I don’t suppose you would like to share a cite for that comment, particularly the part about medical marijuana.
:dubious: Soybeans are arguably superior, containing more protein, fewer calories, way less fat, and more fiber, though admittedly lacking in Omega-3’s. Mix in some flaxseed and you’re good to go. Plus I know both of those taste good.
Right same with hemp as cloth. Mind you, I disagree in that Hemp* is* economically viable- but only as a niche market.
It’s not regressive US laws that make it so, it’s just economics.
Well, yeah, OK. Hemp is economically viable in the same way that handmade clothes are economically viable and transporting goods by horse-drawn wagons is economically viable. These things are viable in the sense that some people will pay a premium to have them done. They are not viable in the more usual sense of being competitive against any alternatives in the open market.
And quality. It may be possible to economically make airplanes out of hemp, but the quality is so crap that nobody would want one if there were alternative available. Even at premium prices hemp can’t compete in most markets because it isn’t very good at anything. It’s a crop that is mediocre for all sorts of things, which makes it ideal or subsistence farmers and worthless industrial farming in a world with a highly developed trade network.
Apparently hemp is the best stuff for sailcloth. But still- a niche market.
That may have been true historically, but I find it really hard to believe that any natural fiber is better than modern synthetics such as Kevlar, let alone the more exotic materials used in top class racing yachts.
We discussed the subject of medical marijuana in this thread, and IIRC you were a participant in the discussion. Several cites there - I won’t repost them, but the consensus seems to be what I said - marijuana’s uses as a medicine are limited and overhyped.
Regards,
Shodan
I saw hemp granola in Whole Foods this week. It looked just like bags of you_know_what.
Even IF it were 100% true (it’s not) that hemp disappeared in the United States solely because the evil William Randolph Hearst campaigned against it, wouldn’t dozens of OTHER countries have continued to grow massive quantities of the stuff, if it were truly the miracle crop its advocates insist it is?
Hearst had no sway in Europe or Asia or South America. Why didn’t huge numbers of farmers there keep growing it?
Nope. Hemp plants are grown very close together, with tall thin stalks up to 12 feet high. Marijuana plants are short and bushy, to encourage budding.
This is the best article if you’re interested
I’m surprised to see no mention of rope, which I would have thought to be historically the most important use of hemp. I don’t know if hemp would still be economically viable as a source of natural fiber for rope, though.
If not for the prohibition in this country, it’s possible the use of hemp might have developed more. Hemp flocking is probably as good as cotton or other fibers for instance. But that would only be a secondary market assuming there were enough primary uses for hemp. The fiber doesn’t have any magical properties that would make it a strong competitor against other natural and synthetic fibers. The magic doesn’t come from the fiber.
It’s not a bad thing (IMO) to legalize the stuff so people can get wasted. It’s a bad thing to pretend it’s good for much else. Again, IMO.
One ought not to push marijuana (for instance) as an anti-nausea agent if there are better alternatives available.
If it were up to me, I would make the stuff legal to cultivate, use or sell, for anyone over 21, but not because I thought there was a huge untapped market for hemp clothes or breakfast cereal. I just think people should be able to get toasted if they want to, and it’s probably better for you than being an alcoholic.
But it’s not up to me.
Regards,
Shodan
The reason we don’t use hemp rope these days is mainly that nylon is lighter and stronger and doesn’t rot, so it wouldn’t be economically feasible to produce hemp rope even if the raw materials can be had for next to nothing.
Actually I do agree. Dishonesty isn’t a good thing. But until this thread I hadn’t thought of it as anything more than a joke. However, if people actually believe that the useful qualities of hemp are more than political artifacts, then it’s not a good idea.
Other synthetics like polypropylene and Dacron are used for various purposes as well. Preventing rot is why hemp ropes were tarred, which is messy and inconvenient. Even considering natural fibers, manila is more resistant to water damage, and was often preferred to hemp. Manila may sometimes be called “manila hemp” but it is actually a different plant (a relative of the banana, actually).
What Procrutes said, on preview.
Legalizing fiber hemp, from the perspective of MJ legalization supporters, could conceivably help to move all cannabis towards greater general acceptability.
Ah. Incitament is the swedish (you were not far off) word for incentive, thanks for fighting my ignorance w/r/t english.
That’s why I asked. I’m in favor of legalising both hemp and cannabis, but I don’t want to believe dishonest claims just because they support my standpoint.
Concrete is great for compressive strength, but it’s rather lacking in tensile strength (meaning it’s fairly easy to pull it apart). So the overall structural usefulness of concrete can be improved by mixing in fibers of something with high tensile strength. I doubt that hemp would really be the best choice of fiber for that job, but that’s the idea.
Like rebar. 