Cannabis:
an environmentally and economically
viable method for climate change
mitigation.
Return Back To OnlinePot's Grow Guides
Main Grow Page#1
Or Main Grow
Page#2
Author
Marc
R Deeley
Degree
MEnvS
Year
2000
University of Strathclyde
Graduate School of Environmental Studies
Thesis
Dedicated to
Maree, Ryan,
Doug and every generation - present and future.
Abstract
This
thesis examines the problem of global climate change, taking as its starting
point the recommendations of both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992). It is
argued that an approach which directly addresses the (scientific)
causes of climate change via the application of biology and chemistry
– termed an ‘environmental approach’ in this thesis
– is better placed than conventional regulatory instruments (i.e. a carbon
tax) to fulfil the objectives of the (1992) Convention. Moreover, it is argued
that an environmental approach/method has the potential to address other
(related) areas of environmental concern, such as the use of chemicals in
agriculture. In addition, because such an approach would not entail the
predominately negative economic effects of conventional regulatory instruments
such as ‘carbon taxation’ it has the potential to be universally inclusive
(through choice), extending global participation in the UNFCCC. An
environmental approach is therefore elaborated upon which centres on the
specific use of Cannabis (in particular, the Sativa L.
sub-species) as a multipurpose source of biomass and industrial feedstock for
energy, agricultural and commodity applications. It is argued that the unique
physiological and chemical characteristics of Cannabis make it ideally suited
for such applications within the overall objective of climate change
mitigation by addressing directly our industrial reliance on fossil fuels and
several of the key land-use/management and consumption related causes of
climate change. It is concluded that Cannabis cultivation and the industrial
utilisation of this crop would be environmentally and economically beneficial
as a method for addressing the problem of global climate change.
Contents
1.3 Environmental approach
p16
Chapter
two: Cannabis
2.0 Cannabis: an introduction
p21
2.1 Physiology
p22
2.2 Cannabis and Climate change
p28
2.3 Economic productivity of Cannabis
p30
2.3.0 Seed
2.3.1 Stem
2.3.2 Bast fibre (primary and secondary)
2.3.3 Woody core
2.4 Modern Uses for Cannabis
p34
2.5 Summary
p35
Chapter
three: Climate
change mitigation potential
3.0 Introduction
p36
3.1 Land-use
p36
3.2 Land availability
p38
3.3 Integration of Cannabis and sustainable agriculture
p40
3.4 Cannabis: energy crop for climate change mitigation
p42
3.4.0 Global implications
3.4.1 Global scenario: 2025 and beyond
3.5 Commercial applications
p48
3.5.0 Energy and transport
3.5.1 Organic farming
Chapter
four: Conclusion
4.0 An environmentally viable method for climate change mitigation?
P51
4.1
An economically viable method for
climate change mitigation? P56
4.2
Logistics
p60
4.3
Cannabis: industrial raw material
for the 21st Century?
p62
5.0 References
p65
Introduction
Global
climate change is arguably the most severe problem that the World faces today.
Our climate influences every aspect of life on this planet from our ability to
produce food and therefore our future development, to the distribution of
biomes and the level of biodiversity that exists in the world – much of
which remains scientifically unclassified or unknown. The degree to which
climate change effects our lives must not be taken lightly. Take for example
the increase in extreme weather conditions around the World producing
devastating droughts in some regions, flooding in others and a generally
greater propensity for cyclones, tornadoes and hurricanes due to increased
oceanic temperatures. Many of us will be fortunate enough to never experience
the destructive forces of nature but if we continue to upset natures various
equilibrium these events could become the norm for majority of the world’s
population. Creating in addition to severe ecological problems many –
equally dangerous – socio-political situations such as disputes over water
resources and in the creation of ‘environmental refugees’.
However,
as this thesis will explore, the present situation is not completely negative
in so far as we have both the time and resources to avoid the worst
apocalyptic scenarios. In addition, positive intervention in one area (i.e.
climate change mitigation) may have positive ecological implications for
others – depending on the adopted course of action. For instance, given that
human development depends to a great extent on our general (environmental)
well being it is in our best interest to make our development
(environmentally) sustainable. This philosophy does not hold that human beings
should make ‘irrational’ sacrifices in order to preserve the environment.
It does say, however, that we should take into consideration the long-term
environmental impact of our actions. In doing so we could ensure equilibrium
between human activities and our planet that allows and indeed enhances
future human development.
This
forms the fundamental basis for environmental or ‘green’ philosophy since
its inception in the 1960’s with Rachel Carson’s emotive – yet
scientific – observation that the use of chemical pesticides/herbicides –
then heralded as a technological cornerstone of the ‘green revolution’ –
such as DDT, would eventually result in a ‘Silent Spring’ (1962). The
philosophy, however, is best associated with J.E Lovelock’s (1979) ‘Gaia
Hypothesis’ which is particularly relevant for the current thesis. In brief,
Lovelock’s work acknowledges an intimate human/nature relationship within
the overall context of an interconnected and dynamic natural world where all
events – phenomenon or otherwise – constitute part of a self-regulating
living organism (‘Gaia’) or World. Regulation is perhaps the ‘wrong’
word – ‘Gaia’ as I read it, especially in his later works resembles more of a chaos of causation between
events where the world would adapt to maintain life – any life.
Take
for example the problem of rising sea levels attributed to global climate
change. Presuming climate change is enhanced further this ‘problem’ will,
in the very long term, theoretically reduce the amount of atmospheric
carbon and other greenhouse gases responsible for the ‘enhanced greenhouse
effect’ by increasing the oceanic biota and therefore a key carbon
‘sink’ – with the possibility of reducing or stabilising global climate
change. Human beings are therefore in a unique position as our activities can
have positive and (definitely do have) negative consequences not only for
ourselves but all life on the planet. At this level there has been some
philosophical progress borne out of a compromise between the economic
imperatives of industrial (or Modern) societies use of natural resources
(development) and the realisation that we do in fact have an intimate,
moreover, reciprocal relationship with Gaia. In short, rising sea levels and
an altered global climate may not be a problem for Gaia but it is most
certainly a problem for humans and an arguably unquantifiable number of other
life forms – we are responsible creatures! Thus we have the term
‘sustainable development’ made practical by environmental policy and
economics geared towards addressing the interaction between humans and our
environment with an explicit need to secure an adequate environment for future
development. In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)
or Brundtland Commission made these connections (i.e. environment, development
and future well being) explicit in a report titled ‘Our Common future’
stating that:
‘Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable – to
ensure that it [development] meets the needs of the present without
compromising the [environmental] ability of future generations to meet their
own needs’ (WCED, 1987, p8).
We are
in a position to make this statement a reality by addressing the problem of
global climate change as all life – present and future – would benefit. At
a fundamental level of analysis, climate change can be prevented by altering
or changing human activities that at present contribute to what is referred to
as the ‘enhanced greenhouse effect’. While there are several overtly
technological options available to reduce, for instance, our reliance on
fossil fuels such as wind, hydro, solar power and nuclear power; it will be
argued that the cultivation of Cannabis would also help to restore a balanced
(human) relationship with nature by addressing several additional ecological
concerns arising out of modern agricultural practices and development more
generally. The reasons for doing so are fundamentally practical. It will be
argued that a pragmatic approach to climate change mitigation – which can
address some of the associated ecological problems that enhance climatic
change – will be of over-all environmental and economic benefit given the
comparative ease at which such measures could be discerned and accordingly
legislated for or implemented.
Science
has essentially proven the philosophical position of much environmentally
conscious discourse. We are now aware of the extent to which our World –
although dynamic in Lovelock’s sense – is a closed circuit in which we are
an integral (influencing) part and that even our culturally limited (Western)
concept or pretension of intelligence necessarily means we have a moral
responsibility to at least try and preserve it; even if this turns out to be a
solely anthropocentric goal.
Chapter One: Climate
change and options for mitigation
1.0 Climate Change
The
scientific observation of global climate change is in no way a new activity
(Houghton, 1997). Neither is the phenomenon itself, which for millions of
years has seen the World shift in and out of ice ages (around 20,000 years
since the last ice age), with dramatic fluctuations in the mean surface
temperature of the Earth. However, there have been unusually large changes
over much shorter periods in the very recent past. Human activities such as
burning fossil fuels and land use conversions have artificially enhanced the
‘greenhouse’ effect leading to a greater proportion of radiation being
kept in the atmosphere and in turn reflected back to the Earth’s surface
resulting in a rise in surface temperature (Houghton; 1997).
