Hemp - a New Crop with New Uses for North America
Ernest Small, Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research
Centre,
Research Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada,
|Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1A 0C6
(e-mail: smalle@ em.agr.ca ; website: http://res.agr.ca/ecorc/)
and David Marcus, Natural Hemphasis,
a division of Natural Emphasis Ltd.
Toronto, ON Canada
(e-mail: dave@hemphasis.com ; website: www.hemphasis.com)
Presented at the 5th National Symposium, NEW CROPS AND NEW USES: STRENGTHS IN DIVERSITY
Atlanta, Nov. 10-13, 2001
INDEX
BASIC
CATEGORIES OF CANNABIS AND THEIR FIELD ARCHITECTURE
CONTROLLING
THE DRUG ABUSE POTENTIAL OF HEMP
Plastic Composites for the Automobile
and Other Manufacturing Sectors
Building Construction Products
Pesticide and Repellent Potential
Non-Seed Use of Hemp as Livestock Feed
Hemp as an Agricultural Barrier
ECOLOGICAL FRIENDLINESS OF HEMP
BREEDING HEMP FOR NORTH AMERICA
THE POLITICS OF CANNABIS WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE US
“Hemp” refers primarily to Cannabis
sativa L. (Cannabaceae),
although the term has been applied to dozens of species representing at least
22 genera, often prominent fiber crops. For examples,
Manila hemp (abaca) is Musa textilis Née, sisal hemp is Agave
sisalina Perrine, and sunn
hemp is Crotolaria juncea
L. Especially confusing is the phrase “Indian hemp,” which has been used both
for narcotic Asian varieties of C. sativa
(so-called C. indica Lamarck
of India) and Apocynum cannabinum
L., which was used by North American Indians as a fiber
plant. Cannabis sativa is a multi-purpose
plant that has been domesticated for bast (phloem) fiber in the stem, a multi-purpose fixed oil in the “seeds”
(achenes), and an intoxicating resin secreted by
epidermal glands. The common names hemp and marijuana (much less frequently
spelled marihuana) have been applied loosely to all three forms, although
historically hemp has been used primarily for the fiber
cultigen and its fiber
preparations, and marijuana for the drug cultigen and
its drug preparations. The current hemp industry is making great efforts to
point out that “hemp is not marijuana.” Italicised, Cannabis refers to
the biological name of the plant (only one species of this genus is commonly
recognized, C. sativa L.). Non-italicised,
“cannabis” is a generic abstraction, widely used as a noun and adjective, and
commonly (often loosely) used both for cannabis plants and/or any or all of the
intoxicant preparations made from them.
Probably indigenous to temperate
Asia, C. sativa is the most widely cited
example of a “camp follower.” It was pre-adapted to thrive in the manured soils around man’s early settlements, which quickly
led to its domestication (Schultes 1970). Hemp was
harvested by the Chinese 8500 years ago (Schultes and
Hofmann 1980). For most of its history, C. sativa
was most valued as a fiber source, considerably less
so as an intoxicant, and only to a limited extent as an oilseed crop. Hemp is
one of the oldest sources of textile fiber, with
extant remains of hempen cloth trailing back 6 millennia. Hemp grown for fiber was introduced to western Asia and Egypt, and subsequently
to Europe somewhere between 1000 and 2000 BC. Cultivation in Europe became
widespread after 500 AD. The crop was first brought to South America in 1545,
in Chile, and to North America in Port Royal, Acadia in 1606. The hemp industry flourished in Kentucky, Missouri, and Illinois
between 1840 and 1860 because of the strong demand for sailcloth and cordage (Ehrensing 1998). From the end of the Civil War until 1912,
virtually all hemp in the US was produced in Kentucky. During World War I, some
hemp cultivation occurred in several states, including Kentucky, Wisconsin,
California, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio,
Michigan, Kansas and Iowa (Ehrensing
1998). The second world war led to a brief
revival of hemp cultivation in the Midwest, as well as in Canada, because the war cut off supplies of
fiber (substantial renewed cultivation also occurred
in Germany for the same reason). Until the beginning of the 19th
century, hemp was the leading cordage fiber. Until
the middle of the 19th century, hemp rivalled flax as the chief
textile fiber of vegetable origin, and indeed was
described as “the king of fiber-bearing plants, - the
standard by which all other fibers are measured”
(Boyce 1900). Nevertheless, the Marihuana Tax Act applied in 1938 essentially
ended hemp production in the United States, although a
small hemp fiber industry continued in Wisconsin
until 1958. Similarly
in 1938 the cultivation of Cannabis became illegal in Canada under the
Opium and Narcotics Act.
