Industrial hemp was once a dominant crop on the American landscape. This hardy and renewable resource (one of the earliest domesticated plants known, with roots dating back to the Neolothic Age in China) was refined for various industrial applications, including paper, textiles, and cordage. Over time, the use of industrial hemp has evolved into an even greater variety of products, including health foods, organic body care, clothing, construction materials, biofuels, plastic composites and more (according to one source, more than 25,000 products can be made from hemp). In the U.S., the first hemp plantings were in Jamestown, Virginia, where growing hemp was actually mandatory. From then on hemp was used in everything from 19th century clipper ship sails to the covers of pioneer wagons. The Declaration of Independence was drafted on hemp paper, and even the finest Bible paper today remains hemp-based. English: Cultivation of industrial hemp for fi... Industrial hemp being grown for fiber and grain in France. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) In the early 20th century, hemp-derived cellulose was promoted as an affordable and renewable raw material for plastics; Henry Ford even built a prototype car from biocomposite materials, using agricultural fiber such as hemp. After that things started to go downhill. In 1937, the passage of “Marihuana Tax Act” occurred, and, despite the U.S. government’s “Hemp for Victory” campaign during World War II, misplaced fears that industrial hemp is the same as marijuana combined with targeted harassment by law enforcement discouraged farmers from growing hemp. The last crop was grown in Wisconsin in 1958, and by 1970 the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) formally prohibited cultivation (although the state of Hawaii is home to the first industrial hemp crop to be cultivated since the passage of the CSA). The Situation Today Sustainable hemp seed, fiber and oil are still used in raw materials by major companies, including Ford Motors, Patagonia, and The Body Shop, to make a wide variety of products. However, most hemp product manufacturers are forced to import hemp seed, oil and fiber from growers in Canada, Europe, and China because American farmers are prohibited by law from growing this low-input sustainable crop. In 2012 the U.S. hemp industry was valued at an estimated $500 million in annual retail sales and growing for all hemp products, according to the Hemp Industries Association, a non-profit trade organization consisting of hundreds of hemp businesses. Not only can hemp be used for an astonishing number of products, its net environmental benefit is impressive. Among the more salient features, hemp grows in a variety of climates and soil types, is naturally resistant to most pests, and grows very tightly spaced allowing it to outcompete most weeds. A natural substitute for cotton and wood fiber, hemp can also be pulped using fewer chemicals than wood because of its low lignin content. Its natural brightness can obviate the need to use chlorine bleach. Why is this incredible plant illegal? Because it is erroneously confounded with marijuana, and many policymakers believe that by legalizing hemp they are legalizing marijuana, which is not true. Canada, Britain, France, Germany, and Spain, along with over twenty other countries, cultivate and process industrial hemp without affecting the enforcement of marijuana laws. (More common misperceptions about hemp and factual rebuttals.) In fact, industrial hemp and marijuana are different breeds of Cannabis sativa; hemp has no value as a recreational drug. Actually smoking large amounts of hemp flowers can produce a significant headache, but not a high. To delve further in the details, in most western countries industrial hemp is distinguished from marijuana on the basis of THC (the chief intoxicant in marijuana) content, which allows the growing of industrial hemp for fiber and seed. Regulations in the E.U. and Canada (31 countries currently grow industrial hemp) limit THC levels in hemp flowers to 0.2 percent and 0.3 percent, respectively, and prevent attempts to camouflage marijuana in hemp fields. Comparatively, THC levels in marijuana flowers are generally between 3 percent and 15 percent. A hemp revival is beginning to gain momentum. Perception is beginning to shift in the U.S. Over the past several decades, there’s been a resurgence of interest in hemp by a diverse but increasingly politically influential and unified group of businesses, farmers, nutritionists, activists, and green consumers. What has to occur is a change in the federal policy to essentially revise the definition of “marijuana” so that the term excludes industrial hemp, and then enact specified procedures and requirements relating to growing industrial hemp and those who cultivate industrial hemp. “A change in federal policy to once again allow hemp farming would mean instant job creation, among many other economic and environmental benefits,” says Tom Murphy, the National