Much of
the evidence in support of human induced climate change is derived from
ice-core data and the fact that since the industrial revolution (the actual
date for which data seem available is 1750) concentrations of those greenhouse
gases (GHGs) most responsible for climate change i.e. carbon dioxide (C02),
Methane (CH4) and Nitrous oxide (N20) have
increased by 30, 100 and 15 percent respectively. From ice-core data, these
gases are now at higher concentrations than at any time in the past 160,000
years (IPCC, 1996b). Agriculture is broadly responsible for 50 percent of
human generated CH4 and 70 percent of N2O emissions
contributing to 20 and 5 percent of global warming respectively. Fossil fuel
combustion and land use conversions (i.e. forest to agriculture, especially
livestock production) are responsible for the increase in CO2 which
accounts for 65 percent of the radiative effect associated with the enhanced
greenhouse effect (IPCC, 1996b).
Enhanced
(or accelerated) climate change represents a problem of phenomenal proportions
for the maintenance of the natural equilibria on which all living organism’s
survival depends. Houghton (1997) considers that changes brought about by
global warming to the hydrological cycle will have the most impact. We can at
present observe many indicators of this disruption in the increasing incidence
of extreme weather conditions such as storms, droughts and floods and the
devastation that these events cause. Climatic projections
(IS 92a) of the IPCC that consider a business-as-usual scenario (in so far as
no action is taken) predict an additional increase in atmospheric carbon of
1400Gt with a subsequent rise in temperature of between 5 and 10oC
by 2200 and conclude that, ‘[t]he associated changes in climate would be
correspondingly large and could well be irreversible’. (Houghton, 1997,
p102)
It is
estimated that the cost of these changes could be realised as soon as 2050 and
would be in the range of 1-1.5 percent of GDP for developed countries.
According to Houghton (1997) and IPCC (1996b) this figure is substantially
higher (5 percent) for developing countries due to their greater geographical
vulnerability to climatic variations and the fact that more of their
income/expenditure depends on agriculture and water resources. Although
extrapolations are difficult given the overwhelming number of variables the total cost could be around 2 percent of Gross World Product (GWP)
or 400 billion US dollars per annum. This figure is increased, assuming
that damage remains over time, giving a cost per ton of carbon of $50.
On a
global scale, human activities currently add around 3.3 thousand million tons
(Gt) of carbon (annually) into the atmosphere equivalent to a 1.5ppmv annual increase, which represents 45 percent of total emissions
(1.5 Gt from changes in land use and deforestation and 6Gt from fossil fuel
emissions). The other 55 percent is removed by the land and ocean biota
(Houghton, 1997). While this represents a simplified description of the
problem there seems little need to repeat the comprehensive analysis of the
IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change, 1990, 1996a, 1996b) although this
vast body of research will be extensively drawn upon in this thesis. It has
been the weight of scientific knowledge about global warming that provided the
impetus for the largest meeting of government representatives ever to have
taken place. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)
held in Rio de Janeiro, 1992 (or ‘Earth Summit’) led to the signing of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by 160
countries. It should be pointed out that responsibility and focus for action
lies firmly with the developed countries, resting as it does (other than
simply liability) with fiscal ability to implement the objectives of the
convention and the socio-economic structures relevant to this, such as
dominant industrial sectors and energy use/consumption.
1.1
Policy: an introduction
This
thesis aims to provide a response to climate change complementary to the
objectives set out in the UNFCCC (Article 2) and recommendations of the IPCC (1996a, 1996b). However, because
there are several possible responses that could be considered, it is necessary
to examine the viability of these options. For a policy to be successful it
would require the widest possible implementation. This is especially important
in the context of global climate change. The scope of this problem, although
possible to tackle at a local or regional level, necessitates that coherent
policy is formulated at the international level. The UNFCCC, in terms of the
number of signatories, represented the beginning of such an acknowledgement
and could have innumerable ramifications for the future of (especially
environmental) policymaking, increasingly taken at the global level. Of
course, many environmental problems are unique in that the consequences of
environmental degradation resulting from anthropogenic interference are
essentially global. Despite this fact regions can (and do) have different
levels of responsibility although some may suffer the actual environmental
consequences of atmospheric pollution disproportionately in relation to their
emissions. Many low lying and small island States exemplify this situation (IPCC,
1996b, UNFCCC, 1992).
Although
it is of importance that international policy takes account of these
disparities in order to achieve successful implementation and therefore the
objective of reducing emissions there are several key questions. For instance,
given that energy consumption in the so-called developing world is set to
increase by around 70 percent over the next 50 years (IPCC, 1996b). How can
this possibly be reconcilable with developed world abatement legislation?
Could we justify ‘developing’ countries being exempt from international
policy and therefore not developing alternative energy systems? Or further,
does leaving developing countries exempt from policy merely ensure future
markets for predominately Western owned oil conglomerates?
The
implications of these questions are very real and demonstrate that formulating
a legislatively practicable, comprehensive and inclusive international
policy is extremely difficult to achieve. Given that such a policy would
ideally, from the policy making perspective, have universal criteria,
methodology and be in the most part standardised; it becomes clear that
applying this to a heterogeneous socio-economic context is at best problematic
and ignores to a certain extent the fundamental problem of climate change and
its causes. These ideas will be considered in the context of an analysis of
the following type(s) of policy.
·Conventional
regulatory instruments
·Taxes
and subsidies
·Tradable
permits and /or quotas
(Adapted
from IPCC, 1996a)
1.2
Market-based and regulatory mechanisms
1.2.0
Regulatory instruments
These
instruments would essentially involve the setting of carbon limits for
particular industries within a legislative framework that bans, alters or
controls polluting activities. The use of this policy instrument within the
international context of climate change mitigation is, although desirable in
the achievement of the overall objective, highly unlikely. There are several
reasons why this is the case. For instance, as mentioned there exist a diverse
range of circumstances to which such a policy would have to be applicable. A
fundamental area of concern regarding an international regulation would be the
possibility of reaching an agreement to begin with. The UNFCCC (hereafter
referred to as the Convention) has the basis of an international regulation as
targets for CO2 abatement are outlined but at the same time
requires consent of Parties to the Convention to be bound by its conditions.
The extent to which a country is bound to the regulatory aspect of the
Convention (specifically Article 4 part 2) is fundamentally a decision for
that particular country.
Notably
the countries that are bound to this regulatory aspect are those
categorised as ‘developed’ (Listed in Annex 1 and 2 of the Convention). Of
significance here is the commitment to,
‘adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on the
mitigation of climate change, by limiting its anthropogenic emissions of
greenhouse gases and protecting and enhancing its greenhouse gas sinks and
reservoirs.’ (UNFCCC, 1992)
Chapter
two: Cannabis
2.0 Cannabis:
an introduction
The
name, Cannabis refers to a large, and as yet unquantified,
population or family referred to collectively as Cannabinaceae which includes
Cannabis, Humulus and possibly Humulopsis (Clark, 1999). The world’s leading
researcher on this topic, Ivan Bocsa (1998), considers this family to include
only Cannabis and its sub-species. It is, therefore, this former category
(Cannabis) that forms the focus for this piece of work. Within the gene pool
of ‘Cannabis’ there are three main sub-species: sativa, indica
and ruderalis – the latter being a wild or weedy form. All share the
fact that they grow spontaneously or otherwise ‘throughout nearly all
equatorial to subarctic regions of the world’ (Clarke; 1999, p13). In
addition, all Cannabis genera are fully interfertile with one another.
For
the purpose of clarity, it must be pointed out that while the taxonomic group Cannabis
is applied in this chapter, there are many genetic distinctions between
say ‘hemp’ (Sativa L.) and the Indica or ruderalis
sub-species. Among these is the propensity to produce the chemical delta-9-THC,
which is illegal in the vast majority of countries and therefore has
implications of an environmental, biological, economic and political nature
for this thesis. The variety commonly referred to as ‘hemp’ constitutes one,
albeit broad, genera of the Cannabis family that belongs to the sativa L.
grouping. These particular cultivars contain negligible to zero quantities of
the chemical THC. European cultivation of hemp has been limited to three gene
pool sections covering the following ecotypes: Northern and Central European,
Southern European and East Asian. However, when taken together with the
differences that also exist within each individual (ecotype) grouping, this
gene pool (Cannabis) consists of an extraordinary level of genetic diversity
in terms of ecotypes (geographic/climatic location), genotypes and their
subsequent phenotypes (actual characteristics) and end use value.
