Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Possible Graphene Alternative Made From Hemp Waste

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the natural-alternative dept.

Science 212

MTorrice writes "A low-cost chemical process can turn hemp fiber into carbon nanomaterials. Researchers used the materials to make devices called supercapacitors that provide quick bursts of electrical energy. Supercapacitors made with the hemp nanosheets put out more power than commercial devices can." According to one of the authors, "Hemp bast is a nanocomposite made up of layers of lignin, hemicellulose, and crystalline cellulose ... If you process it the right way, it separates into nanosheets similar to graphene." Perhaps the process could be applied to related plants (hops?) too.

cancel ×

212 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Pot solves everything (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733353)

If only pot were legal, and free, we could all just sit around getting high all the time and the world would be a better place. Government will provide what we need by taking it from evil rich people.

Yay, free pot!

Re:Pot solves everything (5, Interesting)

KGIII (973947) | about a year ago | (#43733771)

Pot. Is there anything it can't do? /might be a little high right now actually

Re:Pot solves everything (5, Funny)

isorox (205688) | about a year ago | (#43734105)

Pot. Is there anything it can't do? /might be a little high right now actually

It can't call the kettle black.

Re:Pot solves everything (3, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#43733803)

Plot twist: Marijuana summons Cthulhu to destroy the world. The "assholes" knew this whole time, they genuinely were acting in our best interests. Had they told us the reason why they wanted it illegal, we'd laugh them off. They were hoping we could get to the point where we could fight back, sometime in 2050, but no, the dirty hippies won and we were no match for the ancient ones.

Re:Pot solves everything (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733917)

Or, alternatively (and quite possibly much more likely), the a**holes are in league with Cthulhu, and are keeping cannabis illegal so we don't find out the truth - that they ARE the bloodsucking minions of evil.

Marijuana? (1)

mi (197448) | about a year ago | (#43733355)

I wonder, if marijuana plants can be used for same... A close enough relative to hemp for the latter to be banned in some places...

Re:Marijuana? (3, Funny)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43733413)

They're the same species, so yeah, probably close enough.

Re:Marijuana? (4, Interesting)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733535)

Indeed, it's the same plant in the same way that a Yorkshire Terrier is the same animal as a Golden Retriever. Only through selective breeding did they reduce the THC concentrations low enough that the plants couldn't be practically used for psychoactive contents.

Re:Marijuana? (4, Funny)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43733565)

And when you make them into hot dogs, they all taste relatively the same.

Re:Marijuana? (3, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#43733673)

And when you make them into hot dogs, they all taste relatively the same.

Yeah, people get the munchies when they are stoned.

Don't look at your dog that way when you get high.

Dogs can sense when someone is thinking about eating them.

Re:Marijuana? (3, Informative)

TrentTheThief (118302) | about a year ago | (#43733611)

And since all this process requires are the stalks, then for all intents and purposes, yes. It is the same plant.

The buds, which have recreational and medicinal uses aren't being used. The key word there is lignin. They're using the long, fiberous material not the buds.

Re:Marijuana? (3, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733619)

And just like those two Canis Lupus Familiaris any two Cannabis Sativa plants will breed and are thus one species.

Actually hemp production focused far more on producing good fiber than reducing THC content. At least until very recently. The THC reduction was just a side effect no one cared about, not until we started having modern drug laws anyway.

Re:Marijuana? (1)

sosume (680416) | about a year ago | (#43734039)

More as in golden retriever vs labrador retriever .. cannabis sativa and cannabis indica.

Re:Marijuana? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733451)

but those plants are much smaller than industrial hemp. If your concern is to make clothing and other fiber products, you don't have much use for MJ as a feed stock

Re:Marijuana? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733505)

Only when they grow it indoors.

It is the exact same plant, cannabis sativa.

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733631)

And indica, and ruderalis.

Re:Marijuana? (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733649)

Those are not generally used for hemp. The last one is way too short.

