The Cheapest Way to Save the Planet Grows Like a Weed

Planting billions of trees across the world is by far the cheapest and most efficient way to tackle the climate crisis. So states a July 4 article in The Guardian, citing a new analysis published in the journal Science. The author explains:

As trees grow, they absorb and store the carbon dioxide emissions that are driving global heating. New research estimates that a worldwide planting programme could remove two-thirds of all the emissions that have been pumped into the atmosphere by human activities, a figure the scientists describe as “mind-blowing”.

For skeptics who reject the global warming thesis, reforestation also addresses the critical problems of mass species extinction and environmental pollution, which are well documented. A 2012 study from the University of Michigan found that loss of biodiversity impacts ecosystems as much as climate change and pollution. Forests shelter plant and animal life in their diverse forms, and trees remove air pollution by the interception of particulate matter on plant surfaces and the absorption of gaseous pollutants through the leaves.

The July analytical review in Science calculated how many additional trees could be planted globally without encroaching on crop land or urban areas. It found that there are 1.7 billion hectares (4.2 billion acres) of treeless land on which 1.2 trillion native tree saplings would naturally grow. Using the most efficient methods, 1 trillion trees could be restored for as little as $300 billion – less than 2 percent of the lower range of estimates for the Green New Deal introduced by progressive Democrats in February 2019.

The Guardian quoted Prof. Tom Crowther at the Swiss university ETH Zürich, who said, “What blows my mind is the scale. I thought restoration would be in the top 10, but it is overwhelmingly more powerful than all of the other climate change solutions proposed.” He said it was also by far the cheapest solution that has ever been proposed. The chief drawback of reforestation as a solution to the climate crisis, per The Guardian, is that trees grow slowly. The projected restoration could take 50 to 100 years to reach its full carbon sequestering potential.

A Faster, More Efficient Solution

Fortunately, as of December 2018 there is now a cheaper, faster and more efficient alternative – one that was suppressed for nearly a century but was legalized on a national scale when President Trump signed the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018. This is the widespread cultivation of industrial hemp, the non-intoxicating form of cannabis grown for fiber, cloth, oil, food and other purposes. Hemp grows to 13 feet in 100 days, making it one of the fastest CO2-to-biomass conversion tools available. Industrial hemp has been proven to absorb more CO2 per hectare than any forest or commercial crop, making it the ideal carbon sink. It can be grown on a wide scale on nutrient poor soils with very small amounts of water and no fertilizers.

Hemp products can promote biodiversity and reverse environmental pollution by replacing petrochemical-based plastics, which are now being dumped into the ocean at the rate of one garbage truck per minute. One million seabirds die each year from ingesting plastic, and up to 90 percent have plastic in their guts. Microplastic (resulting from the breakdown of larger pieces by sunlight and waves) and microbeads (used in body washes and facial cleansers) have been called the ocean’s smog. They absorb toxins in the water, enter the food chain, and ultimately wind up in humans. To avoid all that, we can use plastic made from hemp, which is biodegradable and non-toxic.

Other environmental toxins come from the textile industry, which is second only to agriculture in the amount of pollution it creates and the voluminous amounts of water it uses. Hemp can be grown with minimal water, and hemp fabrics can be made without the use of toxic chemicals.

Environmental pollution from the burning of fossil fuels can also be reversed with hemp, which is more efficient and environmentally friendly even than wheat and corn as a clean-burning biofuel.

Hemp cultivation also encourages biodiversity in the soil, by regenerating farmland that has long been depleted from the use of toxic chemicals. It is a “weed” and grows like one, ubiquitously, beating out other plants without pesticides or herbicides; and its long tap root holds the soil, channeling moisture deeper into it. Unlike most forestry projects, hemp can be grown on existing agricultural land and included as part of a farm’s crop rotation, with positive effects on the yields and the profits from subsequent crops.

