bookmark_borderThe Hemp Myth, Carbon Sinks and the Environment

by Daniel Brouse and Sidd Mukherjee

Q: Is hemp a good solution for carbon sequestration (carbon sinks) and/or beneficial to the environment?

A: No, not really. In general, hemp only acts as a carbon sink while it is growing and left unharvested. The harvesting usually negates any net-negative carbon sink. (ie more CO2 is released in the harvesting than is being sequestered.) In addition, production of oil, pulp, fibers, or other products usually results in a large carbon footprint. Hemp is not known to be more efficient in the production of anything. It’s also important to note, plant based oils and alcohols result in more low level ozone than petroleum, not to mention, any carbon that is combusted is converted to CO2. Ozone is killing many trees and humans (Death By Ozone, 2016).

Q: Remember the awful hole in the ozone layer in the 80-90’s? Don’t we want more ozone?

A: No. Ozone is a volatile gas and changes form rapidly. In general, there are 2 types of ozone — Tropospheric and Stratospheric. Tropospheric is low level ozone and deadly to life on earth. Stratospheric is in the upper level atmosphere (stratosphere) that protects life on earth (The Ozone Know Zone, 2005).

Q: Won’t the carbon be sequestered in the fiber and stay there until it rots (and hemp is resistant to rotting)?

A: Saying the carbon will stay in the fiber is partially correct… it will also stay in the leaves and the roots. The leaves and roots will decay faster. But, as for the fibers, to harvest them takes more carbon than the carbon that is sequestered. In all cases of plants as carbon sinks, it does nothing to solve the problem of the CO2 in the atmosphere that was released by fossil fuels. Plants are just a temporary store for their own carbon. Trees absorb and release about the same amount of carbon over a 100-year cycle (with many shorter time cycles for the leaves — about 1-2 years.) Comparatively, hemp’s cycle is only a few years. Another important factor in calculating the length of time of a carbon sink with plants is that plants also breath: “Plants release up to 30 per cent more CO2 than previously thought.” During daylight and night there is the process of plant respiration in which plants breath in O2 and breath out CO2. This is different than during daylight hours when a separate process called photosynthesis takes in carbon dioxide and releases oxygen. Plants release up to 30 per cent more CO2 than previously thought, 2017)

Q: Would it is better to have tarmac than grow hemp? Even though hemp can replace petroleum-based plastic with biodegradable products?

A: No, not at all. We should plant as many plants with the longest sink-cycle (trees). Most importantly we should stop releasing CO2 that has been sequestered for millions of years. Then, we should figure how to re-sequester CO2 for millions of years.

Hemp has far more benefits and significantly less costs than petroleum products; however, agriculture in general has many costs (in fact, the invention of flooded rice paddy agriculture thousands of years ago in China was one of the first major human causes of climate change.” The origins of human-influenced climate change may be traced back 5,000 years“, 2004) Monoculture of hemp, corn, and other bio-fuels release all the CO2, create more ozone and require vast areas of land. Having a single crop produced in large scale has a devastating effect on biodiversity. Bio-plastics and other petroleum substitutes create the same sort of environmental problems. They don’t instantly bio-degrade. They initially breakdown into micro-bio-plastics.

The little live creatures on this planet have evolved for a couple billion years to eat what plants make — like carbohydrates. So, they eat carbohydrates much faster than they can eat hydrocarbons from fossil fuels. (But they are working on it, we already see evolution in that direction.)

Unfortunately, there are no good carbon sinks known to Man (other than petroleum / hydrocarbons.) The best solution is to stop human Green House Gas emissions. A study published in the Journal Nature, The contribution of insects to global forest deadwood decomposition found, “Worldwide, dead and decaying wood releases roughly 10.9 gigatons of carbon every year. This is roughly 115% of annual fossil fuel emissions.”

“We found both the rate of decomposition and the contribution of insects are highly dependent on the climate, and will increase as temperatures rise,” study co-author David Lindenmayer said.

At present, bio derived packaging is to be preferred to fossil derived packaging since the former made out of carbohydrate will break down faster than fossil derived hydrocarbon. More important, the bio derived packaging is only returning to the atmosphere recently obtained CO2, since the plants from where the packaging came would decay anyway. But, if fossil plastic decays, that’s dumping into the atmosphere fossil C which was buried hundreds of millions of years ago. Maybe it’s a good thing the little bugs haven’t yet found a widespread, efficient way to eat fossil plastic.

