massively enormous



January 2000,http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf[brackets added for clarity] [JS]

None of the cost estimates [for hemp production] include costs for monitoring, licensing, or regulating hempproduction. These external expenses would be part of the cost of producing industrial hemp and could be borne bytaxpayers or passed on to growers and/or processors. According to Thompson et al. (1998), Kenex Ltd. Estimates that Canadianfarmers will pay US $50 annually for a background check and to obtain the satellite coordinates for their hemp fields (fields are monitored viasatellite as part of the Canadian program). The studies also present a range of revenue estimates, which is not surprising given the uncertaintyabout demand and expected market prices. Overall, it seems questionable that U.S. producers could remain profitable at the low end of theestimated net returns. In addition, given the thinness of the current U.S. hemp fiber market, any overproduction could lead to lower prices and lost

profitability.

3. Issues of legality increases incumbency



January 2000,http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf[ZV]

Industrial hemp can be grown as a fiber and/or seed crop. Grown for fiber, it is planted in dense stands to maximizestalk production. Grown for seed or for seed and fiber, plants are spaced farther apart to encourage branching andseed production. Marijuana varieties are grown for their leaves and flower buds, and therefore are grown under low-density conditions to maximize branching. Thus, planting density and other production characteristics do not offer areliable way to distinguish varieties for law enforcement purposes.

http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap443.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap443.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf


13/36


5. Treaties Block1. Link: The UN Convention on Narcotic Drugs Bans Hemp Production

Gordon Scheifele [graduated from the University of Guelph and is the president of the Ontario Hemp Alliance], Growing Industrial Hemp

in Ontario,Article Published by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs,August 2009,

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-067.htm[JS]

Industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa) is one of the oldest cultivated plants in the world. For centuries, its fibers have been used to make ropes,sails and clothing. The species was banned in North America in the 1930s because its leaves and flowers contain a hallucinogenic drug known as

delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). It was banned internationally in 1961 under the United Nations Single Convention onNarcotic Drugs. In 1998, Canada created Industrial Hemp Regulations under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. These regulationsallow for the controlled production, sale, movement, processing, exporting and importing of industrial hemp and hemp products that conform toconditions imposed by the Regulations.

2. Impact: The Affirmative teams plan would not pass treaties are the supreme law in the United States;

even if the Affirmative plan was passed, it would not go into effect because of the treaty violation

The U.S. Constitution,Article VI[JS]

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treatiesmade, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; andthe Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrarynotwithstanding.

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-067.htmhttp://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-067.htmhttp://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-067.htm


14/36


ADVANTAGE RESPONSES

1. A2: Hemp helps the Environment1. It is a faulty assumption that hemp and the hemp industry will be less harmful to the environment than the

status quo



Cooperative Extension Service at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture; Assistant Director of Agriculture and Natural Resources




Many people have thought that industrial hemp would be the miracle crop that would protect the environment and produce a visible, economic

crop for farmers. It is a faulty assumption that hemp is different from other crops in that it will require no pesticides andfertilizers and that the industry developed from its production will be less harmful to the environment than thosenow being grown.

2. Cannabis hemp is not a unique, environmentally friendly crop

Drug Watch International[a volunteer non-profit drug information network and advocacy organization that promotes the creation ofhealthy drug-free cultures in the world; the organization upholds a comprehensive approach to drug issues involving prevention, education,

intervention/treatment, and law enforcement/interdiction], Position Statement on Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.),November 2002, accessedDecember 23, 2009, http://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htm[ZV]

Cannabis hemp is not a unique, environmentally friendly crop. Like any other agricultural commodity there arefertilization requirements, the need to deal chemically with insect pests, and the use of fungicide treatment of hempseeds. Cannabis hemp causes more soil nutrient depletion than cotton, flax, and grain crops, and far greater soilerosion than occurs with well managed and minimally disturbed forestlands. Additionally, a hemp fieldspossibilities for biodiversity and wildlife habitat are very limited in comparison to those of a forest.