A Self-funding Solution

Hemp cultivation is profitable in many other ways – so profitable that it is effectively a self-funding solution to the environmental crisis. According to an April 2019 article in Forbes titled “Industrial Hemp Is the Answer to Petrochemical Dependency,” crop yields from hemp can range from $20,000 to $50,000 per acre. Its widespread cultivation can happen without government subsidies. Investment in research, development and incentives would speed the process, but market forces will propel these transformations even if Congress fails to act. All farmers need for incentive is a market for the products, which hemp legalization has provided. Due to the crop’s century-long suppression, the infrastructure to capitalize on its diverse uses still needs to be developed, but the infrastructure should come with the newly opened markets.

Hemp can break our dependency on petrochemicals not only for fuel but for plastics, textiles, construction materials and much more. It has actually been grown for industrial and medicinal purposes for millennia, and today it is legally grown for industrial use in hundreds of countries outside the US. Before the US ban, a 1938 article in Popular Mechanics claimed it was a billion-dollar crop (the equivalent of about $16 billion today), useful in 25,000 products ranging from dynamite to cellophane. New uses continue to be found, including eliminating smog from fuels, creating a cleaner energy source that can replace nuclear power, removing radioactive water from the soil, and providing a very nutritious food source for humans and animals. Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive derivative of hemp, has recently been shown to help curb opioid addiction, now a national epidemic.

Hemp can also help save our shrinking forests by eliminating the need to clear-cut them for paper pulp. According to the USDA, one acre planted in hemp produces as much pulp is 4.1 acres of trees; and unlike trees, hemp can be harvested two or three times a year. Hemp paper is also finer, stronger and lasts longer than wood-based paper. Benjamin Franklin’s paper mill used hemp. Until 1883, it was one of the largest agricultural crops (some say the largest), and 80 to 90% of all paper in the world was made from it.  It was also the material from which most fabric, soap, fuel and fiber were made; and it was an essential resource for any country with a shipping industry, since sails were made from it. In early America, growing hemp was considered so important that it was illegal for farmers not to grow it. Hemp was legal tender from 1631 until the early 1800s, and taxes could even be paid with it.

Banned by the Competition?

The competitive threat to other industries of this supremely useful plant may have been a chief driver of its apparently groundless criminalization in the 1930s. Hemp is not marijuana and is so low in psychoactive components that it cannot produce a marijuana “high.” It was banned for nearly a century simply because it was in the same plant species as marijuana. Cannabis came under attack in the 1930s in all its forms. Why? Hemp competed not only with the lumber industry but with the oil industry, the cotton industry, the petrochemical industry and the pharmaceutical industry. Many have speculated that it was suppressed by these powerful competitors.

William Randolf Hearst, the newspaper mogul, owned vast tracts of forest land, which he intended to use for making wood-pulp paper. Cheap hemp-based paper would make his forest investments a major money loser. Hearst was a master of “yellow journalism,” and a favorite target of his editorials was “reefer madness.” He was allied with the DuPont Corporation, which provided the chemicals to bleach and process the wood pulp used in the paper-making process. DuPont was also ready to introduce petroleum-based fibers such as nylon, and hemp fabrics competed with that new market.

In fact hemp products threatened the whole petroleum industry. Henry Ford first designed his cars to run on alcohol from biofuels, but the criminalization of both alcohol and hemp forced him to switch to the dirtier, less efficient fossil fuels that dominate the industry today. A biofuel-based infrastructure would create a completely decentralized power grid, eliminating the giant monopolistic power companies. Communities could provide their own energy using easily renewable plants.

None of this is new news. Hemp historians have been writing about hemp’s myriad uses and its senseless prohibition for decades. (See e.g. The Emperor Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer, 1992; Hemp for Victory: A Global Warming Solution by Richard Davis, 2009.) What is news is that hemp cultivation is finally legal across the country. The time is short to save the planet and its vanishing diversity of species. Rather than engaging in endless debates over carbon taxes and Silicon Valley-style technological fixes, we need to be regenerating our soils, our forests and our oceans with nature’s own plant solutions.