Hemp, grown under license mostly
in Canada, is the most publicised “new” crop in North America. Until very
recently the prohibition against drug forms of the plant prevented
consideration of cultivation of fiber and oilseed
cultivars in Canada. However, in the last 10 years three key developments
occurred: (1) much-publicised recent advances in the legal cultivation of hemp
in western Europe, especially for new value-added products; (2) enterprising
farmers and farm groups became convinced of the agricultural potential of hemp
in Canada, and obtained permits to conduct experimental cultivation; and (3)
lobby groups convinced the government of Canada that narcotic forms of the hemp
plant are distinct and distinguishable from fiber and
oilseed forms. In March 1998, new regulations (under the Controlled Drugs and
Substances Act) were provided to allow the commercial development of a hemp
industry in Canada, and since then more than a thousand license
have been issued. Hectares licensed for cultivation for 1998-2001 were respectively,
2,500, 14,200, 5,487, and 1,355, the decreasing trend due to a glut of seed
produced in 1999 and pessimism over new potential regulations barring exports
to the US. Information on the commercial potential of hemp in Canada is in
Blade (1998), Marcus (1998), and Pinfold Consulting (1998). In the US, a
substantial trade in hemp products has developed, based on imports of hemp fiber, grain and oil. The American agricultural community
has observed this, and has had success at the state level in persuading
legislators of the advisability of experimental hemp cultivation as a means of
evaluating the wisdom of re-establishing American hemp production. However,
because of opposition by the federal government, to date there has only been a
small experimental plot in Hawaii. Information on the commercial potential of
hemp in the US is presented in the following.
Cannabis sativa
is extremely unusual in the diversity of products for which it is or can be
cultivated. Popular Mechanics magazine (1938) touted hemp as “the new billion
dollar crop,” stating that it “can be used to produce more than 25,000
products, ranging from dynamite to Cellophane.” Table 1 presents the principal
products for which the species is cultivated in Europe, all of which happen to
be based on fiber. This presentation stresses the
products that hold the most promise for North America, which also include a
considerable range of oilseed applications (Table 2; Fig. 1).
BASIC
CATEGORIES OF CANNABIS AND THEIR FIELD ARCHITECTURE
Cannabis sativa
is an annual wind-pollinated plant, normally dioecious
and dimorphic, although sometimes monoecious (mostly
in several modern European fiber cultivars). Figure 2
presents the basic morphology of the species. Some special hybrids, obtained by
pollinating females of dioecious lines with pollen
from monoecious plants, are predominantly female
(so-called “all-female,” these generally also produce some hermaphrodites and
occasional males). All-female lines are productive for some purposes (e.g. they
are very uniform, and with very few males to take up space they can produce
considerable grain), but the hybrid seed is expensive to produce. Staminate or “male” plants tend to be 10-15% taller and are
less robust than the pistillate or “female” (note the
comparatively frail male in Fig. 3). So prolific is pollen production that an
isolation distance of about 5 km is usually recommended for generating
pure-bred foundation seed. A “perigonal bract”
subtends each female flower, and grows to envelop the fruit. While small, secretory, resin-producing glands occur on the epidermis of
most of the above-ground parts of the plant, the glands are very dense and
productive on the perigonal bracts, which are
accordingly of central interest in marijuana varieties. The root is a laterally
branched taproot, generally 30-60 cm deep, up to 2.5 m in loose soils, very
near the surface and more branched in wet soils. Extensive root systems are key to the ability of hemp crops to exploit deep supplies of
nutrients and water. The stems are erect, furrowed, and usually branched, with
a woody interior, and may be hollow in the internodes. Although the stem is
often woody, the species is frequently referred to as a
herb or forb. Plants vary enormously in height
depending on genetic constitution and environment (Fig. 4), but are typically
1- 5 m (heights of 12 m or more in cultivation have been claimed).