3. Hemp requires abundant moisture






Hemp requires abundant moisture throughout the growing season, particularly while young plants are becomingestablished especially during the first six weeks of growth (Dewey, 1913). After plants are well rooted, they can endure drierconditions, however, severe drought hastens maturity and produces dwarfed plants. Studies in Europe indicate that hemprequires 20-28 inches of available moisture for optimum yield, and that 10-14 inches of moisture should be availableduring the vegetative growth state. These amounts include both precipitation and available soil moisture. In Europe,

hemp yield is strongly dependent on the amount of rainfall during June and July (Bocsa and Karus, 1998). Crop water usewill, of course, vary depending on local soil, climatic, and cultural conditions.

http://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdf


15/36


4. Hemp requires soils with high fertility






Although hemp can be grown on a variety of soil types, it does best on loose, well-drained loam soils with high fertility andabundant organic matter(Dempsey, 1975, Van der Werf, 1991). Hemp should not be grown on poor soils (Robinson, 1952).Repeated attempts to cultivate hemp on heavy, low-lying soils have demonstrated that, while these soils may produce somelarge hemp plants, it is practically impossible to raise a good, even stand of hemp stalks that produce high quality fiber.In Texas good crops of hemp have been produced on rich dark prairie soil, but on upland soils, subject to drought, the crop has proved a failure(Dewey, 1901). Fertile clay loam or silt loam soils, neutral or slightly alkaline, are best for hemp. It will not grow well in acid sandy soils, heavyclay, gumbo soils, or gravelly soils that dry out quickly. All of these soil types exist in Arkansas.

5. Hemp is not environmentally beneficial hemp yields prove



Yield: Claims that hemp has four times the pulp yield of forests are false. Joseph E. Atchison, a non-wood plantfiber scientist, consultant, and winner of many industry awards, has stated that the yield of acceptable hemp pulp(0.5-0.6 tons per acre) is only about half that of well managed pine plantations (.9 -1.2 tons) and only a small fraction ofsome intensively managed, fast-growing hardwoods (4 - 6 tons).

6. Over a wide range of soil and environmental conditions, hemp has been shown to require liberal

fertilization for maximum production


Agricultural Economic from Mississippi State University (1988); Associate Vice President for Agriculture-Extension and Director of theCooperative Extension Service at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture; Assistant Director of Agriculture and Natural Resources




In addition to deep soils and adequate moisture, hemp requires high levels of nutrients to produce high biomass yields. Eventhe earliest investigators in the United States and Europe noted that only soils maintained in a high state of fertilityproduced good crops of hemp (Anonl., 1890; Dewey, 1901 and 1913; Dempsey, 1975; Van der Werf, 1991). Hemp responds well tonitrogen fertilization, has some response to phosphorus and little response to potash. It is popularly believed that hemp does requirelittle or no fertilization for productive yields. This assumption is false. Over a wide range of soil and environmentalconditions, hemp has been shown to require liberal fertilization for maximum production. Although nutrient uptake by

hemp is high, a substantial portion of withdrawn nutrients are returned to the soil as leaves and roots, since only thestems are removed from the field. If the crop is retted in the field, nearly all soluble nutrients are washed into the soilduring retting (Dewey, 1913). This process in all likelihood would not be practiced today. Uniform stem size is desirable for industrial

processing of hemp as well as for mechanical harvesting, and stem uniformity is affected by nitrogen fertilization.

http://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://norml.uark.edu/Hemp-Feasability-UofA.pdf


16/36


2. A2: Hemp helps the Economy1. The claimed advantages of cannabis hemp over other raw materials are false



The claimed advantages of cannabis hemp over other raw materials are false. Better alternative products exist inevery case. Reflecting these economics, world production of hemp is now only slightly more than one-fifth what itwas in the 1960s. Additionally, recent world market prices for hemp are below most estimated U.S. and Canadianproduction costs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has researched the economic potential for hemp grown byAmerican farmers and found that the U.S. market for hemp fibers is, and will likely remain, only a small, thinmarket. The long-term demand for hemp products is uncertain, and there is a high potential to quickly reachoversupply. The market potential for hemp seed as a food ingredient will probably remain small. These outlooksdiscount the prospects for hemp as an economically viable alternative crop.

2. Hemp is a financially irresponsible plant predicted to return net losses in the US

The Economic Research Service [a primary source of economic information and research in the U.S. Department of Agriculture],Industrial Hemp in the United States: Status and Market Potential,Article Published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,


ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS Both the 1995 Kentucky Task Force report (McNulty) and the 1998 Kentuckyimpact analysis (Thompson et al.), as well as the Oregon and North Dakota studies (Ehrensing, Kraenzel et al.),presentestimated costs and returns for hemp production. All include estimates for fiber (stalk) production. The 1995 Kentucky, 1998Kentucky, and North Dakota reports also present estimates on seed production. In addition, most of the studies compare the estimatedhemp costs and returns to those for other crops. The Kentucky Task Force estimated total costs which includevariable costs, fixed costs, and operator labor to be $286 per acre for hemp fiber, $196 for seed, and $233 for certified seed (table 7).These costs were comparable to 1993 estimated expenses for producing corn and double-crop wheat/soybeans in Kentucky (table 8). The analysisassumed that hemp grown for fiber would be harvested and sold as raw stalks on a dry-weight basis. Various sources priced raw, dry defoliated

stalks at $60 to $125 per metric ton. Yields were assumed to range from 7 to 15 metric tons per hectare (2.8-6.1 metric tons per acre), basedlargely on European studies. Thus, potential returns for hemp fiber ranged from a low price/low yield estimate of$170 per acre to a high price/high yield return of $759 per acre (table 8). With estimated production expenses of $286,net returns for hemp for fiber ranged from -$116 to $473 per acre. Returns for hemp seed were estimated to range from $60 to$800 per acre. Given costs of production at $196 per acre, net returns ranged from -$136 to $604 per acre (McNulty).

3. It seems questionable that U.S. producers could remain profitable at the low end of the estimated net

returns




Several States have published reports or authorized agronomic and economic feasibility studies of hempproduction. The four reports summarized here have focused on different aspects of supply and/or demand. Their estimates of hemp costs andreturns reflect these various focuses, as well as different assumed production practices and costs. However, the widest range of estimatesexhibited among the reports is for stalk and seed yields and prices not surprising given the uncertainty about hemp production and current and

potential hemp markets. Overall, hemp production was profitable only at the higher end of estimated yields and prices. Itseems questionable that U.S. producers could remain profitable at the low end of the estimated net returns,particularly given the thinness of current U.S. hemp markets. The market for hemp products might easily be oversupplied, as inCanada where the 35,000 acres of hemp produced in 1999 was seemingly more than the market could handle. The Minneapolis Star Tribunequotes the general manager of Kenex Ltd., Canadas biggest hemp processor, as saying Its given us one hell of a glut of grain and fiber. Theres

been a major overestimation of the market thats out there (von Sternberg, 1999).

http://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf


17/36


4. The market for hemp products might easily be oversupplied




Several States have published reports or authorized agronomic and economic feasibility studies of hemp production. The four reportssummarized here have focused on different aspects of supply and/or demand. Their estimates of hemp costs and returns reflect these variousfocuses, as well as different assumed production practices and costs. However, the widest range of estimates exhibited among the reports is forstalk and seed yields and prices not surprising given the uncertainty about hemp production and current and potential hemp markets. Overall,hemp production was profitable only at the higher end of estimated yields and prices. It seems questionable that U.S. producers could remain

profitable at the low end of the estimated net returns, particularly given the thinness of current U.S. hemp markets. The market for hempproducts might easily be oversupplied, as in Canada where the 35,000 acres of hemp produced in 1999 wasseemingly more than the market could handle. The Minneapolis Star Tribune quotes the general manager of Kenex Ltd., Canadas

biggest hemp processor, as saying Its given us one hell of a glut of grain and fiber. Theres been a major overestimation of the market thats outthere (von Sternberg, 1999).

5. Uncertainty about demand for hemp and the potential for oversupply discounts the prospects for hemp as

an economically viable




Industrial hemp has been the focus of official interest in several States. However, hemp and marijuana are different varieties of Cannabis sativa,which is classified as a controlled substance in the United States. With Canada now allowing hemp production, questions have been raised about

the demand for hemp products. U.S. markets for hemp fiber(specialty textiles, paper, and composites) and seed (in food or crushed foroil) are, and will likely remain, small, thin markets. Uncertainty about long run demand for hemp products and thepotential for oversupply discounts the prospects for hemp as an economically viable alternative crop for Americanfarmers.

6. The U.S. market for hemp fibers is, and will likely remain, a small, thin market




Current markets for bast fibers like industrial hemp include specialty textiles, paper, and composites. Hemp hurds are used in variousapplications such as animal bedding, composites, and low-quality papers. As joint products, finding viable markets for both hemp bast fiber andhurds may increase the chances of a successful business venture. Hemp industry sources and some academic studies cite many potential uses for

hemp fiber and hurds. However, for these applications to develop or expand, hemp will have to compete with current raw materialsand manufacturing practices. The U.S. market for hemp fibers is, and will likely remain, a small, thin market.Changes in price or quantity could be more disruptive and have a greater adverse impact on market participants thanwould be the case in a larger market.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdfhttp://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ages001E/ages001E.pdf


18/36


7. A domestic hemp industry will face tough competition from better-established U.S. industries

Skaidra Smith-Heisters [an economic policy analyst for the Reason Foundation; herresearch is part of the Reason Foundations NewEnvironmentalism program, which develops innovative solutions to environmental problems and emphasizes the benefits of local decisions;

formerly worked in habitat restoration, endangered species management and natural resources planning with the California State Parks system],



Similarities between hemp and flax in the textile industry, or between hemp and other cellulosic biofuel feedstocks, might allow technological

advances for the processing of one to be adapted to the other. The status of hemp in the United States is a disadvantage in highlyspecialized and time-sensitive research, however. If permitted again, a domestic hemp industry will face toughcompetition from both better-established U.S. industries (e.g. corn ethanol) and more experienced foreign producers ofhemp. Greater use of the hemp plant, including bast fiber, hurds, and seed, with development of more markets for co- and byproducts, willimprove the viability of hemp industries. At the same time, more economical use of agricultural residues such as corn stalks, cereal straw, flaxshives, and sugarcane bagasse might fill many of the same needs as dedicated fiber crops like hemp with greater resource efficiency.

8. Hemp is not economically beneficial paper proves



Most of the fibers from the hemp plant are not suitable for production of writing and printing paper. The usable partof the plant has such a high processing cost that its use is restricted to extremely limited-demand, high-pricedspecialty papers and is not economical for mass-production paper grades. Many fiber alternatives for paper-makingare available and more competitive.

9. Hemp is not economically beneficial plastic and synthetic fibers proves



Hemp fibers are inferior for making rope, twine, and other products where durability and strength are important.Unlike plastic and synthetics, hemp absorbs water, becomes heavy, and rots easily. For every proposed use ofindustrial (cannabis) hemp, there already exists an available product, or raw material, which is cheaper tomanufacture and provides better market results.

10. Hemp is not economically beneficial vegetable oil/fuel proves



Many plants such as corn, sorghum, and alfalfa produce more biomass per acre, are more soil building than hemp,and are already meeting market demands for alternative fuels such as ethanol.

http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htm


19/36


11. Hemp is not economically beneficial food and cosmetic products proves



Hemp seed containing THC is now being aggressively promoted and marketed for use in food, cosmetics, andnutraceutical (so-called health supplements) products. However, THC is fat-soluble and accumulates in the humanbody. The United Nations reports that the health effects of cannabis food products have not been adequatelyresearched. The European Union has reduced the allowable THC content of hemp and reports that there is nonutritional justification for hemp food products.

http://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htmhttp://www.drugwatch.org/Hemp.htm


20/36


3. A2: Hemp Legalization is Key to Solving the Energy Crisis1. Hemp faces many innovated developments before becoming a viable biofuel




Plant breeding and genetic engineering; streamlined harvesting, retting, and fiber separation; development ofspecialized processing facilities and retooling of existing facilities, including cotton mills; commercializedmicrobial/enzymatic processes for ethanol production; improved non-toxic pulping processes and/or improvedchemical recovery in milling; further development of industrial-grade cellulosic and other bio-based plastics; andstandardization at every level (to compete with highly standardized synthetic feedstocks) are all key advances thatwould be important to the success of the industrial hemp industry in the future.

2. No single alternative energy can hope to solve the countrys energy needs

Dr. Will Friedman et al. [Ph.D. in political science with specialties in political psychology and American politics; former senior vicepresident for policy studies at the Work in America Institute, where he directed research and special projects on workplace issues; former

adjunct lecturer in political science at Lehman College; former research fellow at the Samuels Center for State and Local Politics; formerpractitioner in the field of counseling psychology], McKenna Morrigan [Master of Public Administration Degree in Environmental Policy from

the University of Washington; Bachelor of Arts Degree in Cultural Anthropology from Brown University; Public Engagement Program Manager

at Public Agenda], Alison Kadlec [Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota; former visiting professor and lecturer in the

political science departments at the University of Minnesota, Macalester College, Baruch College and Hunter College], Putting the Pieces

Together: How Do Citizens and Experts See the Energy Issue? A Report for the Kettering Foundation from Public Agenda, Article Published

by the Kettering Foundation [A foundation set up by Public Agenda],February 2008,http://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdf[JS]

Most experts with whom we spoke called for a diverse assortment of alternative energy sources, not just one ortwo. They talked about a range of technologies that capture renewable energy sources like wind, solar, water,biomass and geothermal heat and also, in some cases, carbon-neutral nuclear power. Its true that differentexperts had their own preferred technologies, but virtually all agreed that no single alternative will be enough.

3. There is no silver bullet for solving our nations energy problems

Dr. Will Friedman et al. [Ph.D. in political science with specialties in political psychology and American politics; former senior vicepresident for policy studies at the Work in America Institute, where he directed research and special projects on workplace issues; former

adjunct lecturer in political science at Lehman College; former research fellow at the Samuels Center for State and Local Politics; formerpractitioner in the field of counseling psychology], McKenna Morrigan [Master of Public Administration Degree in Environmental Policy from

the University of Washington; Bachelor of Arts Degree in Cultural Anthropology from Brown University; Public Engagement Program Manager

at Public Agenda], Alison Kadlec [Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota; former visiting professor and lecturer in the

political science departments at the University of Minnesota, Macalester College, Baruch College and Hunter College], Putting the Pieces

Together: How Do Citizens and Experts See the Energy Issue? A Report for the Kettering Foundation from Public Agenda, Article Published

by the Kettering Foundation [A foundation set up by Public Agenda],February 2008,http://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdf[ellipses in original] [JS]

There is No Silver Bullet: Just as experts articulated a comprehensive and integrated perspective on the nations energyproblems, they tended to take an integrated, multi-faceted approach to solutions. There is no single answer to thecomplex of issues underlying energy, they argued. Instead, whats needed is an integrated suite of solutions. Or, asone expert respondent put it (in what appears to be a new catch phrase) whats needed is a silver buckshot (not a silver bullet)approach. Theres no silver bullet. You cant take one policy or another and run with it, youve got to do everythingyou can. Industry Expert, Energy Economics This is an area where you dont have single, all-purpose solutions. You need portfolios ofsolutions. Policy Expert, Energy and Efficiency Its going to require a diverse portfolio, its not going to be just efficiency, or just wind or justnuclear. Policy Expert, Energy Efficiency.

http://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdfhttp://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdfhttp://reason.org/files/1030ae0323a3140ecf531bd473632b57.pdfhttp://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdfhttp://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/energygap.pdf


21/36


4. Study: Turning plants into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting biodiesel generates

Susan S. Lang[Senior Science writer for the Cornell University News Service], Cornell ecologists study finds that producing ethanol and

biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy,Article Published by the Cornell University News service,

July 5, 2005,http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html[JS]

ITHACA, N.Y. Turning plants into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol orbiodiesel generates,according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study. There is just no energy benefitto using plant biomass for liquid fuel, says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. Thesestrategies are not sustainable.