__________________________________

This article was first posted on Truthdig.com. Ellen Brown chairs the Public Banking Institute and has written thirteen books, including her latest, Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.

13 Responses

  1. […] Hemp cultivation is profitable in many other ways – so profitable that it is effectively a self-funding solution to the environmental crisis… (more). […]

  2. Ellen, don’t forget regenerative agriculture. It stores carbon in the soil at a massive scale and it does not require 10 calories of energy to produce 1 calorie of food, as opposed to industrial agriculture. And it is necessary, otherwise what’s left of humus will soon be completely eroded away. Listen to or read Joel Salatin from Polyface farm.

  3. Can I get an AMEN? I couldn’t have said it better myself, Ellen!

  4. As usual Ellen, your piece rocks! Was not aware it could be grown now legally. I hear a hemp-crete house gets stronger with age.

  5. *Great article, but will the Global Warming crowd move on it? The Sun is the main controller of the Planet’s temperature anyway and none of them seem to know this. It is about to go into a Solar Minimum for an 11-year cycle so temperatures should decrease.*

    *May The Force be with you,Bill*

    *William H. Warrick III MD (Retired)*

    *1729 NW 11th Rd*

    *Gainesville, Fl. 32605-5321* *Veterans For Peace, Chapter #01*

    *Auburn, Maine*

    *This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the National Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the retrieving or storing of this communication or any related metadata, as well as printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it. Any government employee who has sworn an Oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic that retrieves, reads, copies prints, re-transmits, disseminates, or uses it against me or the recipients is in violation of their Oath. If you believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it immediately*.

    On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 5:47 PM WEB OF DEBT BLOG wrote:

    > Ellen Brown posted: “Planting billions of trees across the world is by far > the cheapest and most efficient way to tackle the climate crisis. So states > a July 4 article in The Guardian, citing a new analysis published in the > journal Science. The author explains: As trees grow,” >

  6. Ellen, I was wondering what your thoughts are on having a Hemp Standard for our currency? That is, the dollar being backed by hemp to one degree or other, or at least defined in terms of units of hemp? Then money would literally grow on trees, lol. And since so much could be produced so quickly, it would still basically be a fiat currency in practice since it could easily grow along with the economy.

  7. Aloha. Excellent analysis; thanks! Here’s a supporting point of view.

  8. Sorry, but the only significant species loss can be categorized as subspecies on remote pacific islands. As far as climate change goes, the Greenland viking farms are still under ice in the summer months, not just on the southern tip, but including the farms 300 miles up the N.W. coast of Greenland. The forcing factor for CO2 is still logarithmic instead of linear, and if we burned every source of CO2 on the planet we still couldn’t get the level much over double, and that would only give us 1 extra degree of heat. We don’t need to plant extra trees, the little increase in CO2 we’ve achieved is already greening the planet.
    Plastic pollution is a problem, but wind and solar alternative energy is a huge bird killer.

    • Ah, I see the deniosaurs have entered this discussion. You seem to be ignoring the power of feedback loops. And solar and power need not kill birds–they now have bladeless “vortex” designs for wind turbines, while solar PV has always zero bird deaths, and as for concentrated solar power (CSP) plants they would simply need to reorient their mirrors a bit. That’s it. Not like the number of bird deaths from blade turbines was really ever any worse than those caused by skyscrapers, windows, cars, cats, cell towers, power lines, etc. And let’s not forget the #1 killer of birds: climate change itself.

  9. The problem with those feedback loops is every last one of them would have to be positive, not one negative feedback or that 0.04 % atmospheric trace gas won’t be able to drive that 4% water vapor to a higher temp. Never mind the water vapor already soaked up all available heat in the first place, and water vapor has this huge wide absorption spectrum while CO2 is just a couple of blips on the same graph. But keep dreaming, how many more decades of failed predictions before you give up?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: