TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Re. Paper from poplars? From:jhedtke -at- OZ -dot- NET Date:Mon, 29 May 1995 20:16:38 PDT
Geoff, I can't be impressed with forestry in the state of Washington,
particularly with the loggers failing to understand that old-growth
forests don't grow back and they're going to be out of a job when
they cut it all down (funny how that works out). But you are
completely incorrect when you say that "You can't do away with
natural coniferous (evergreen) forests just yet." Hemp plants
produce 4 times as much paper fiber as trees and they are much
gentler on the soil. They also don't need bleaching, eliminating the
sulfur by-products that are most of the paper industry's pollution.
(N.B. Hemp also produces twice as much usable fiber as cotton,
20,000 pounds of usable protein/acre, and an effective petrochemical
alternative that will eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. It
prefers poor soil and sparse water and it grows almost anywhere.)
You might remember that the reason that hemp was criminalized was a
direct result of the development of a hemp-seed decorticator (sorta
like a cotton gin for hemp) that made it practical on an industrial
scale. A campaign was mounted by the timber, cotton, and
petrochemical industries to scare the populace into criminalizing it
by telling them "Reefer Madness" style stories of drug-crazed negroes
attacking their white daughters. The fact that Harry J. Anslinger,
first head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, was the son-in-law of
one of the timber barons musta just been a coincidence.
The Bush Administration admitted that cultivating hemp in this
country would indeed reduce industrial pollution (from paper and
cotton pollution) 50% and would, moreover, single-handedly reverse
the emission of greenhouse gasses. They then added "Too bad it's
illegal."
This is all probably getting *way* too far afield for this group, but
it's worth knowing, since we're communicators, what our history is so
we can come to an informed opinion.
Yours Truly,
John Hedtke
P.S. I strongly recommend a book entitled "Steal This Urine Test:
Fighting Drug Hysteria in America" for more information about this
topic. It'll be very enlightening.