2.1
Physiology
Cannabis
is an annual herbaceous crop that requires planting in the early spring as
flowering is induced by longer nights (or shorter days). The characteristic
growth pattern of varieties (hemp, Sativa L.) grown in the European
(temperate) climate display 2-3 months of vegetative growth preceding a
flowering cycle. Essentially, Cannabis is dieocius having distinct male (Y) or
female (X) plants (usually of the ratio 1:1), the latter having most economic
value and taking slightly longer to mature given the extended flowering cycle
(Bocsa and Karus, 1998). Because Cannabis is anemophilous (wind-pollinated)
the male plants, which mature faster, can be spotted and if desired by the
cultivator be removed from the crop. Removing male plants is dependent on the
use to which the crop is being put. For instance, if the crop is to be used
for fibre, the female plants can mature for up to five months after flowering
if no fertilisation occurs (Clarke; 1999). On the other hand, crops being
produced for seed or oil will require male/female fertilisation to occur and
so the male plants can be removed after fertilisation occurs to leave more
room for the female plants to grow. The existence of monoecious (male and
female flowers on one plant) varieties has enabled breeders to establish some
cultivars to circumvent these breeding/cultivation restrictions (Clarke,
1999). In the EU,
‘(t)he 32 commercially available registered hemp varieties consist
of twenty-two monoecious, nine dioecious, (and one uni-sex female) sexual
types’. (Clarke; 1999,p16)
End use
remains; however, an important factor in terms of crop management as the usual
4-6 month lifecycle can take anywhere between 2 and 10 months depending also
on the location. For example, fibre crops can be harvested before flowering
occurs thus negating the variables associated with a particular cultivar (van
der Werf et al. 1999). This flexibility of use and/or
management makes it ideal as a rotation crop. In addition, research has
demonstrated improvements in soil quality of the land used for Cannabis
cultivation when in rotation with other crops (Roulac, 1997). It has also been
argued that Cannabis is entirely sustainable as it ‘suppresses weeds and is
virtually free from disease or pests’ (Ranalli; 1999, p64) and therefore requires only modest levels of
(organic) fertilisation. Because of these characteristics there are improved
yields (up to 10 percent) of the crop following Cannabis when in rotation (Roulac,
1997) and reduces or eliminates the need for herbicides. Such
observations tie in with the fact that annual herbaceous crops are
generally leguminosae and have the ability to nodulate and fix (atmospheric)
nitrogen (Lopez-Real, 1981). This is a possibility that requires investigation
where Cannabis is concerned, as evidence to support this hypothesis would be
additional encouragement for its cultivation in rotation systems. Another
highly significant characteristic of Cannabis, probably emanating from genetic
inheritance from weedy (ruderallis) forms is the possible ability to
grow on degraded and even polluted land. Ranalli (1999, p69) points out that
Cannabis is, ‘able to extract heavy metals from the soil in amounts
higher than many other agricultural crops’.
The
aforementioned characteristics mean that Cannabis requires very modest
fertilisation and little or no herbicides or pesticides when in a rotation
cycle (van der Werf et al, 1999) which holds obvious environmental and
economic advantages making the integration of Cannabis into agriculture highly
desirable in terms of improved sustainability. When considered in conjunction
with the use value of this crop, these characteristics have serious
implications for the future viability of more environmentally damaging crops
such as cotton. For example, cotton (Gossypium L.) could be displaced
by ‘hemp’ (Cannabis variety most favoured for fibre production) in a
sustainable textile industry (Alden et al, 1998) or farmers could rotate their
cotton crop with Cannabis to reduce the chemical input the cotton crop
requires. More attention will be paid to overtly economic arguments in the
following section, although it is often difficult to separate such
interdependent issues given the physiological characteristics of Cannabis.
Hemp
(Cannabis sativa L.) is a green plant of the C3 variety, (Geof
Kime, Hempline Inc., personal communication; 1999) which means that during
photosynthesis a three-carbon compound is produced. Other plants that share
this (C3) physiology include sunflower, rice, wheat and potato (IPCC,
1996b). While this remains constant, it should be pointed
out that many of the different phytochemical characteristics associated with
this crop are strongly dependent on the environment. It has been demonstrated
that geographical situation can have the most profound effects given the
varying temperatures, precipitation and seasonal variations that this entails,
causing alterations in the biochemical pathways of the plant and thereby
inducing several distinctions (Pate; 1999). One such example of this
environmental influence over Cannabis is the production of Cannabinoids
(chemicals unique to the C. family) which has implications for the
international production of Cannabis.
The
production of these chemicals (over sixty such metabolic compounds) in
Cannabis serve several functions for the various ecotypes and so appear to be
closely linked to the environmental variables or abiotic factors, often
referred to as stresses that can effect the organisms survival. A
useful examination of the interplay between environmental factors and plant
physiology is provided by Pate (1999) who draws on a substantial amount of
empirical research. Of particular interest is the climatic influence over the
production of Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannibinol (THC) which
contributes to the 3000 year old use of Cannabis for treating a diverse range
of human medical conditions (Clarke; 1999). The production of THC and terpenes
(unsaturated hydrocarbons) are most frequent in the indica sub-species
which are predominately found in the equatorial and tropical biomes. These
compounds, ‘can be seen as analogous to the waxy coatings of the cacti
and other succulents that serve as a barrier to water loss’ (Pate; 1999,
p26).
There
is evidence to suggest that cannibinoids (such as CBD and CBG) found in the
varieties of low THC Cannabis (hemp) grown for industrial purposes in
temperate climates are in fact precursors to THC. And moreover, that their
composition changes when UV-B radiation increases (280 to 315nm) given the
absorption properties of THC.
‘CBD-rich English Cannabis devoid of THC produced significant
amounts of THC and less CBD, when grown in the Sudan. This trend was
accentuated in the next generation of plants.’ (Pate; 1999, p27)
These
observations have led to the conclusion that, ‘cannabinoids and their
associated terpenes provide a survival advantage to the plant, particularly in
the tropical biome’ (Pate, 1999). The implication here is that different
genera may possess enhanced rates of photosynthesis perhaps closer to those of
C4 crops (i.e. those producing a four carbon compound). This would
be of most benefit where genetic diversity is concerned over potential
rates of atmospheric carbon take-up: a point that will be discussed shortly.
It has also been found, more generally, that THC production increases with the
amount of stress placed on the plant such as when growing conditions become
less favourable which covers several parameters including soil quality, low
humidity and sparse rainfall (Latta and Eaton; 1975). Stress also occurs from
damage to the plant by insects to which Cannabis has three primary defence
mechanisms consisting of, ‘a generous covering of nonglandular trichomes,
emission of volatile terpenoid substances, and exudation of the sticky
cannabinoids’. (Pate; 1999,p29)
All
of these substances are found in greater concentrations on the inflorescence
(reproductive areas) than in leaves and are, therefore, in higher
concentrations in the female plants (Pate, 1999). It would be fair to assume
that all these defence mechanisms protect the long-term survival of the genera
in so far as they ensure that fertilisation and seed (the scientifically
correct term being a fruit or nut; Bocsa and Karus, 1998) production is
guaranteed. Given these facts the main implication for this thesis is that
cultivars selected for their ability to produce fibre and seed in a temperate
climate would adapt to both equatorial and tropical biomes by increasing their
cannabinoid and terpene content. This process of adaptation could be enhanced
greatly by crossing temperate varieties such as hemp with indigenous ecotypes
of Cannabis. While the concluding chapter will consider in more detail the
surrounding issues, de Meijer (1999; p149) argues that,
‘(d)omesticated
drug strains and truly wild populations may be an important source of novel
alleles for various future breeding aims, including fibre hemp breeding.’
The
European or temperate cultivar, ‘hemp’ adapts to much the same climate as
wheat, requiring an annual rainfall of about 0.65 m, although equatorial and
tropical cultivars do have mechanisms to cope with desiccation (see above).
However, given that most research into crop physiology has been located in
temperate latitudes, it follows that the cultivars used are selected primarily
for their fibre and to a lesser extent ‘seed’
content.
Again the end-use (in
conjunction with cultivar) determines variables such as crop densities, sowing
date, and harvest date which in turn effects dry matter production – this
being proportional to Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) (van der Werf;
1999). In ideal conditions, dry yield (Y) = L r
RUE r
HI. For the purposes of
this work it is necessary to count the entire plant in this equation, as we
are interested in the total or gross rate of photosynthesis in relation to total
biomass rather than (just) dry product of economic value, although this
is important. Essentially, this is because total sequestration of atmospheric
carbon can only be established by considering the entire plant or biomass
increment.