Outreach Coordinator of Vote Hemp. Current Federal and State Legislative Progress The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2013 (H.R. 525) was recently introduced in the House with 28 original co-sponsors, and it was quickly joined by a companion bill in the Senate (S. 359) which was introduced by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR), Rand Paul (R-KY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), underscoring the bipartisan support around the hemp issue. If passed, the bills would remove federal restrictions on the domestic cultivation of industrial hemp, defined as the non-drug oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis. The full text of the bills, as well as status and co-sponsors, can be found online. H.R. 525 is the fifth bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in support of industrial hemp farming since the federal government outlawed it in the U.S. in 1971. At the state level, the first hemp bill was introduced in Colorado in 1995. To date, 31 states have introduced pro-hemp legislation and 19 have passed such legislation. Eight states (Colorado, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia) have defined industrial hemp as distinct and removed barriers to its production; Three states (Hawaii, Kentucky and Maryland) have passed bills creating commissions or authorizing hemp research; Nine states (California, Colorado, Illinois, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Vermont and Virginia) have passed hemp resolutions; and, Six states (Arkansas, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina and Vermont) have passed hemp study bills. However, despite state authorization to grow hemp, farmers in those states still risk raids by federal agents, prison time, and property and civil asset forfeiture if they plant the crop due to the failure of federal policy to distinguish non-drug oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis (i.e., industrial hemp) from psychoactive drug varieties (i.e., “marihuana”). The Future of Hemp in the U.S. Hemp is not a panacea for our social, economic, and environmental woes—no single crop can do that. However, as we transition to a future that embraces more sustainable agriculture practices industrial hemp can help lead the way. With focused and sustained research and development, hemp could spur dramatic positive ecological and economic benefits. For instance, renewable, fast-growing hemp is a substitute for many unsustainable products like non-organic cotton (which currently uses more than 25 percent of the world’s insecticides and more than 10 percentof the world’s pesticides) and many plastic products. In addition to supporting a federal policy change on industrial hemp, each of us can help grow the hemp marketplace by buying hemp products and also by staying informed and talking to our state and national representatives, and our friends and family, about the benefits of industrial hemp for the economy and the environment. – Logan Yonavjak is a freelance writer for Forbes, Ashoka Changemakers, and Nextbillion.net. The 4th Annual Hemp History Week will be held next week, June 3-9, 2013. “Modern Uses of Industrial Hemp” chart via [author_name] Logan Yonavjak FULL BIO 4/24/2014 @ 9:00PM|2,554 views How Private Capital Is Restoring U.S. Wetlands Share 3 Comments Wetlands are vibrant ecosystems that provide critical wildlife habitat, storm protection and water filtration. Between the mid-1950s and the mid-1970s, natural processes and human activities resulted in the net loss of more than 450,000 acres of wetlands annually. But by 2008, fewer than 18,000 acres per year were being lost, a 96 percent annual decrease. What happened? In a phrase, increased compliance with the national “no net loss of wetlands” principle that grew out the 1972 Clean Water Act. This landmark bill, and subsequent legislation, spurred the creation of “mitigation banks,” overseen by the Army Corp of Engineers, to finance wetlands restoration. By restoring wetlands, these banks create credits that developers, private and public, can buy to offset damage to wetlands caused by their projects. Because the system speeds the approval process — and time is money — developers are willing, if not happy, to buy mitigation credits. The developer payments in turn repay the private investors who front the money for banks’ restoration work. In the decades since the first commercial mitigation bank application in 1991, more than 1,900 mitigation banks have been established. By 2008, between $1.1 and $1.8 billion was being spent to restore functioning wetlands annually, protecting approximately 24,000 acres per year. Despite these gains, this approach is not a panacea; the loss of wetlands is still occurring at a significant rate. These losses are due to a number of different factors, including large-scale erosion and rising sea levels, particularly along coastal areas. However, the success of this model in wetlands restoration is a prime example of the role government policy