Relative to petroleum, plants are much more beneficial. Hydrocarbons have a much greater cost to the environment. Relative to trees, hemp is far more costly; however, the real solution is to cut down on packaging and consumption.

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

bookmark_borderEmissions Worst Ever

The World Meteorological Organization reported on October 30, 2017:
Greenhouse gas concentrations surge to new record

Green-House-Gas-Bulletin-2017.pdf

Concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere surged at a record-breaking speed in 2016 to the highest level in 800,000 years, according to the World Meteorological Organization’s Greenhouse Gas Bulletin. The abrupt changes in the atmosphere witnessed in the past 70 years are without precedent.

Globally averaged concentrations of CO2 reached 403.3 parts per million in 2016, up from 400.00 ppm in 2015 because of a combination of human activities and a strong El Niño event. Concentrations of CO2 are now 145% of pre-industrial (before 1750) levels, according to the Greenhouse Gas Bulletin.

Rapidly increasing atmospheric levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have the potential to initiate unprecedented changes in climate systems, leading to “severe ecological and economic disruptions,” said the report.

The annual bulletin is based on observations from the WMO Global Atmosphere Watch Programme. These observations help to track the changing levels of greenhouse gases and serve as an early warning system for changes in these key atmospheric drivers of climate change.

Population growth, intensified agricultural practices, increases in land use and deforestation, industrialization and associated energy use from fossil fuel sources have all contributed to increases in concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere since the industrial era, beginning in 1750.

Since 1990, there has been a 40% increase in total radiative forcing – the warming effect on our climate – by all long-lived greenhouse gases, and a 2.5% increase from 2015 to 2016 alone, according to figures from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration quoted in the bulletin.

“Without rapid cuts in CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, we will be heading for dangerous temperature increases by the end of this century, well above the target set by the Paris climate change agreement,” said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas. “Future generations will inherit a much more inhospitable planet, “ he said.

“CO2 remains in the atmosphere for hundreds of years and in the oceans for even longer. The laws of physics mean that we face a much hotter, more extreme climate in the future. There is currently no magic wand to remove this CO2 from the atmosphere,”said Mr Taalas.

The last time the Earth experienced a comparable concentration of CO2 was 3-5 million years ago, the temperature was 2-3°C warmer and sea level was 10-20 meters higher than now.

In a separate report, the United Nations (UN) released the Emissions Gap Report for 2017. The report concludes that world treaties are only slowing emissions by 1/3 of what is needed to meet the maximum 2 degree rise in temperature. A 2 degree Celsius rise in temperature would likely cause a 20-40 foot rise in sea levels.

Emissions-Gap-Report_2017.pdf

If the trend continues, most coastal and port cities (including the Jersey Shore and Philadelphia) will be submerged in your lifetime.

2 Degree Temp. Rise and Sea Level Rise
2 Degree Temp. Rise and Sea Level Rise
New Jersey Shore Under Sea Level
New Jersey Shore Under Sea Level

bookmark_borderFirst Global Pollution Tax

The United Nations’ aviation agency (International Civil Aviation Organization) approved the initial steps in implementing a worldwide tax on greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes. If the proposal gets accepted, it would take effect in 2022.

The European Union had been seeking a more robust agreement:
“While we would have liked more countries to accept our regional scheme, progress was made overall,” the EU’s Climate Change Commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, said in a statement. “We will now factor this in when, together with the member states and the European Parliament, we decide on the way forward with the EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme).”

At least the United Nations initiative would invoke the first global effort to reduce greenhouse gases and hopefully pave the way for reductions in other industries.

More on taxing pollution.
More on global warming.

bookmark_borderTax Pollution

One of the only taxes that makes sense is a pollution tax. A progressive income tax is perhaps the worst type of taxation. Why would you want to tax people for being productive… then, tax them higher the more productive they are?

These countries currently have taxes on carbon emissions: Australia, India, South Korea, Japan, Europe (28 countries), Finland, The Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, UK, Ireland, Costa Rica, South Africa, New Zealand.

Why doesn’t the United States have a pollution tax?

More about emissions trading.

Help stop global warming.