Density
of planted seed is a critical factor (along with sowing date, see below) in
establishing canopy formation and therefore biomass per ha-1. For example, when the same cultivar is planted,
all other factors being equal, at different densities i.e. 120 m-2 and
50 m-2 the respective yields would be around 15 t/ha-1 and
20 t/ha-1 (van der Werf et al; 1999, p95). This again, however,
represents the economically valuable matter. Due to self-thinning at
higher densities, the amount of matter subject to biotic and abiotic
decomposition is severely under estimated which van der Werf et al (1999)
considers to be around 3 t/ha-1. Densities vary considerably
between crops grown for seed (4/m-2) and fibre (100/m-2)(Clarke;
1999, p2) and can vary anywhere between 4-30 plants per m-2 for
seed and 50-750 plants per m-2 for stem/fibre production (Ranalli;
1999, p67). A fibre crop, with a typical dry stem yield of 15 t/ha (60-70
percent of total biomass) has other components of roots (10 percent) and
leaves (20 percent) which represent the total biomass that would also include
seeds (5-15 percent) if left to flower (Ranalli, 1999). Total biomass of this
particular (fibre) crop would then be about 20 t/ha, increasing to around 23
t/ha when accounting for self-thinning. The root system is ecologically important as this can prevent
soil erosion. Cannabis primary root can reach depths of up to 2.5 metres
although this depends on several factors including cultivar, ecotype and soil
quality (Bocsa and Karus, 1998).
Radiation
use efficiency (RUE) increases dramatically when the crop canopy is formed
which depends also on the date of sowing. For temperate cultivars (hemp),
sowing can occur early (March) in the growing season as the seedlings are able
to withstand a short frost of up to – 8° to – 10°
C (van der Werf et al; 1999, p90). Thus, early planting using late flowering
cultivars for fibre production in a temperate climate will increase the RUE
and will in turn increase the total biomass (dry stem yields up to 18 t/ha;
van der Werf, 1999) before harvesting. The optimum rate of planting for such
cultivars for obtaining (maximum) dry stem yield is around 90 per m2
(Ranalli, 1999).
2.2
Cannabis and climate change
Like
all green plants and agricultural crops there is, for Cannabis, a delicate
balance in photosynthetic potential and increased levels of atmospheric carbon
dioxide and variations in other plant assimilates. This is made even more
salient in terms of the interplay between biosphere and atmosphere as there
are links and interplay between every aspect, an idea reinforced in the
introduction when considering the ‘Gaia Hypothesis’. Increased C02 and
increased temperature impact on every possible variable that plants require
for growth, as this section will explore. In addition, the ability for any
crop (or indeed agricultural practice) to contribute towards climate change
mitigation will depend on the extent of total benefits rather
than simply the amount of atmospheric carbon that can be converted into
biomass during photosynthesis – these aspects form the focus of the
following sections and chapter three. It is first necessary to establish some
baseline data in the context of enhanced atmospheric carbon dioxide for
Cannabis.
Since
all plants require carbon dioxide (C02) for growth there are
feedback mechanisms of climate change which mean that under enhanced C02 conditions
plants will in theory benefit from this in terms of greater yields (Leemans
et al; 1996). Weerakoon (1999) experimented with rice seedlings, which like
Cannabis is a C3 crop, and found that in controlled environments
with atmospheric carbon of 895ppmv (well above the X2 CO2 or
‘business-as-usual’ scenario used by the IPCC, 1996b) photosynthesis
increased by 50 per cent and biomass was also significantly enhanced. However,
it would be premature to draw conclusions from such work as environments vary
considerably in terms of precipitation and soil quality, aspects (to name but
a few) clearly missing from the controlled environment of a laboratory.
As most climate change models operate at X2 atmospheric carbon – as
compared to the 280ppmv in 1700, which is now at a 1.5ppmv per annum increase
over the 1994 level of 360ppmv (Houghton; 1994) – it follows that work
concerning the adaptation of plants also use this baseline or
‘business-as-usual’ scenario.
According
to Bazzaz and Sombroek (1996) the biomass production of C3 plants
will increase by roughly 30 per cent in conditions of X2 atmospheric carbon
provided other factors remain constant. At present (given that we are at
approximately 369ppmv) this 30 per cent can be reduced to around 10 per cent.
Since biomass is the resulting product of the photosynthetic conversion of
atmospheric carbon, the most accurate way to establish carbon uptake is to
examine the productivity rate of Cannabis in terms of gross primary biomass
production (GPBP). Given the data concerning gross primary biomass (section
2.1), a figure of around 23t/ha can be assumed. However, there exists little
data to verify an exact figure for the amount of carbon sequestered during
photosynthesis and estimates range between half (Houghton, 1997) and one third
of GPBP (Geof Kime, Hempline Inc., personal communication; 1999). Thus it
could be assumed that around 11.5 t/C02 per ha is sequestered if
half of gross primary production or 7.6 t/ha if one third giving an average of
9.5 t C02 per ha. Assuming increased biomass as a result of the CO2
fertilisation effect would increase this figure (at today’s
atmospheric carbon level, see above) by approximately 10 percent. This however
is tenuous given the possibility of negative feedbacks to offset such
advantages by for example decreasing water use efficiency (Bazzaz and Sombroek,
1996).
It
is apparent from this section that there are many physiological and phenotypic
factors that would serve to make Cannabis resilient to climate change. For
instance, the ability to adapt to dry conditions and the possibility that
Cannabis could retain its water use efficiency under such conditions would
enable the plant to take full advantage of the ‘fertilisation effect’ of
increased atmospheric carbon. As yet no research has been conducted to
elaborate more fully on this possibility. In addition many further advantages
could be derived from the substantial gene pool of Cannabis in terms of
climate change adaptation, increasing the sustainability of agriculture and
(more generally) for specific economic uses. The next
section will elaborate in some detail how the Physiology of Cannabis
translates into an array of economically significant end-uses.
2.3
Economic productivity of Cannabis
2.3.0
Seed
Thus
far mention of the Cannabis ‘seed’ has been in the general context of
overall biomass production or yield. However, one of the important aspects of
this plant is that although referred to as seed (which technically speaking it
is), the Cannabis plant actually produces an ‘achene’ or fruit. In the context of a world agricultural system that, since the
so-called ‘Green Revolution’ of the 1960’s, has seen massive increases
in the production of protein deficient cereal crops, the introduction of
Cannabis into agricultural systems could represent a return of plant based
protein. According to research (Pate, 1999), the achene (nut or fruit)
contains 20-25 per cent protein, 20-30 percent carbohydrates and 10-15 per
cent insoluble fibre, 25-30 per cent oil as well as a rich variety of
minerals. These include phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, sulphur, and calcium
with modest amounts of iron and zinc.
Cannabis
achene is therefore a very useful and easily digestible (Pate, 1999) food
source for both humans and animals. Particular benefit could accrue to
domesticated ruminants (cattle) whose diet are quite poor and result in the
emission of a substantial proportion of methane (a pervasive and significant
GHG, see section 1.0) (IPCC, 1996b, p757). Research into the role of Cannabis
in this area of climate change mitigation could have positive implications.
Food or ‘seed cake’ is obtained by either ‘cold pressing’ or using
higher temperature techniques which remove a greater percentage of the oil
(Pate; 1999). This however would depend on the use and market for which the
food is destined i.e. animal feed, oil production or human consumption. Yield
of oil is equal to around 33 per cent of seed weight (Geof Kime, Hempline Inc,
personal communication; 1999) so at a yield of approximately 1350 kg/ha we would expect around 450 kg/ha of oil. This oil is a valuable
commodity as it can be used to many ends (summarised in section 2.4) including
fuel oil (Kerosene directly displaced hemp oil as a source of lighting fuel,
Clarke, 1999) for motor vehicles.
2.3.1
Stem
As
the reader will be aware from previous sections, Cannabis (in particular the
Sativa genera – ‘hemp’) has been referred to as a fibre crop. There are
several uses to which this fibre can be put depending on the content of the
stem which is determined by cultivar and development stage (age) of the plant
(Ranalli, 1999) and also appears to be affected by plant density (van der
Werf, 1999). Broadly speaking, the stem can be split into two (consistent)
components of bark and core, which differ in their chemical composition. For
example, in an Italian cultivar, bark (or bast, contains primary and secondary
fibres) contained 67 % cellulose, 13 % hemicellulose, and 4 % lignin. Core
(‘woody core’ or shives) contained 38 % cellulose, 31 % hemicellulose, and
18 % lignin (Ranalli, 1999, p72). Thus today there exist two main uses for
this crop based on these components for the paper pulp and textiles
industries, the chemical composition being a very important factor. In fact,
the yield of pulp corresponds directly with the cellulose and hemicellulose
content of the fibre (de Groot et al, 1999; Biermann, 1993). This section will
also explore the potential use of these components for biofuel.