can play in catalyzing private capital markets to meet environmental and social challenges. With government funding becoming more constrained, and limited philanthropic capital available, private capital is key to large-scale environmental protection and restoration. Beyond wetlands, mitigation banks exist to protect other natural resources, like species habitat, known as “conservation banking.” In all, 105 banks have been created, resulting in the protection of over 90,000 acres of habitat. Over the years, rules have been refined to better ensure ecological results. “If you’re going to allow people to buy mitigation credits to offset their impact, you better be sure that the credit they’re buying is actually making up for the impact,” says Adam Davis, a partner at Ecosystem Investment Partners, a private equity firm based in Baltimore that has raised more than $200 million and is financing restoration of more than 43,000 acres of wetlands. “However, if it is actually making up for the impact, then it’s a great solution, because it allows predictability for developers and it also creates incentives for restoration and conservation professionals.” Changing Perceptions In 2012, EIP closed its second fund, raising $181 million from pension funds, endowments, and high-net-worth family offices. Significantly, few were “impact” investors; instead, they were attracted to the consistent demand for mitigation credits from energy, infrastructure and other development projects, including government agencies that are required to offset impacts from projects. EIP combines conservation with market rate returns. Investors are overcoming their preconceptions about both conservation projects and deals that depend on government policy. “We need more success stories in the ecosystem markets space,” says Howard Kaplan, who advises institutional investors on real assets opportunities as president of Farmvest Inc. “EIP is a prime case of how a fund can raise $181 million, demonstrate how it can be deployed, and also show how the types of risks and returns private investors are looking for are possible.” The increasing flow of capital means more, and increasingly large-scale projects. EIP’s first four projects are restoring approximately 8,000 acres of wetlands. Its most recent four projects, in Minnesota, West Virginia, Louisiana and Kentucky, will restore over 35,000 acres and 100 miles of streams, including some of the largest private restoration projects in the country to date. Wetlands and stream mitigation banking represents perhaps the most mature of the new ecosystem markets and holds lessons for how policy can be a tool to enlist private capital to drive broader conservation and restoration results. “Consistent application of government policies can help,” Davis says, “but this will require more effort to help regulators realize private capital can really flow to solve major environmental problems.” In essence, policy has created a way to internalize what previously were considered economic “externalities.” Wetlands provide society with a wide range of critical ecosystem services, like water filtration; however, before the passage of the CWA, they were being degraded because there was no standard way to price them into the cost of development. Beyond Wetlands The lessons from wetland mitigation banking can be applied to other ecosystem markets; however, clear ecological success criteria, long-term outcomes, and appropriate financial backing are important requirements that may be tougher to meet in other contexts, such as habitat protection or nutrient trading. For instance, it is difficult to assess a farm’s reduction in “units” of nitrogen or phosphorous, which can cause algal blooms and other problems. Even wetlands restoration, the most mature of the ecosystem markets, isnt yet operating at scale. More investment options that meet the needs of Wall Street for quality management and deal size need to be developed. Still, EIPs recent successful fundraise indicates that institutional investors can participate as regulatory predictability improves. Experience and scale are critical to understanding the monetary value of a particular wetland mitigation project, which can be difficult for both entrepreneurs and their investors as they seek to perform assessments on individual projects. This means there are certain fixed costs involved in assessment and modeling for every deal. In addition, wetland credits can only be bought and sold in specific local watersheds. These watersheds vary by size and often have different regulators acting under different rules. Therefore, credit prices cannot really be compared across these regions. However, these markets have gotten considerably more transaction friendly in their 20-year existence. Going forward, there is an opportunity to p Now THIS Is What We Call Green Jobs: The Restoration Industry Restores The Environment And
Posted on: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 23:30:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015