There
is great variation in Cannabis sativa,
because of disruptive domestication for fiber,
oilseed, and narcotic resin, and there are features that tend to distinguish
these three cultigens (cultivated phases) from each other. Moreover,
density of cultivation is used to accentuate certain architectural features.
Figure 5 illustrates the divergent appearances of the basic agronomic
categories of Cannabis in typical field configurations.
Highly
selected forms of the fiber cultigen
possess features maximising fiber production. Since
the nodes tend to disrupt the length of the fiber
bundles, thereby limiting quality, tall, relatively unbranched
plants with long internodes have been selected. Another strategy has been to
select stems that are hollow at the internodes, with limited wood, since this
maximises production of fiber in relation to
supporting woody tissues. Similarly, limited seed productivity concentrates the
plant’s energy into production of fiber, and fiber cultivars often have low genetic propensity for seed
output. Selecting monoecious strains overcomes the
problem of differential maturation times and quality of male and female plants
(males mature 1-3 weeks earlier). Male plants in general are taller, albeit
slimmer, less robust, and less productive. Except for the troublesome
characteristic of dying after anthesis, male traits
are favored for fiber
production, in contrast to the situation for drug strains noted below. In
former, labor-intensive times, the male plants were
harvested earlier than the females, to produce superior fiber.
The limited branching of fiber cultivars is often
compensated for by possession of large leaves with wide leaflets, which
obviously increase the photosynthetic ability of the plants. Since fiber plants have not generally been selected for narcotic
purposes, the level of intoxicating constituents is usually limited.
An
absence of such fiber-strain traits as tallness,
limited branching, long internodes, and very hollow stems, is characteristic of
narcotic strains. Drug forms have historically been grown in areas south of the
north-temperate zone, often close to the equator, and are photoperiodically
adapted to a long season. When grown in north-temperate climates maturation is
much-delayed until late fall, or the plants succumb to
cold weather before they are able to produce seeds. Unlike fiber
strains that have been selected to grow well at extremely high densities, drug
strains tend to be less persistent when grown in high concentration (de Meijer 1994). Drug strains can be very similar in
appearance to fiber strains. However, a
characteristic type of narcotic plant was selected in southern Asia,
particularly in India and neighboring countries. This
is dioecious, short (about a meter in height), highly
branched, with large leaves (i.e. wide leaflets), and it is slow to mature. The
appearance is rather like a short, conical Christmas tree.
Until
recent times, the cultivation of hemp primarily as an oilseed was largely
unknown, except in Russia. Today, it is difficult to reconstruct the type of
plant that was grown there as an oilseed, because such cultivation has
essentially been abandoned. Oilseed hemp cultivars in the modern sense were not
available until very recently, but some land races certainly were grown
specifically for seeds in Russia. Dewey (1914) gave the following information:
“The short oil-seed hemp with slender stems, about 30 inches high, bearing
compact clusters of seeds and maturing in 60 to 90 days, is of little value for
fiber production, but the experimental plants, grown
from seed imported from Russia, indicate that it may be valuable as an oil-seed
crop to be harvested and threshed in the same manner as oil-seed flax.” Most
hemp oilseed in Europe is currently obtained from so-called “dual usage” plants
(employed for harvest of both stem fiber and seeds,
from the same plants). Of the European dual-usage cultivars, ‘Uniko B’ and ‘Fasamo’ are
particularly suited to being grown as oilseeds. Very recently, cultivars have
been bred specifically for oilseed production. These include ‘Finola,’ formerly known as ‘Fin-314’ (Fig. 6) and ‘Anka’ (Fig. 7), which are relatively short,
little-branched, mature early in north-temperate regions, and are ideal for
high-density planting and harvest with conventional equipment. Dewey (1914)
noted that a Turkish narcotic type of land race called “Smyrna” was commonly
used in the early 20th century in the US to produce birdseed,
because (like most narcotic types of Cannabis) it is densely branched,
producing many flowers, hence seeds. While oilseed land races in northern
Russia would have been short, early-maturing plants in view of the short
growing season, in more southern areas oilseed landraces likely had moderate
height, and were spaced more widely to allow abundant branching and seed
production to develop. Until Canada replaced China in 1998 as a source of
imported seeds for the US, most seeds used for various purposes in the US were
sterilized and imported from China. Indeed, China remains the largest producer
of hempseed. We have grown Chinese hemp land races, and these were short,
branched, adapted to a very long growing season (i.e. they come into flower very
slowly in response to photoperiodic induction of short days in the fall), and
altogether they were rather reminiscent of Dewey’s description of Smyrna.
Although similar in appearance to narcotic strains of C. sativa,
the Chinese land races we grew were in fact low in intoxicating constituents,
and it may well be that what Dewey thought was a narcotic strain was not.
Although some forms of C. sativa have quite
large seeds, until recently oilseed forms appear to have been mainly selected
for a heavy yield of seeds, usually recognizable by abundant branching. Such
forms are typically grown at lower densities than hemp grown only for fiber, as this promotes branching, although it should be
understood that the genetic propensity for branching has been selected.
Percentage or quality of oil in the seeds does not appear to have been
important in the past, although selection for these traits is now being
conducted. Most significantly, modern selection is occurring with regard to
mechanized harvesting, particularly the ability to grow in high density as
single-headed stalks with very short branches bearing considerable seed.
As detailed below, the
development of hemp as a new legal crop in North America must be considered in
relation to illicit cultivation, so it is important to appreciate the scope of
the drug situation. Up until the first half of the 20th century,
drug preparations of Cannabis were used predominantly as a recreational
inebriant in poor countries and the lower socio-economic classes of developed
nations. After World War II, marijuana became associated with the rise of a
hedonistic, psychedelic ethos, first in the United States and eventually over
much of the world, with the consequent development of a huge international
illicit market that exceeds the value of the hemp market during its heyday.
Table 3 shows the “economic significance” (dollars generated in the black
market plus dollar cost of control measures) of the illicit drug industry
associated with C. sativa, and contrasts this
with the estimated dollar value of major categories of legitimate uses. In the
Netherlands, the annual value of narcotic hemp cultivation (ca. $10 billion)
exceeds the value of tulips (Collins 1999). Marijuana has become the most
widely disseminated illicit species in the world (Schultes
and Hofmann 1980). With the exception of alcohol, it is the most widely used
recreational euphoric drug. About 25% of North Americans are believed to have
used Cannabis illegally. According to the US National
Institute on Drug Abuse (, more than 72 million Americans (33%) 12 years of
age and older have tried marijuana. Cultivation,
commerce, and consumption of drug preparations of Cannabis have been
proscribed in most countries during the present century. The cost of enforcing
the laws against Cannabis in North America is in the billions of dollars
annually. In addition, there are substantial social costs, such as adverse
effects on users, particularly those who are convicted. Tragically this
includes some legitimate farmers who, faced with financial ruin because of the unprofitability of crops being grown, converted to growing
marijuana.
A
rather thorough analysis of the scope of the illicit marijuana industry in
Canada for 1998 is reported at and summarized in MacLeod (1999). At least 800 tonnes of marijuana
were grown in Canada in 1998, representing a harvest of 4.7 million flowering
plants. More than 50% of the marijuana available in Canada is grown
domestically. An average mature plant was estimated to produce 170 g of
“marketable substance.” The value of the Canadian crop is uncertain, but has
been estimated to be in the billions of dollars annually (Heading 1998; MacLeod
1999).
The
US Drug Enforcement Administration’s online criminal justice statistics for
2000 () shows the following seizures and eradication of plants of C. sativa: 40,929 outdoor plots (2,597,796 plants),
139,580,728 ditchweed (ruderal
plants), 2,361 indoor operations (217,105 plants), for a grand total of 2,814,
903 plants destroyed. Impressively, the species was grown in all 50 states
(including outdoor seizures in every state except Wyoming)! It is of course
impossible to know exactly how much marijuana is cultivated in the United
States, and perhaps only10 to 20% of the amount grown is seized. The
profitability of the illegal crop is indicated by a comparison of the cost of a
bushel of corn (roughly $2.50) and a bushel of manicured marijuana (about
$70,000; it has been suggested that prices range from $500 a pound, for low‑quality
marijuana, to more than $5,000 a pound for “boutique” strains like “Northern
Lights” and “Afghan Kush”). According to a National
Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML)
(http://mir.drugtext.org/marijuananews/marijuana_ranks_fourth_largest_c.htm)
marijuana is at least the fourth most valuable crop in America, outranked only
by corn, soybeans, and hay. It was estimated that 8.7 million marijuana plants
were harvested in 1997, worth $15.1 billion to growers and $25.2 billion on the
retail market (the wholesale value was used to compare marijuana to other cash
crops). Marijuana was judged to be the largest revenue producing crop in
Alabama, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Rhode Island,
Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, and one of the top five cash crops in
29 other states.
Cannabis
contains a seemingly unique class of chemicals, the cannabinoids,
of which more than 60 have been described, but only a few are psychoactive. Cannabinoids are produced in specialized epidermal glands,
which differ notably in distribution on different organs of the plant (high
concentrations occur on the lower surface of the young leaves and young twigs,
on the tepals, stamens, and especially on the perigonal bract). Given this distribution, the glands would
seem to be protective of young and reproductive above-ground tissues (the roots
lack glands). Two classes of epidermal glands occur - stalked and sessile (Fig.
8), but in either case the glandular cells are covered by a sheath under which
resin is accumulated, until the sheath ruptures, releasing resin on the
surface. The resin is a sticky mixture of cannabinoids
and a variety of terpenes. The characteristic odor of the plant is due to the abundant terpenes, which are not psychoactive. The more important cannabinoids are shown in Fig. 9. In the plant the cannabinoids exist predominantly in the form of carboxylic
acids, which decarboxylate with time or when heated.
Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( )9-THC, or simply THC) is the predominant
psychoactive component. Other THC isomers also occur, particularly )8-THC,
which is also psychoactive. Technically, the euphoric psychological effects of
THC are best described by the word psychotomimetic.
Cannabidiol (CBD) is the chief non-psychotomimetic cannabinoid. A
THC concentration in marijuana of approximately 0.9% has been suggested as a
practical minimum level to achieve the (illegal) intoxicant effect, but CBD
(the predominant cannabinoid of fiber
and oilseed varieties) antagonizes (i.e. reduces) the effects of THC (Grotenhermen and Karus 1998).
Concentrations of 0.3% to 0.9% are considered to have “only a small drug
potential” (Grotenhermen and Karus
1998). Some cannabinoid races have been described,
notably containing cannabichromene (particularly in
high-THC forms) and cannabigerol monomethyl
ether (in some Asian strains). The biosynthetic pathways of the cannabinoids are not yet satisfactorily elucidated,
although the scheme shown in Fig. 10 is commonly accepted. At least in some
strains, THC is derived from cannabigerol, while in
others it may be derived from CBD. CBN and delta-8-THC are considered to be
degradation products or analytical artifacts (Pate
1998a).