2.3.2
Bast fibre (primary and secondary)
This
particular component is best suited as a raw material in the manufacture of
paper and/or textiles (20 percent of total stem fibre; Ranalli, 1999) due to
the low lignin content and length of the fibres (Primary fibres 5-40mm, secondary
bast fibres are uniformly about 2mm) (Ranalli, 1999). The ultimate fibre cells
for textile manufacture range from 5-55mm and have an average length of 20mm
(Ranalli, 1999). A low lignin content has other environmental benefits given
that wood (both soft and hard) involves the chemical removal of lignin. Pulp
from hemp (bast) can therefore be characterised as a non-wood pulp (de Groot
et al, 1999). In addition, long fibres add to the strength of paper and the
yield in chemical pulping corresponds to the cellulose content (see above) of
the raw material (Ranalli, 1999; de Groot et al, 1999; Biermann, 1993).
2.3.3
Woody core
These
(core) fibres account for 65 percent of the stem weight (de Groot, et al,
1999). Unlike most annual fibre crops that must be treated as straw (using
this raw material in the pulp process involves effluent treatment to remove
silica), hemp has a ‘very low silica content’ (de Groot, et al, 1999). In
addition, the composition of the woody core is both botanically and chemically
comparable to hardwood (de Groot, et al, 1999). It as argued that future
technological developments could lead to this component being a ‘valuable
paper feed stock’ in low pollution pulping systems (alkaline processes use
around 50 percent less energy) (de Groot, et al, 1999).
According
to the IPCC (1996b), there exist several advantages of using biomass in the
energy sector not least because these can be used to offset or substitute
directly for fossil fuels thereby reducing emissions of GHGs and for the
sequestration of CO2 via the process of photosynthesis. Moreover,
biomass is a general term covering a large degree of diversity and chemical
composition in terms of plant matter which are of variable significance as a
raw material or feed-stock for the energy (and transport) sector. The IPCC
(1996b) consider that the types of biomass most suitable for these
applications in the context of climate change mitigation are fast-growing
hardwoods. Hemp or other cultivars of Cannabis are therefore perfectly
placed to be utilised in this area given the plants chemical composition.
Moreover, there exists at present much of the technology to translate this
into a pragmatic climate change mitigation option with higher energy
efficiency and lower unit capital costs (IPCC, 1996b). This is especially significant given that,
‘Bekkering’s
(1992) analysis of future global trends in greenhouse gas emissions has shown
that reducing emissions from fossil fuels will have the greatest effect on
atmospheric carbon concentrations between 1990 and 2100.’ (Adger and Brown;
1994, p229)
The
following diagram outlines only a few of the possible uses to which Cannabis
could be put although many of these are in commodity areas where fossil fuels
and petrochemicals are predominately utilised. It is essential that research
be directed at this crop specifically for use as a biofuel. Given the above
information this is certainly a possibility that is of fundamental theoretical
importance for this thesis, as chapter three will explore.
2.4
Modern uses for Cannabis.
Adapted
from a diagram presented by Roulac (1997). Rather than being a comprehensive
diagram, this serves solely to demonstrate the diversity of product and use
for which Cannabis can be put. In addition, the possible ability for the
‘woody core’ or Hurds/shives to be used for energy applications has not
been considered in this diagram.
.
2.5
Chapter two: Summary
h
Large C. gene pool: wide selection of genotypes and phenotypes (i.e.
desiccation
and frost tolerance)
h
fast growing annual crop.
h
extracts significant quantities of heavy metals from soil.
h
long tap root, up to 2.5 metres helps prevent soil erosion
h
requires modest (organic) fertilisation and near zero chemical fertilisation.
h
ideally suited for integration into environmentally sound (i.e. organic)
agricultural
practices.
h
increases yield of the proceeding crop in rotation cycle by up to 10 percent.
h
gross primary biomass increments up to 23t/ha.
h
CO2 sequestration range between 7.6tC/ha and 11.5tC/ha.
h
perfect substitute for cotton, requires less chemical inputs.
h
suited to pulp paper manufacture: bast primary and secondary fibres low lignin
high cellulose content.
h
chemical composition of woody core comparable to hardwood.
h
potential as a biomass feed-stock for energy and transportation applications.
h
also has the potential to be a valuable food source of plant protein.
Chapter
three: Climate change mitigation potential
3.0
Introduction
3.1
Land-use
As
a determining variable, land-use is sensitive to many socio-political
considerations and differs regionally according to factors such as
demographics, requirements for agricultural land and the management of
agricultural land. For example, some analysis (IPCC, 1996b) consider that
intensive agricultural practices in the EU will lead to 15-20 Mha of good agricultural land being surplus to
requirement by 2010 (IPCC, 1996b, p755). On the other hand, this situation is unlikely to occur in tropical
regions as only half of land-use conversions (i.e. from forests to
agriculture) contribute to an increase in agricultural productivity. The other
half, ‘is used to replace previously cultivated land that has been degraded
and abandoned from production’ (IPCC, 1996b, p749). This type of
(inefficient) land-use conversion contributes as a significant source
of atmospheric carbon (14 percent of total) which could be remedied by
increasing carbon storage in managed (i.e. agricultural) or forested soils.
3.5.1
Organic Farming
If
the theoretical propositions of Alden et al (1998) concerning industrial
Cannabis and land use minimisation can be borne out in practice then serious
benefits could accrue for even the smallest landowners/farmers. This benefit
is doubled when the environmental benefits of Cannabis cultivation are
considered in the agricultural context. As a goal of sustainable development
organic farming is of fundamental importance. Global food security does not
just depend on the quantity of goods produced. The way in which goods are
produced effects, for example, the long-term sustainability of soil systems.
In addition, it could be argued that quality also has a dramatic impact on
demand.
The
introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms into the food chain has
received criticism from scientists in developed and developing countries alike
due to the long-term scientific uncertainties associated with their
propagation and consumption. These scientific uncertainties make the
introduction of GM crops unsustainable and potentially hazardous for long-term
food security (see section 4.0).
Many
developed countries (mostly in the EU) are making a concerted effort to move
away from intensive to more extensive agricultural systems in order to reduce
the environmental impact of agriculture and for overtly economic (but
associated) objectives such the reduction of surpluses – given their
subsequent effect on prices. In the EU the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
reforms of 1992 sought to break the link between farm incomes and volume of
food (Ilbery, 1998). The ‘productivist’ philosophy behind GM crops does
not fit well with these objectives and circumstances i.e. surpluses. Organic
farming satisfies all the relevant criteria. So too does agricultural
set-aside and non-rotational set-aside as described in EU Regulation 2078/92
or ‘agri-environmental action programme’. This was heavily influenced by
international policy such as the UNFCCC and considered non-food crop
set-asides for uses such as biofuel production with accompanying measures
encouraging reforestation of agricultural land and organic farming (Ilbery,
1998). Changes to the CAP were themselves regulated for; being
controlled via the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS)
established under Regulation 3887/92 (Ilbery, 1998).
Clearly
this level of organisation would not be possible universally given the
plethora of socio-political (and therefore economic) concerns at the global
level that would mitigate against such co-operation in for example the civil
conflict endemic in many parts of the World. It does, however, demonstrate the
possibilities for the integration of agricultural and environmental policy,
which for too long had remained separate issues in the EU. The encouragement
of organic farming and more sustainable conventional practices at the Global
level is fundamental to the successful integration of these policy areas and
enhances dramatically the potential for Cannabis to be used in a multitude of
functions, not least in the over-arching goal of climate change mitigation.
Chapter
four: conclusion
4.0
Cannabis: an environmentally viable method for climate change mitigation?
It
is apparent that Cannabis has the potential to confer several environmental
benefits in addition to climate change mitigation. Not least is the ease with
which Cannabis cultivation could be integrated into sustainable systems
of agriculture or indeed into environmentally unsustainable situations as a
method of improvement. The idea of ‘sustainability’ in agriculture
engenders concerns regarding the long term security of food production which
includes many aspects of production from soil quality – and all the
variables that affect this – to the sustainability of products themselves.
In addition, this definition could be extended to cover the impact
agriculture has on surrounding environments, the hydrological cycle and
therefore global warming. These all potentially affect the sustainability of
agricultural systems and therefore food security. While this demonstrates the
interconnectedness of events in nature and those induced by human activities,
it is also intended to emphasise the positive impact Cannabis cultivation may
have in this context.
For
example, we observed earlier that problems such as the over-cropping of
erodible soils lead to unsustainable practices of land conversion particularly
in the tropics. Systems of rotation – using crops with long tap roots such
as Cannabis – could help prevent the degradation of agricultural land,
removing or at least lessening the need to convert more land (i.e. forested
areas) for agricultural purposes. Some may be inclined to
argue that less intensive systems of agriculture could result in food
shortages. Cannabis however, as well as being a protein rich food crop could
promote environmentally beneficial methods of agriculture (via rotation
cultivation) that could help secure a long-term strategy of land
management ensuring that food shortages do not occur. This would be enhanced
greatly by using Cannabis as a key bioremediation crop to restore unproductive
land back into agricultural use. Shortages are arguably far more likely to
occur in areas where there is a deficit of suitable land due to intensive
agricultural practices combined with inadequate land management (IPCC, 1996b).
Arguments
suggesting that the way forward lies (solely) in the technological advances of
genetic engineering are mistaken. Claims made by GMO corporations, such as
Monsanto, that less chemical fertilisers could be applied to food (GM) crops
with guaranteed yields and quality have not been borne out by the experiences
of conventional farmers in the United States – many of whom have been using
GM seeds for almost a decade. Moreover, claims that GMOs could ‘feed the
world’ are extremely tenuous to say the least. To address these points,
research into GM yields has demonstrated a mean 4 percent yield drag in RR soybeans. Even comparing the top five varieties from each, RR
still yielded five percent less than conventional soyabeans (E.A. Clark,
1999).
According
to other research, GM soya is unsuitable for some (hotter) climates as soil
temperatures reaching 40-50 degrees Celsius resulted in crop losses of up to
40 percent due to stem splitting (Coghlan, 1999). Moreover, research carried
out at Cornell University, New York, has demonstrated that genetic diversity
of agricultural crops – as opposed to genetic standardisation – is the way
forward. Experiments using rice (another C3 crop), where all commercial
varieties are derived from just two Sativa varieties, showed that crossing
these with ‘wild’ genera boosted yields by between 10 and 20 percent
(Coghlan, 1999). It is far more plausible, therefore, that years of continuous
(protein deficient) cereal production will require alternative and
rotational crops rather than genetically modified crops to,
‘allow control of those weeds, pests and diseases that still
cannot be controlled in the cereal crops themselves, and perhaps more
importantly [would] help restore organic matter to the soil following years of
depletion by cereal crops’ (Forbes and Watson, 1992, p 257).
There
is absolutely no scientific foundation for claims that GM crops will
‘feed the world’. It is often argued that those in the West who oppose this
technology do so only because they can afford to and that decisions should be
left to individual countries. However, GM technology represents, for a nation-state,
the ‘cheap fix’ for many social and agricultural problems as individual or
small farmers would not be able to afford this technology (Mack, 1998). Their respective States, however – burdened with debts –
could (and have, in the case of Brazil and Kenya) encourage(d) the use of
these crops as an economic alternative to the capacity building of
agricultural infrastructure, refrigeration facilities and transportation
networks with no regard for the long term sustainability of this technology
– which is far from established. In effect, the technology has preceded the
science.
It
is also the case that the food we eat today is not varied enough in terms of
nutritional content. The bulk of the worlds’ food is derived from only
twelve crop plants and three types of livestock (Tivy, 1990, p7). For this
reason many of the worlds poorer communities suffer from malnutrition as a
result of cereal rich but protein deficient diets. The technological
‘solution’ involves engineering crops with enhanced nutritional value but
according to the British Medical Association (representing 115,000 doctors),
the use of anti-biotic marker genes in GM crops poses a slight but
“completely unacceptable risk” of enhancing drug resistant bacteria (cited
in E.A Clarke, 1999).
This
is coupled with concerns about pest resistance to the pesticides and
herbicides that (GM) crops are engineered to be resistant
to – such as Monsanto’s ‘Round-up’ herbicide (E.A. Clarke, 1999).
However, integrating Cannabis as a rotation crop into agricultural systems
could potentially alleviate this regional (malnutrition) problem while
mitigating climate change and other environmental problems associated with
intensive agriculture such as pollution by ‘carcinogenic nitroso
compounds’ found in areas of high nitrate pollution (Tivy, 1990, p250).
Given these facts combined with the information in chapter two, there is a very
strong case for the integration of Cannabis into both
conventional and organic farming methods for climate change mitigation and
general environmental improvement. One of the key areas where this would be
possible is in the energy efficiency of agricultural systems. The least efficient system is that of ‘feedlot’ cattle
production as it produces only one tenth of the energy input – a fact that
has led some to ‘question the long-term viability’ of such a system
(Martin and Keable, 1981).
Thus
not only could the multipurpose characteristics of Cannabis aid (more)
sustainable systems of agriculture in the tropics whilst providing a welcome
source of plant based protein but it may also help to challenge the intensive
cattle production of the Western World, referred to as ‘excessive’ by the
IPCC. Cultivation of Cannabis in agricultural systems represents an
integrated approach to deal with several related problems and indeed causes of
climate change. However, the potential environmental benefits from cultivation
on an industrial scale are most significant where climate change is concerned.
As we have seen there are several related environmental factors and social
practices that contribute to the overarching problematic of climate change.
These
can be broadly summarised as:
h
Fossil fuel consumption
h
Deforestation
h
Degradation of agricultural land and desertification
Cannabis
cultivation for biofuel and industrial wood pulp could have the most profound
mitigation potential by addressing the above factors. Sections 3.4 and 3.4.0
outlined the mitigation potential of Cannabis using the agricultural land
considered by research to be available for energy crops which proved to be
highly significant. In addition, there would obviously be less need to cut
down ‘old growth’ trees if pulp was to be derived from Cannabis
plantations in conjunction with that grown in agricultural systems. The
prospect of utilising Cannabis in land reclamation/regeneration is also a
significant and real possibility where industrial plantations are concerned
given the physiological characteristics of the crop. It is probable however
that Cannabis plantations would require significantly more chemical inputs
than would be the case in rotational systems (Bocsa and Karus, 1998, see also
chapter two section 2.1). It could be suggested, however, that the advantages
of Cannabis cultivation for climate change mitigation far outweigh (minor)
disadvantages such as this, although decisions are seldom – if ever –
taken on the basis of their environmental credentials alone.
4.1
Cannabis: an economically viable method for climate change mitigation?
Cannabis
is certainly an economically valuable crop given the plethora of possible uses
to which its constituent parts could be put but economic value is also
determined by the demand for products and the market(s) in which these demands
are expressed. On this level the world market for hemp (Cannabis Sativa)
derived industrial pulp is very small at around 120,000 tons/year (FAO,
1995). This however does not constitute real demand, as there are
several political issues that ‘artificially’ determine industrial and
therefore consumer behaviour – the essence of which shall be the subject of
further deliberation later. At a holistic level enhanced climate change
represents costs of almost unquantfiable proportions. How for example, do we
quantify losses of species or for that matter the displacement of entire
communities due to flooding? These questions raise several issues and make
objective financial judgements very difficult. However, as noted in section
1.0, the IPCC and others consider that the cost attributed to climate change
can best be described as a ‘fixed’ cost for atmospheric carbon, which over
time turns out to be around 50 US dollars per ton. In 1990, total atmospheric carbon
totalled 750Gt (IPCC, 1996b).
When
the full cost of climate change (if indeed this is possible) is taken into
account almost any measures to mitigate climate change would be cost
effective. However, according to the IPCC and UNFCCC mitigation measures
should also confer direct benefits on individuals. The benefits that would
accrue to farmers and consumers alike from the integration of Cannabis into
sustainable agriculture have been examined but costing these adequately (such
as the reduction of chemical inputs and increased yields of other crops) is
beyond the scope of this piece of work. It would be beneficial and indeed
advantageous to conduct a comprehensive social cost-benefit analysis for such
a project, although this would be an extremely ambitious undertaking.
It
is a distinct possibility that there could actually be more
economic than environmental benefits if Cannabis was integrated fully into a
World Economy based on the use of agricultural or bio-products as opposed to
the current state of affairs which relies heavily on fossil fuels. From IPCC
projections of future energy use we will become increasingly reliant on
biomass this century and beyond. I would be inclined to argue that such
projections must be taken in a context where all commodities are
less dependent on fossil fuels for their production, not just energy. The
following digression will elaborate.
Within
economic discourse many considered the emergence of information technology to
represent a new ‘wave’ of development but forget that this is a mechanism
that allows the economy to function – it is essentially a tool to do the
things we already do i.e. manufacture, buy and sell essentially the same
commodities. In addition, ‘waves’ of development in capitalist society are
dependent not just on relative prices, new technologies or entrepreneurial
dynamism but the techniques which influence all of the above. Assuming
that raw materials are a (if not the) fundamental requirement of
industrial society, it is fair to assume that a shift from the oil based
economy is inevitable given the industrial reliance on finite and
environmentally unsustainable resources. Eventually the price of fossil
fuel will force alternatives, such as biofuels onto the market. Although, by
the time this (market effect) occurs, assuming no fossil fuel shortages occur
in the next (22nd) Century, the effects of climate change could be
too dramatic to reverse.
Cannabis
is possibly the most diverse and useful plant known to humanity (Roulac, 1997)
and we already have much of the technology to manufacture many thousands of
commodities from it (see section 2.4). Moreover, because we have possessed the
ability to do so since the 1930’s, the reasons why industry has not utilised
this plant is open to suggestion! There are several conspiracy theories
featuring heavy-weight industrial players of the day such as Randolf-Hearst
(then owner of both the New York Times and large areas of natural forest in
the US) and the DuPont corporation which had patented techniques for the
manufacture of artificial fibres from petrochemicals (Roulac, 1997).
Kondratiev’s (a 20th century Russian economist) theory states
that ‘waves of development’ occur due to changes in relative prices
between manufactures, food and raw materials (Harris, 1988) and would seem to
fit with the above ‘conspiracy’ theory (i.e. that Hearst and DuPont
conspired to remove a formidable competitor) in so far as the hemp industry in
the US was taxed out of existence in the 1930’s – leaving
petrochemicals with no competition (see Roulac, 1997).
Thus
far all industry to date has been heavily reliant on fossil fuels of one kind
or another and it would be reasonable to suggest that the – as yet –
undefined K5 (after Kondratiev) ‘wave of development’ will utilise biomass
to the same extent as all the previous waves of development have utilised
fossil fuels – K4 being fuelled by petrochemicals and the motor industry.
Cannabis could fill many (if not all) of the gaps in an economy shifting from
a fossil fuel to biomass industrial base as is implied in the IPCC projections
of future energy supply – this being a definitive feature of industrial
society. According to this rationale, within the context of a global response
to climate change mitigation, a suitable conclusion would be that the
production of Cannabis could confer economic benefits on every country and
individual landowner that participates. However, due to the global dominance
of fossil fuels, policies are required to stimulate expansive cultivation of
such an environmentally beneficial alternative. This could be achieved via the
extension of global climate change mitigation policy as enshrined in the
UNFCCC to include those countries at present not Party to the Convention by
the adoption of a biomass cultivation initiative – in which Cannabis could
be a major contributor. As chapter three discussed a sizeable proportion of
all farmland could be utilised for Cannabis rotation, not to mention land
rehabilitation.
There
are other mechanisms by which this crop could enter the global market besides
direct legislation or international agreement. For instance, there are several
problems related to the supply of plant-based oil and protein for both human
and animal consumption. Today the bulk of the World plant based protein is
derived from Soya and most of that grown in the US has transgenic properties
due to genetic engineering. The OECD (1999) states that there is a strong
demand for plant based oil and protein, especially as a feed ingredient and
projections show that production will increase by 34 percent or 64Mt by 2004
(OECD, 1999).
Moreover,
oil seed rape is favoured for its oil content (35 percent oil) while soya is
favoured for its protein content (OECD, 1999) both of which are surpassed or
equalled by Cannabis with 33 percent oil by (seed) weight and 25 percent
protein by ‘seed’ (see section 2.3.0). If there are restrictions placed on
the cultivation of transgenic crops due to the lack of knowledge regarding
their safety and therefore long term sustainability – or indeed that
consumers themselves reject this food – Cannabis is in a perfect position to
enter the food and feed market as a perfect non-GM substitute for these
products.
4.2
Logistics
Unlike
previous waves of development in which benefits accrued only to those
countries with large oil reserves and/or the technological means to
manufacture commodities from them, a biomass economy would not be regionally
specific but would be distributed internationally. Cannabis fits perfectly
into such a scenario as it can be produced at almost every latitude covering,
therefore, most climatic zones. Because it is an annual crop it would not be
affected by climate change to the same extent as other choices of short
rotation woody feedstock for industry (IPCC, 1996, p389). Moreover, the use of a standardised industrial feedstock makes far
more economic sense than does using a heterogeneous supply of biomass, as
technology could be tailored specifically and standardised to reduce
cultivation, harvesting and processing costs. In addition, due to the
environmental benefits of Cannabis as a rotation crop participation could be
universal and could be non-specific to the size of land-holdings – thus enhancing
rural employment.
In
the context of international agreements concerning climate change mitigation
(i.e. UNFCCC) such an economy would almost certainly require technology
transfer from rich to poor to enable regional biomass processing – an idea
that has been accepted by the 160 signatories to the Convention. This would be
essential in order to take advantage of the multipurpose characteristics of
Cannabis. For example, it would be advantageous to have the technological
capacity at a local level for the dual processing of paper and biofuel as this
would be based on a separation of the constituent parts of Cannabis as
described in chapter two. In addition, if seed production was to be locally
desirable in this multipurpose scenario then it would also necessarily involve
technologically advanced dual processing facilities.
As
mentioned earlier, there are also some serious political considerations for
this thesis. According to research (see section 2.1) the environment Cannabis
is cultivated in can affect the biochemical pathways of the plant. While this
confers benefits on the plant in terms of its ability to cope with a range of
climatic conditions, it also effects the production of the Cannabinoid
Delta-9-tetrahydrocannibinol – categorised as an illegal narcotic in most
countries due to domestic and international drug laws (mostly of US origin).
This situation would put developing countries (in other words those who would
benefit most from this climate change mitigation, environmental and economic
policy) at an unfair disadvantage in relation to the countries of temperate
regions who can cultivate low THC varieties of Cannabis Sativa or ‘hemp’
for fibre and seed within these regulations.
An
international agricultural agreement on Cannabis cultivation would necessarily
address this issue either by relaxing laws governing the THC quantity in
plants due to climatic variations or by embarking on a tropical breeding
programme to try and reduce the apparent correlation between UV-B levels and Delta-9-THC
production. Research in this area is urgently required given the overwhelming
benefits that cultivation of this crop would bring to these regions and indeed
the World in terms of climate change mitigation and through the preservation
of the bio-diversity found in old growth forests currently destroyed by
land-use conversion and industrial activities. In comparison to the problem of
climate change this issue is insignificant given the immediate possibilities
for addressing it via modern plant breeding practices or legislative changes.
4.3
Cannabis: Industrial raw material for the 21st Century?
While
the answer to this question rests with the degree to which resources are
dedicated to research, the present picture is very promising. Current research
has resulted in new advances in Cannabis breeding for fibre yield, quality and
seed production (Ranalli, 1999) and technologies are being further developed
for the utilisation of biomass in the energy and transport sectors which
Cannabis is perfectly suited to (see section 3.5.0). In addition, because of
the range of products that can be synthesised from Cannabis our current
reliance on fossil fuels could be reduced still further. Moreover, the ability
to do so exists at present so far from being a future or long-term objective,
industrial Cannabis could in fact be utilised for these purposes in the very
short-term. In the context of climate change mitigation policy, reducing the
use of fossil fuels is of paramount importance but there are overlapping
environmental concerns associated with modern production methods that can and
should be addressed by coherent environmental policy, especially in a
global/holistic context.
In
addition to the environmental concerns arising from modern agriculture, many
of the products currently synthesised from fossil fuels will continue to
pollute air, land and water long after their usable life is over. Products
made from Cannabis would not have this problem given their greater potential
for recycling and for biodegradable product lines (Roulac, 1997). This is an
important aspect in the light of international standards set out by the
International Organisation for Standardisation such as the ISO 14000
requirements for environmental management. Roulac (1997) points out that the
US Department of Energy requires all contractors to register as complying with
these (ISO) standards. If all the environmental considerations are taken into
account, Cannabis certainly has the potential to become a primary
industrial feedstock for the 21st Century.
However,
we should learn the lessons of the past where corporate and political
interests have been successfully mobilised to prevent the cultivation of this
important crop. There remain therefore a plethora of inter-related issues that
require serious deliberation – several of which are fundamentally political.
Not least is the politico-economic power that today’s multi-national (in
particular petrochemical and biotech) corporations have over governments –
especially in the developing world. Moreover, within the context of climate
change and it’s associated causes, decisions cannot be left to the market to
decide, although as pointed out (in section 4.2) this will occur
eventually where fossil fuels are concerned. Successful climate change
mitigation requires immediate action which in turn requires political and
corporate attention to be focused on the relevant issues. These include our
obligations and responsibility to implement climate change mitigation as laid
out in the UNFCCC for maintaining the World’s biological diversity and for
future generations’ development.
For
example, while the GM food safety issue is of major concern, this technology
has the potential to contribute positively in the further development of
biofuel crops and land rehabilitation using multipurpose industrial crops i.e.
Cannabis. Unfortunately, without some political intervention this technology
will have greater market viability where food crops are concerned over other,
arguably more environmentally sound uses such as climate change mitigation.
Alternative technology designed specifically for the energy sector has also
been making substantial progress. According to Paul Staples, Chairman of HyGen
Industries (personal communication, 2000) hydrogen powered fuel cells will
enter the market with a sizeable share of domestic, commercial and utility
applications within the next ten years. In addition, there are many companies
such as Iogen Corporation that are committed to the development of ethanol
from biomass feedstocks. This process has particular economic and
environmental benefits since (see section 3.5.0) it can use commercially
established technology such as the internal combustion engine rather than new
(i.e.hydrogen) fuel cells, thus saving the premature devaluation of capital
stocks (from oil generated power stations to motor vehicles). Most importantly
Cannabis is particularly well suited to this end both practically and
logistically.
The
cultivation of Cannabis within both conventional and organic agricultural
systems, combined with the rehabilitation/reclamation of degraded land could
form an important – if not crucial – foundation for a coherent and
politically/socially inclusive World Agricultural Agreement. By addressing
climate change via an environmental approach using Cannabis as a multipurpose
biomass – supported by environmental policy and economics – we have the
potential to address many of the land-use and consumption related causes of
climate change and the actual volume of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. This could be achieved as part of an overarching international
climate change mitigation policy that would target – above all – the
extensive use of fossil fuels in the World Economy today rendering the use of
Cannabis viable, not only for energy applications but as a foundation for a
World Economy that requires an alternative industrial feedstock for the
production of all commodities that presently rely on fossil fuels.
5.0
References
Alden et al.
(1998) ‘Industrial hemp’s double dividend: a study for the USA’ in Ecological
Economics, 25, pp291-301.
Adger W.L and
Brown K. (1994) ‘Land Use and the Causes of Global Warming’
Wiley Ltd.
Bazzaz, F.A
and Sombroek, W.G (1996) ‘Global Climate Change and Agricultural Production:
Assessment of Current Knowledge and Critical Gaps’ in Global Climate
change and Agricultural Production (Eds. Bazzaz, F.A and Sombroek, W.G)
Wiley.
Biermann, C.J
(1993) ‘Pulping and Papermaking’ Academic Press Inc.
Bocsa, Dr
Ivan and Karus, M (1998) ‘The Cultivation of Hemp: Botany, Varieties,
Cultivation and Harvesting’ Hemptech.
Bocsa, Dr
Ivan (1999) ‘Genetic Improvement: Conventional Approaches’ in Advances
in Hemp Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The
Hawthorn Press, Inc).
Coghlan
(1999) ‘Splitting Headache’ New Scientist 20th Nov.
1999.
Coghlan
(1999) ‘Relative Values’ New Scientist 27th Nov. 1999.
Clarke, E.A
(1999) ‘Ten Reasons Why Farmers Should Think Twice Before Growing
GE Crops’, published on-line by the University of Guelph, Ontario,
Canada.
(see
http://www.oac.uoguelph.ca/www/CRSC/faculty/eac/10reasons.htm).
Clarke, R.C
(1999) ‘Botany of the Genus Cannabis’ in Advances in Hemp Research
(Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The Hawthorn Press, Inc).
De Groot, B.,
G.J van Roekel Jr, J.E.G van Dam (1999) ‘Alkaline Pulping of Fiber Hemp’
in Advances in Hemp Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press
(imprint of The Hawthorn Press, Inc).
De Haan F.A.M
(1987) ‘Effects of Agricultural Practices on the Physical, Chemical and
Biological Properties of Soils: Part III - Chemical Degradation of
Soil as the Result of the Use of Mineral Fertilisers and Pesticides:
Aspects of Soil Quality Evaluation’. In Scientific Basis for Soil
Protection in the European Community (Eds. Barth, H & L'Hermite, P.
Elsevier) Applied Science Publishers Ltd, London.
De Meijer,
E.P.M (1999) ‘Cannabis Germplasm Resources’ in Advances in Hemp
Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The Hawthorn
Press, Inc).
Eurostat
(1997) ‘Agricultural Yearbook’ OECD
Faaij, A., J.
van Doorn, A. Curvers, L. Waldheim, E. Olsson, A. van Wijk, C. Daey-Ouwens
(1997) ‘Characterisation and availability of biomass waste and residues in
the Netherlands for gasification’, Department of Science, Technology and
Society, Utrecht University, Netherlands Energy Research Foundation, Termiska
Processer AB Studsvik Sweden, Province of Noord-Holland, published in Biomass
and Bioenergy, Vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 225-240.
FAO (1995)
Yearbook, ‘Production 1994’ Vol.48. Rome, Italy.
FAO (2000)
‘Advisory Committee on Paper and Wood Products’ Sao Paulo, 27-28
April 1999. Published on-line by the FAO
(see
http://www.fao.org/montes/fop/fopw/acpwp/40/indus.htm.)
Farming News
(1999) on-line publication of the Norfolk Genetic Information Network
(see
http://members.tripod.com/ngin/farming.htm).
Forbes, J.C
and Watson, R.D (1992) ‘Plants in Agriculture’ Cambridge University
Press.
Gradwohl and
Greenberg (1988) ‘Saving the Tropical Rainforests’ Earthscan
Hall, D.O et
al. (1994) ‘Biomass for energy and
Industry’ in : Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on
Biomass for Energy and the Environment, Agriculture and Industry 5-9
October 1992, Florence, Italy. Ponte Press Bochum Germany.
Houghton, J
(1997) ‘Global Warming: the complete briefing’, Cambridge
University Press.
Harris (1988)
‘The UK economy at the crossroads’ in ‘The Economy in Question’
(Eds. Allen, J and Massey, D) Sage Publications in association with the Open
University
International
Energy Agency (1997) published by OECD.
Ilbery, B
(1998) ‘The Challenge of Agricultural Restructuring in the EU’ in The
New Europe: economy, society and environment (Ed. Pinder) Wiley.
OECD (1999)
‘Agricultural Outlook’ 1999-2004
Pate, D.W
(1999) ‘The Phytochemistry of Cannabis: Its Ecological and Evolutionary
Implications’ in Advances in Hemp Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food
Products Press (imprint of The Hawthorn Press, Inc).
Pate, D.W
(1999) ‘Hemp Seed: A Valuable Food Source’ in Advances in Hemp Research
(Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The Hawthorn Press, Inc).
Pearce, D. et
al (1989) ‘Blueprint for a Green Economy’,
Earthscan
Ranalli, P
(1999) ‘Agronomical and Physiological Advances in Hemp Crops’ in Advances
in Hemp Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The
Hawthorn Press, Inc).
Roulac, J
(1997) 'Hemp Horizons: the comeback of the worlds most promising plant'
Chelsea Green Publishing Company.
Tivy, J
(1990) ‘Agricultural Ecology’ Longman Group (Ltd)UK.
Van der Werf,
H.M.G et al (1999) ‘Crop Physiology of Cannabis sativa L.: A
Simulation Study of Potential Yield of Hemp in Northwest Europe’ in Advances
in Hemp Research (Ed. Ranalli, P). Food Products Press (imprint of The
Hawthorn Press, Inc).
Verloo, M and
Willaert, G (1990) ‘Direct and Indirect Effects of
Fertilisation Practices on Heavy Metals in Plants and Soils’. In Fertilisation
and the Environment (Eds. Merckkx R., Vereecken H. and Vlassak K.) Leuven
University Press, Belgium.
Weerakoon,
W.M et al (1999) ‘Effects of nitrogen nutrition on responses of rice
seedlings to carbon dioxide’ Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment’
72, 1-8 cited on-line @ World Climate Report.
Http://
www.greeningearthsociety.org/climate/search/search.htm
Yassoglou,
N.J (1987) ‘The Production Potential of Soils: Part II - Sensitivity of the
Soil Systems in Southern Europe to Degrading Influences’. In
Scientific Basis for Soil Protection in the European Community (Eds.
Barth, H. & L'Hermite, P.) Elsevier Applied Science
Publishers Ltd., London.
Button Ads
Custom Search