5. The US needs a liquid fuel replacement for oil in the near future, but not from plant biomass

Susan S. Lang[Senior Science writer for the Cornell University News Service], Cornell ecologists study finds that producing ethanol and

biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy,Article Published by the Cornell University News service,

July 5, 2005,http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html[brackets added for clarity][JS]

The United States desperately needs a liquid fuel replacement for oil in the near future, says [David] Pimentel[professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell], but producing ethanol orbiodiesel from plant biomass is goingdown the wrong road, because you use more energy to produce these fuels than you get out from the combustion ofthese products. Although Pimentel advocates the use of burning biomass to produce thermal energy (to heat homes, for example), hedeplores the use of biomass for liquid fuel. The government spends more than $3 billion a year to subsidize ethanol production when it does not

provide a net energy balance or gain, is not a renewable energy source or an economical fuel. Further, its production and use contribute to air,water and soil pollution and global warming, Pimentel says. He points out that the vast majority of the subsidies do not go to farmers but to largeethanol-producing corporations.

6. Hemp is unimportant as a fuel source in the EU, despite being legal there

Professor Semida Silveira [Ph.D. in Regional Planning from the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, with focus on development andsustainability; Professor of Energy and Climate Studies at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology; her program focuses on systems studieslinking energy and climate knowledge with sustainable development, planning and policy work; her work is characterized by a systems approach

to problem analysis and resolution, and profound understanding of the role of infrastructure systems, policies and entrepreneurship for

sustainable development; formerly worked as a sustainability expert at the Swedish Energy Agency, and as energy and climate program manager

at the Stockholm Environment Institute; her most recent activities include bioenergy and climate change policy work, promotion of Swedish

knowledge and technologies in development assistance, and international business cooperation with corporate responsibility; won the JabotiLiterature Prize 2001 in Brazil in the category physical sciences, technology and informatics for her book Electricity for Sustainable

Development, published in Portuguese; she is also the author of various articles and books including an anthology of the Swedish energy

development, Building sustainable energy systems Swedish experiences, and her last book Bioenergy realizing the potential; she has done

research at MIT, IIASA and University of Tbingen, and advises in various committees and companies; she has developed and managed projects

in collaboration with academics, development banks, policy makers and the private sector in both industrialized and developing countries],

Bioenergy: Realizing the Potential, Book Published by Elsevier, 2005, [ISBN-0080446612, 9780080446615] [ZV]

Energy, environment, agricultural and forestry-based drivers are contributing to a rediscovery of bioenergy in industrialized nations with accessto biomass resources. In fact, bioenergy offers the possibility to harness a domestic, rural-based, low-carbon and sustainable energy source in

both industrialized and developing countries. Currently, commercial and noncommercial uses of biomass represent about13.5% of the worlds primary energy consumption (see also Figure 1.1). In the European Union (EU), bioenergycomprises some 3.5% of the total primary energy mix. Figure 2.1 shows the primary energy consumption in the European Union,

including details of renewable energy sources. Notably, biomass is the largest renewable energy source in the European Union.The biomass resources commonly used in the EU are fuelwood, wood residues from the wood-processing industry,used wood products (e.g. demolition wood), and also straw in some countries. Various modern technologies are being applied.

[Authors Commentary: Notice, that while industrial hemp production is totally legal in the EU, it has not been used

as a source of biofuel]

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.htmlhttp://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html


22/36


4. A2: Hemp Saves Trees1. Paper usage creates trees that wouldnt otherwise be there

The United States Forestry Service [established in 1905, the Forest Service is an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture; the

Forest Service manages public lands in national forests and grasslands], Green Facts, 2009,

http://www.affordableimage.com/greenfacts.pdf[JS]

Most trees used for paper come from forests called managed timberlands. Even though the trees in thesetimberlands may look like woods, they are an agricultural crop like vegetables on a farm. The trees are grown tobe made into products for human use. Not using paper in order to save trees is like not eating salad in order to save vegetables. Infact, many forests might not exist in the first place if trees werent planted and harvested by industry.

2. Nothing can compete with forests for pulp as far as saving energy and using the carbon dioxide in the

atmosphere



Nothing can compete with forests for pulp as far as saving energy and using the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,and forests are healthier if mature trees are harvested. Sustainable forestry practices, high efficiency, and increasingrecycling are in place in the wood products industry in most industrial countries. For instance, there is no impendingwood reserve/fiber crisis in the United States. Timber growth

neg - industrial hemp legalization con

Documents