Both in Canada and the US, the
most critical problem to be addressed for commercial exploitation of C. sativa is the possible unauthorized drug use of the
plant. Indeed, the reason hemp cultivation was made illegal in North America
was concern that the hemp crop was a drug menace. The drug potential is, for
practical purposes, measured by the presence of THC.
THC is the world’s most popular illicit chemical, and indeed the fourth most
popular recreational drug, after caffeine, alcohol and nicotine. “Industrial hemp”is a phrase that has become common to designate hemp
used for commercial non-intoxicant purposes. Small and Cronquist
(1976) split C. sativa into two subspecies: C. sativa subsp. sativa,
with less than 0.3% (dry weight) of THC in the upper (reproductive) part of the
plant, and C. sativa subsp. indica
(Lam.) E. Small & Cronq. with
more than 0.3% THC. This classification has since been adopted in the European
Community, Canada, and parts of Australia as a dividing line between cultivars
that can be legally cultivated under licence and forms that are considered to
have too high a drug potential. For a period, 0.3% was also the allowable THC
content limit for cultivation of hemp in the Soviet Union. In the US, Drug Enforcement
Agency guidelines issued Dec. 7th 1999 expressly allowed products
with a THC content of less than 0.3% to enter the US without a license; but
subsequently permissible levels have been a source of continuing contention.
Marijuana in the illicit market typically has a THC content of 5 to 10% (levels
as high as 25% have been reported), and as a point of interest, a current
Canadian government experimental medicinal marijuana production contract calls
for the production of 6% marijuana. As noted above, a level of about 1% THC is
considered the threshold for marijuana to have intoxicating potential, so the
0.3% level is conservative, and some countries (e.g. parts of Australia,
Switzerland) have permitted the cultivation of cultivars with higher levels. It
should be appreciated that there is considerable variation in THC content in
different parts of the plant. THC content increases in the following order: achenes (excluding bracts), roots, large stems, smaller
stems, older and larger leaves, younger and smaller leaves, flowers, perigonal bracts covering both the
female flowers and fruits. It is well known in the illicit trade how to screen
off the more potent fractions of the plant in order to increase THC levels in
resultant drug products. Nevertheless, a level of 0.3% THC in the flowering
parts of the plant is reflective of material that is too low in intoxicant
potential to actually be used practically for illicit production of marijuana
or other types of cannabis drugs. Below, the problem of permissible levels of
THC in food products made from hempseed is discussed.
There
is a general inverse relationship in the resin of Cannabis between the
amounts of THC present and the amount of the other principal cannabinoid, CBD. Whereas most drug strains contain
primarily THC and little or no CBD, fiber and oilseed
strains primarily contain CBD and very little THC. CBD can be converted to THC
by acid catalyzed cyclization, and so could serve as
a starting material for manufacturing THC. In theory, therefore, low-THC
cultivars do not completely solve the problem of drug abuse potential. In
practise, however, the illicit drug trade has access to easier methods of
synthesizing THC or its analogues than by first extracting CBD from non-drug
hemp strains.
Breeding for low THC cultivars in Europe has been reviewed by Bócsa
(1998), Bócsa and Karus
(1998), and Virovets (1996). Some researchers have
claimed to have produced essentially THC-free strains, although at present no
commercial cultivar seems to be 100% free of THC. THC content has proven to be
more easily reduced in monoecious than in dioecious varieties. It should be possible to select
THC-free strains, and there has been speculation that genetic engineering could
be helpful in this regard. As a strategic economic and
political tactic, France has been attempting for several years to have the
European Union (EU) adopt legislation forbidding the cultivation of industrial
hemp cultivars with more than 0.1% THC, which would mean that primarily French
varieties would have to be cultivated in Europe. However, the Canadian government
has found that some French material has proven to be excessively high in THC.