The common cannabis used for both medical/recreational use and hemp was what I was speaking about.

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733485)

So close is the same damn thing!

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733513)

It's the same plant, it's just a matter of THC content in any particular strain.

Another reason America can fuck right off.

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733587)

Banned in some places, like the entire US of A, except with a difficult to get permit. What a ridiculous country!

Re:Marijuana? (5, Insightful)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733717)

Entire? Not quite. It's been discussed here plenty for you to already know that there are states that have enacted legalization.

Colorado even just recently approved the regulatory structure for stores selling pot products [denverpost.com] .

You may certainly continue to believe what you want to believe, it's just fictional.

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733811)

Irrelevant. We're talking about industrial hemp here, not pot. Yes, they are the same species, but they are not the same thing and do not serve the same purpose as a crop. Industrial hemp is still mostly illegal across the board, and yes, this is ridiculous.

Re:Marijuana? (2)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733853)

Amendment 64 also doesn't require Colorado farmers to seek federal approval before growing hemp. But that doesn't mean the feds couldn't crack down if they wanted to.

This is no different than those growing for medical and recreational purposes. Yes, the DEA can crack down if they want to, but it's not going to do any good in the long run.

Re:Marijuana? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733875)

There is a farmer in Colorado that has started raising industrial hemp. I don't know how many others will follow suit considering there is a potential market for hemp based products but not materialized demand. As industrial hemp production grows so will its uses and demand, but right now I don't expect production to boom.

Re:Marijuana? (2)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43734089)

I'm pretty sure there is plenty of demand considering anyone producing hemp products domestically (shirts, shoes, twine, etc) has to import their hemp from Canada, UK, etc.

Which makes me wonder, if hemp is a class 1 controlled substance and is therefore illegal to grow, how is it that some hippy in the hills is able to import it from other countries?

Re:Marijuana? (2)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733831)

Also, here is a good article from a local magazine discussing the hemp industry here in Colorado. Westword [westword.com]

Amendment 64 also doesn't require a federal permit to grow industrial hemp (as other states have done), so as it stands right now, go right ahead and grow it knowing that yours may be the landmark case that allows others to cultivate in the future.

Re:Marijuana? (3, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43733881)

Yeah, but if you get such a store, you'll lose your KFC.

It's an unfair trade.

Re:Marijuana? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733599)

They're the same plant. Hemp (both industrial and medicinal strains) were banned because:
a) there was hysteria over growing opium addiction, and the confusion about hashish (which was, at the time, a foreign and relatively unknown substance) lead some people to believe it was a form of opium
b) it threatened the massive paper and fibre industries
c) the 'top' media entrepreneurs at the time had investments in (b) and used their media empires to stoke the fear surrounding (a) to see hemp banned in the US alongside opium; then other countries followed because of the pressure put upon them by the US government

A classic story of capital triumphing over Good Things.

Re:Marijuana? (3)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about a year ago | (#43733943)

On the contrary, the real reason marijuana is illegal is due to the huge benefits of hemp and relative cheapness/ease of growth. Corporate lobbying strikes again (or struck, back in the 1930's). Do some research if you're completely lost on what I'm referring to here (I'm sure the majority are).

Great! (4, Funny)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year ago | (#43733361)

My ashtray is full of carbon nanomaterials stemming from hemp products.

Am I rich now?

Re:Great! (4, Funny)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43733423)

I've already patented the process you're alluding to.

Re:Great! (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#43733427)

Depends on how much of the raw material for your carbonized hemp nanomaterials you can produce and distribute. Folks who manage to efficiently ramp production of such materials up to industrial scales with proper distribution networks do indeed get quite rich --- but just having a lab prototype rarely makes researchers much money.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733609)

*blows smoke over your head*

Re:Great! (5, Funny)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#43733815)

No, your tech is all vaporware.

Re:Great! (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about a year ago | (#43733909)

Took me a second to see you already beat me to the punchline and even executed it much better. All carbon is burned up.

Re:Great! (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about a year ago | (#43733899)

Ashes white-colored because the carbon has combined with oxygen and flown away. You have no carbon materials of any kind there.

Nah. (0)

MouseTheLuckyDog (2752443) | about a year ago | (#43733379)

The researchers was just so high they think they did it. They didn't realize they failed miserably.

wait for it... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733425)

legalize it!!
Hemp growing is illegal in the US despite the numerous benefits it can provide

maybe its time to stop letting big business create laws that exist only to benefit their profit margins

Re:wait for it... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733443)

United States

Colorado [79], Vermont, and North Dakota have passed laws enabling hemp licensure. Both states are waiting for permission to grow hemp from the DEA. Currently,[when?] North Dakota representatives are pursuing legal measures to force DEA approval.[80] Oregon has licensed industrial hemp as of August 2009.[81] Hemp is not legal to grow in the U.S. under Federal law because of its relation to marijuana, and any imported hemp products must meet a zero tolerance level. It is considered a controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91-513; 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Some states have made the cultivation of industrial hemp legal, but these states — North Dakota, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, California, Montana, West Virginia and Vermont — have not yet begun to grow it because of resistance from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.[82]

undoing mod (2)

hoboroadie (1726896) | about a year ago | (#43733531)

N/T
Fuck touchscreen, fuck autospell.

Re:undoing mod (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year ago | (#43733701)

If you had included "The King" you would've fully channeled The Hound.

Re:wait for it... (2)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a year ago | (#43733597)

Colorado [79], Vermont, and North Dakota have passed laws enabling hemp licensure. Both states are waiting...

So three states equals 2? Is that some kind of bong math?

Re:wait for it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43734019)

wikipedia math
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

the excerpt was copied from their artice

Re:wait for it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43734027)

It's bong grammar, dude.

Re:wait for it... (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about a year ago | (#43733457)

More likely, these supercapacitors will be outlawed in the US because they "contain drugs".

Re:wait for it... (2)

zlives (2009072) | about a year ago | (#43733813)

nope they will require a prescriptioin and be sold by big pharma for pile o profits

Re:wait for it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733637)

Do you really think that growing hemp could really provide more jobs than the ones that are created by outlawing it and anything similar to it? Unless you want to add more than a million people to the list of the unemployed (by releasing convicts and firing cops and prison guards), then you need to think a little more carefully. Right now these undesirables are keeping your wages high. Let them out and the competition might put YOU into the poorhouse.

Re:wait for it... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733879)

i'll take my tax dollars spent on this BS back thank you. the for profit incarceration business model is a crime against humanity. i will be glad when its shut down.

its this high taxation for BS wars, BS military build up on equipment even the military doesn't want, thats putting ME in the poor house.

interesting stuff, but misleading (5, Informative)

geoskd (321194) | about a year ago | (#43733463)

They did in fact create a system that puts out more instantaneous energy per unit weight, but that is not the improvement that super capacitors need. They have improved gravimetric power density. The two measures that need improvement to make super capacitors more useful are gravimetric energy density (how much energy can it store in a given weight), and volumetric energy density. How much energy can it store in a given volume. Without significant improvements in those two areas, super capacitors cannot make significant inroads against batteries.

It should also be noted that super capacitors already have better power density than chemical batteries by a wide margin, and are more than sufficient to replace I.C. engines and gasoline in that respect.

Re:interesting stuff, but misleading (2)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43734153)

It should also be noted that super capacitors already have better power density than chemical batteries by a wide margin, and are more than sufficient to replace I.C. engines and gasoline in that respect.

On the other hand they don't provide yet another excuse to incorporate hemp into yet another product or process. I consider hemp to be a sort of "wonder" material, as in, "I wonder what they'll try to put hemp in next just because they can.*" Oh, look! Another item with hemp in it! Surely US hemp policy must be changed now! No doubt it is a useful material, but it is easy to get the impression that hemp advocates are trying just a little too hard. It's also funny how the hemp advocacy often seems to run in parallel with certain other policy advocacy.

* Hemp trousers. Hemp ice cream, hemp sandwich cookies, hemp milk. Hemp capacitors. Really now.

always amusing (0)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733481)

anytime an application needing plant fiber comes along, there's always a group that starts extolling the virtues of hemp for the purpose, because they want industrial hemp to be in common use to hide their short high-THC subspecies of the stuff. Never mind there is ALWAYS other plants with higher yield per acre for any purpose and for any climate, especially in the USA. Just give it up, you silly potheads.

Re:always amusing (1)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43733533)

We should also standardize around a single food crop. Why are we wasting so much time/money/space with variety. The government should mandate that we all have to eat that protein goop from the Matrix movies.

Re:always amusing (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#43733707)

Done. Well, two crops --- corn and soy, to cover sugar, fat, and protein. And we don't even have to wait for government mandates --- private industry has taken the lead in pushing the entire food supply towards a processed corn/soy goop monoculture.

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733545)

1. It is not a subspecies. It is the same plant, just different strains. Just like different kinds of tomatoes.

2. You cannot hide high THC plants in a hemp field. The hemp plants will fertilize and thus ruin the high THC plants. This is why male plants are culled early in illicit grow operations. Growing hemp outdoors on an industrial scale would probably make most illicit outdoor growth impossible for just that reason.

Re:always amusing (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733661)

you could hide them in properly designed tanks in a building that was also used for industrial hemp research.

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733709)

You could hide them in a closet too. Your idea is no better than that. There will not be very many places growing hemp indoors for research, nor would it be practical for much illicit production to be done there.

You could make meth in a college chemistry lab, does not mean it is very common nor going to supply many users.

Your coworkers/students would soon notice what you are doing.

Re:always amusing (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733761)

you forget we're talking of the reasonings of a third party, not about what would actually work or be logical

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733787)

Yes, a third party who wants to commit a crime and get away with it.

Illicit drug production is big business. These folks are not interested in growing 1 plant in the middle of a lab. If they wanted to do that they would just tinfoil a closet.

Re:always amusing (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733897)

Illicit drug production is big business.

I provide care for those who are terminally ill, you insensitive clod!

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733945)

Then I assume your production is legal in your state, but sadly not in your country.

I hope that this becomes legal medically as well as recreationally.

Right now most of the production/trafficking is big business for various groups. At least those in your care can be certain you are not spraying only FSM knows what for mites. If you are doing that, stop.

Re:always amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43734145)

An absurd "crime." We need to drop the politics and bigotry and legalize marijuana. It's an embarrassment that we continue Nixon's drug war to this day.

Re:always amusing (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733697)

biology is divided on the "subspecies" vs. varieties issue, see wikipedia for Cannabis

Re:always amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733765)

Pollination doesn't "ruin" a high-THC plant, merely cause it to generate seeds along with flowers. You get less useful pharmaceutical material but it isn't ruined by any means.

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733809)

It ruins it from a sales perspective.

Other than high schoolers no one is buying this product with seeds in it. At least they did not when I was in college.

Re:always amusing (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43733921)

Actually, there are often seeds when you buy from a dispensary here in Colorado. I'm not sure if this is because the plant actually produced those seeds, or if it is because they are simply including them as a free gift with purchase.

Don't matter much to me, they will still grow when watered.

Re:always amusing (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43733931)

I have not had any interest in it since college, but you basically could not sell that on the campus I went too. People just would not purchase anything with seeds. It was used at some parties to roll 1/8 blunts, but other than for pranks like that it was considered too low grade to consider useful.

Re:always amusing (2)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43734025)

Well, that's just incorrect these days. Yes, a lot of the pot from the 90's and 00's was considered "not good" if it had seeds. Nowadays, most pot is pretty damn good. If there are a few seeds because the plant hermaphrodized, then not a big deal.

Re:always amusing (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year ago | (#43733625)

You're right. The correct thing to do is openly advocate for legal recreational Cannabis. There are absolutely no sensible arguments against it, which is why the government won't even discuss the issue.

Re:always amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733741)

which is why the government won't even discuss the issue.

I think you are somewhat mistaken:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_US_state

Re:always amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733633)

If anyone wants proof:

If you favorite plant was so good, then why doesn't industry use it?

If it were that good, they'd just lobby for it's use.

I once asked a Georgia Pacific engineer why they aren't using hemp for their products.

I got an ear .... no book full.

I wish some GP'er would write book or something and put these "Hemp is our saviour" myths to rest.

No, really, if it were cheaper and less resource consuming they'd do it- it's actually MORE water consuming. I'm assuming expense doesn't matter because it costs more too.

Convincing multiplicities that a water sucking paper plant is in their best interests is a very time consuming and expensive project. If they could say "Here we're suing hemp and everything is A-O-K!" they would. Really. There is no conspiracy with industry. It's just ignorant politicians listening to ignorant people - with Bibles. - that's redundant, I know.

Re:always amusing (1)

kimvette (919543) | about a year ago | (#43733687)

Funny, I have read most of the Bible and I never came across any commandment saying "thou shall not toke it up at 4:20"

Re:always amusing (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43733729)

there are verses saying to be sober though

if you want a boring life you could obey them

Re:always amusing (2)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#43733837)

There are also verses about partying down with plenty of booze --- after all, a certain Nazarene carpenter's son's first biblical miracle was making sure a wedding party wouldn't run out of wine *after the guests were already pretty soused*. The overall message one might take away from the scriptures is "there are times to be sober, and times to not."

Re:always amusing (5, Interesting)

kimvette (919543) | about a year ago | (#43734011)

Agreed.

As a Christian I am constantly appalled by idiots who cherry-pick verses out of context to support their prejudices. I don't think having a good time at a party (or at the wedding you referred to) is equivalent to being a drunkard. People who take verses to support their own biases, ignoring the context and what is actually being said make all Christians look bad.

Re:always amusing (2)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43733715)

If Linux is truly superior, then why isn't everyone using it? Surely Microsoft would jump all over that bandwagon.

Re:always amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733919)

IT people around the world use Linux to power their servers. The result is superior up time and fewer crashed. MS Windows code works well, it's just never improved upon like Linux is and is more error and bug prone.

Re:always amusing (1)

KGIII (973947) | about a year ago | (#43733955)

I'm not positive if they do now but they did, at one time, run their mail servers on *NIX. I'm actually willing to hazard a guess that they're using it all over the place over there. However they're not selling it for consumers because they don't see it as best suited for their customers. We can quantify what is best scientifically for things that hemp might be useful for. OSes are subjective mostly with huge weighty lists of pros and cons. I think the term is false equivalency.

Re:always amusing (1)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43734003)

it's actually MORE water consuming.

More than what, a Yucca plant? Than what is needed to product polyester?

Greeley, Colorado, an agricultural locale that would likely be a good place to grow hemp, receives a little over 14 inches of rain per year, while the water requirements for hemp are shown to be right in that range (12-14 inches/year). It's really not all that different from corn.

Re:always amusing (2)

Animats (122034) | about a year ago | (#43733807)

anytime an application needing plant fiber comes along, there's always a group that starts extolling the virtues of hemp for the purpose,

If you just need biomass for something, there's lots of agricultural waste around. Find a use for straw, or corn husks and cobs, or bagasse (the leftover part of sugar cane). There are other long bast fibers available commercially - jute (used to make burlap), flax (used to make linen), and kenaf (sometimes used to make paper). For even longer fibers, there are plants from the banana family, such as abaca (once called "manila hemp", but it's unrelated) and sisal, which make good rope.

There's a lot of cellulose out there, waiting for someone to come up with a process for making ethanol from cellulose cheaply. There are processes that work, but they still cost too much.

Re:always amusing (1)

KGIII (973947) | about a year ago | (#43733967)

I wonder if the Manila hemp lead to the myth that one could get high smoking banana peels?

Re:always amusing (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#43733885)

Yeah, I'm sure that the potheads would rather go through all sorts of rigamarole to get legal hemp when they can just live in Colorado or Washington and have as much actual pot as they'd like without worrying about it. They're well on their way to making pot legal throughout the country. There's also absolutely no evidence that potheads have any serious difficulty in acquiring pot. That makes the "well, it's industrial hemp really" argument completely pointless.

And hemp does appear to be useful for a lot of things, including cordage, beer, plastics, building material, and clothing. The market has spoken, and made hemp cultivation a profitable business in places that allow it to exist.

And for the record, I've never toked the reefer myself.

Charges good, man. (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#43733499)

"Supercapacitors made with the hemp nanosheetsput out more power
than commercial devices can."

Wow! How high does the charge get?

Re:Charges good, man. (2)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#43733851)

Depends on how long the material is pulled and the girth of the feedstock.

And a use for kudzu, too! (3, Interesting)

jfengel (409917) | about a year ago | (#43733583)

The wiki link to "bast" refers to a dozen species that produce basts, including flax, wisteria, mulberry, and kudzu.

Is there a reason to go for hemp in particular, aside from the usual hemp-will-solve-everything? Flax is also produced in industrial quantities. TFA doesn't mention why they chose hemp bast.

Look, I'm all for legalized weed and hate the propaganda that makes it out as a devil drug, but I'm not any bigger fan of exaggerations about the wonders of hemp. At least on this web site, it would be nice to look at actual data, rather than who can out-propagandize everybody else.

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733675)

TFA doesn't mention why they chose hemp bast.

I can think of one reason why they chose it...

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733683)

Oh, you're so balanced.

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733731)

Hemp has been bred to make ideal fiber in minimal footprint. Just because something is used as propaganda, it does not magically become false.

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (1)

ScentCone (795499) | about a year ago | (#43733901)

Just because something is used as propaganda, it does not magically become false.

Well that's just, like, your opinon, man.

True, though. But this is still just about stoners looking for another avenue. A familiar refrain from the crowd that thinks they'd be better off with a tires, a spouse, underwear, and air craft carriers all made out of hemp.

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#43733935)

"Ideal" is an overstatement --- it's a good fiber for some applications, but not magically universally optimal. Consider the pattern of hemp use versus alternate fibers in plenty of (historical and present) societies where marijuana prohibition is/was not a determining factor: while hemp was prized for certain applications (such as nautical ropes and cables, due to good strength and weather/wear resistance), those societies *also* produced a wide variety of alternate fibers (cotton, linen, silk, wool, etc.) for other uses. If hemp was "ideal," then every other fiber source would have been driven out of wide-scale production long ago.

Re:And a use for kudzu, too! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733957)

So the argument is "hemp solves everything" just like he said? Your reason says that it's useful not that it's the best which was the question. What makes hemp better than kudzu (also known as ko-hemp)? He didn't say that hemp wasn't any good only that there are other plants that could be used for industrial purposes as well so why are those automatically out and hemp is in?

I would think kudzu for industrial applications would be best. Let's face it, that stuff is the closest thing we have to a living super being. After the imminent nuclear winter there will only be two things living: 1. cockroaches, 2. kudzu. We'll have nuclear kudzu eating cockroaches or maybe nuclear cockroach eating kudzu. And to be fair, kudzu is currently used to make things, but when hemp is discussed it's treat as though it's the only plant in the world that will work. We've got all these other plants that we can use, but no, hemp or all is lost.

From Hops too!? (1)

Chiminea (696521) | about a year ago | (#43733629)

OMG not the hops too! Think of the children!

Knock Knock (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733643)

Worse case Ontario, we just get drunk as fuck, and sell some super catastrophers at the mall for 12 bucks a gram. This isn't rocket appliance here, boys.

Ugh, potheads (3, Insightful)

Zadaz (950521) | about a year ago | (#43733721)

For all I know this is valid scientific research. But I can't even be bothered to find out because potheads have stigmatized hemp. "Dude, do you know hemp is 85% more efficient biomass than bacon?" "You know that hemp fibers can be turned into inferior yet expensive paper, right?" "Hemp-o-lene, it's either hemp biofuel or something you jump on." Which all are quite obviously thin excuses to grow more "medicinal"* hemp.

And hemp is a pretty great material, but every time I see an article that talks about a new industrial use I can't help thinking it comes from the same people who giggle when they hear "420" and snerk when they mention how they're into 'hydroponics'.

Seriously folks, if you want me to take you (hemp or pot smokers) seriously you need to clean up your game. Don't smoke a bowl on April 20th, instead bring to my attention how we really don't know the medical properties of cannabis because of government overregulation (or whatever, anything that has real promise to someone who has no interest in smoking pot.)

*Medicine is sold at drug stores, not in shadowy places with a bouncer at the door and punny names like "Grass Roots Clinic" or "Foggy Daze Dispensary".

Re:Ugh, potheads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43733855)

At present, this comment is directly above Oscar Wilde's quote "He hadn't a single redeeming vice."

I've seldom seen a more appropriate juxtaposition

Re:Ugh, potheads (5, Informative)

WillgasM (1646719) | about a year ago | (#43734033)

Hemp's illegal because weed's illegal. But why's weed illegal; because someone long ago wanted to make hemp illegal. They had controlling share of an opposing market and wanted to eliminate the competition. Here we are decades later wishing to make hemp legal again, but we can't because apparently people still believe jazz musicians are trying to corrupt our white women. Forget the hempen trojan horse; I don't want pot legalized on a technicality. By default, pot should be legal unless someone can give me a valid reason to ban it. The reason it's illegal today is the same root reason it was banned in the first place: there's a powerful industry that makes money from pot being illegal. The paper/textile industries agenda has been replaced (and dwarfed) by our private prison system. "because we'll lose money" is not a good reason to impose regulation. I shouldn't have to defend pot because I've yet to see a valid attack.

Re:Ugh, potheads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43734075)

So, what you're saying is, all other people's actions need to be justified to you, or they're stupid and undeserving of the allowance to do the action? I understood that 'freedom' generally meant that others must justify the restriction of action..

In other words, the potheads don't need to justify being a pothead to you, 'you' (larger society) need to continuously justify the dis-allowance of being a pothead.

Leave the hops alone! (1)

genericmk (2767843) | about a year ago | (#43734053)

They're in short enough supply as it is and beer is far more important than nanosheets!

The 1% wants to keep you down, man! (5, Insightful)

tekrat (242117) | about a year ago | (#43734073)

So since William Randolph Hearst demonized Hemp and forever tied to to Pot, it's been illegal to grow in the USA. You do realize that in most of the free world, you can walk into a grocery store and still buy products made from Coca leaf?

And yet in the "land of the free" almost everything is banned. Except guns. And you need those in case the government "takes away your rights". I hope you see the tremendous irony there.

No. (1)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#43734117)

I need my guns in case some stoners try to steal my hemp crop.

Coconuts for cryocoolers (1)

benjfowler (239527) | about a year ago | (#43734149)

Reminds me of a story from ITER (giant tokamak being built in the south of France), where they used low-tech coconut shells to solve a really high-tech problem. Sometimes Nature provides us with solutions that work better than anything man-made.

They need to build cryocoolers to remove helium and contaminants from the reactor, and the best material they've tested so far, came from burnt shells of coconuts imported from Indonesia. So the EU has been busy stockpiling enough coconuts to last the lifetime of ITER...

http://www.iter.org/newsline/116/1681 [iter.org]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>