There
is certainly a need to utilize available germplasm
sources in order to breed suitable cultivars for North America. A list of the
23 approved cultivars for the 2001 season in Canada is at . Most of these are regulated by the European Organization of
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). These cultivars are “approved” for
use in Canada not on agricultural criteria, but merely on the basis that they
meet the THC criterion. Indeed, most of these are unsuitable or only marginally
suitable for Canada (Small and Marcus 2000), and only a very few Canadian
cultivars to date have been created. In Canada, every acquisition of hemp grown
at a particular place and time must be tested for THC content by an independent
laboratory and, under the industrial hemp regulations, fields of hemp with more
than 0.3% THC may require destruction (a slight degree of flexibility is
generally exercised). Importation of experimental hemp lines (i.e. other than
the approved cultivars) requires importation licenses (as well as phytosanitary clearance of the shipment by the Canadian
Food Inspection Agency), and the importation licenses require an indication
that the THC contents are low.
In Canada, the methodology used for analyses
and sample collection for THC analysis of hemp plantings is standardized (at
the Health Canada /Therapeutics Program/Hemp web site at , see “Industrial Hemp Technical Manual” for procedures on sampling
plant materials and chemical procedures for determining THC levels). The
regulations require that one of the dozen independent laboratories licensed for
the purpose conduct the analyses and report the results to Health Canada.
Sample collection is also normally carried out by an independent authorized
firm. The Canadian system of monitoring THC content has rigidly limited hemp
cultivation to cultivars that consistently develop THC levels below 0.3%.
Because
C. sativa has been a neglected crop for so
long in North America, there are only negligible genetic resources available on
this continent. Most germplasm stocks of hemp are in
Europe, and the largest and most important collection is the Vavilov Institute gene bank in Leningrad. Figure 11 shows
THC concentrations in the Vavilov collection, as well
as in our own collection, largely of European germplasm.
A disturbingly high percentage of the collections have THC levels higher than
0.3%, making it difficult to incorporate these into breeding programs.
Soil
characteristics, latitude and climatic stresses have been found to have
significant effects on THC concentrations, and there are seasonal and even
diurnal variations (Small 1979; Pate 1998b). However, the range of THC
concentrations developed by low-THC cultivars (those typically with #0.3% THC) under different circumstances on the whole is limited, for
the most part generally not varying more than 0.2 percentage points when grown
in a range of circumstances, and usually less (note information in Scheifle 2000, Scheifle and Dragla 2000, Scheifle et al.
1999). Practically, this has meant in Canadian experience that a few cultivars
have been eliminated from further commercial cultivation because they sometimes
exceed the 0.3% level (‘Fedora 19’ and ‘Futura,’
authorized in 2000, have now been removed because some test results in several
years exceeded 0.3%; ‘Finola’ and ‘Uniko B’ are under probation because of elevated levels),
but on the whole most of the permitted cultivars have maintained highly
consistent development of quite low levels of THC.
Hemp
seeds contain virtually no THC, but THC contamination results from contact of
the seeds with the resin secreted by the epidermal glands on the leaves and
floral parts, and also by the failure to sift away all of the bracts (which
have the highest concentration of THC of any parts of the plant) that cover the
seeds. This results in small levels of THC appearing
in hempseed oil and foods made with the seeds. Although most of the western
hemp-growing world uses 0.3% THC as a maximum concentration for authorized
cultivation of hemp plants, regulations in various countries allow only a much
lower level of THC in human food products manufactured from the seeds.
Currently, up to 10 ppm THC is permitted in seeds and
oil products used for food purposes in Canada. In Germany, more stringent
limits were set for food in 2000: 5 ppm in food oil,
0.005 ppm in beverages, and 0.15 ppm
in all other foods. The US Drug Enforcement Administration published new
regulations on hemp in the Federal Register on October 9th 2001 that
in effect 4 months later would ban the food use of hemp in the US because any
amount of THC would be unacceptable in foods (follow links at ). These proposals are currently being challenged by the hemp
industry. Limits have been set because of concerns about possible toxicity and
interference with drug tests (Grotenhermen et al.
1998). An extensive analysis of literature dealing with the toxicity of hemp is
in Orr and Starodub (1999; see Geiwitz
2001 for an analysis). Because hemp food products are considered to have great
economic potential, there is considerable pressure on the hemp industry in
North America to reduce THC levels.
The Drug Enforcement Agency and the Office of National Drug Control Policy of the US raised concerns over tests conducted from 1995 to 1997 that showed that consumption of hempseed products available during that period led to interference with drug-testing programs for marijuana use. Federal US programs utilize a THC metabolite level of 50 parts per billion in urine. Leson (2000) found that this level was not exceeded by consuming hemp products, provided that THC levels are maintained below 5 ppm in hemp oil, and below 2 ppm in hulled seeds. Nevertheless the presence of even minute trace amounts of THC in foods remains a tool that can be used by those wishing to prevent the hemp oilseed industry from developing.
Based
on world production of fibers in 1999, about 54.5%
was synthetic (of which 60.3% was polyester), 42.9% was plant fiber (of which 78.5% was cotton), and 2.6% was wool (Karus 2000). In addition to cotton, flax is the only other
significant plant fiber crop grown in temperate
regions of the world (kenaf has received some
enthusiastic backing in the southern US in recent years, but is most cheaply
produced in India, Bangladesh, and China). Flax held 2.7% of the world plant fiber market in 1999, while hemp had only 0.3% (Karus 2000). Hemp fiber can
potentially replace other biological fibers in many
applications, but also, as noted below, can sometimes compete with minerals
such as glass fiber and steel. As forests diminish,
cultivation of annual plants as fiber sources is
likely to increase. While crop residues like cereal straw will probably supply
much of the need, specialty fiber plants such as hemp
also have potential. The four conditions that will need to be met are (after
Bolton 1995): 1) the material should be produced at a large enough scale, 2)
the price should be low enough, 3) the fiber
characteristics should be adequate for the end use, and 4) proven technology
should be available for the processing of the new raw material. Of these
criteria only 3) is adequately met at this time for hemp in North America, but
this is to be expected in a crop that has only begun to be cultivated after an
absence of many years.
One of the reasons hemp fiber has been valued is because of its length. The primary
bast fibers in the bark are
5-40 mm long, and are amalgamated in fiber bundles
which can be 1-5 m long (secondary bast fibers are about 2 mm long). The woody core fibers are short - about 0.55 mm – and like hardwood fibers are cemented together with considerable lignin. The
core fibers are generally considered too short for
high grade paper applications (a length of 3 mm is considered ideal), and too
much lignin is present. While the long bast fibers have been used to make paper almost for 2 millennia,
the woody core fibers have rarely been so used.
Nevertheless it has been suggested that the core fibers
could be used for paper making, providing appropriate technology was developed
(de Groot et al. 1998). In any event, the core fibers, have found a variety of
uses, as detailed below. The long, lignin-poor bast fibers also have considerable potential to be used in many non-paper, non-textile applications, as noted below.
Selection
for fiber has resulted in strains that have much more
bark fiber tissues and much less woody core than
encountered in narcotic strains, oilseed strains, and wild plants (Fig. 12). In
non-fiber strains of Cannabis, bark can be
less than one quarter of the stem tissues (i.e. more than three quarters can be
woody core). By contrast, in fiber strains half of
the stem tissues can be bark, and more than half of this can be the desirable
long primary fibers (de Meijer
1995). Non-fiber strains rarely have as much as 15% fiber in the bark.
Other
desirable features of hemp fibers are strength and
durability (particularly resistance to decay), which made hemp useful in the
past for rope, nets, sail-cloth, and oakum for caulking. During the age of
sailing ships, Cannabis was considered to provide the very best of
canvas, and indeed this word is derived from Cannabis. Several factors
combined to decrease the popularity of hemp in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries. Increasing limitation of cheap labor for traditional production in Europe and the New
World led to the creation of some mechanical inventions, but too late to
counter growing interest in competitive crops. Development of other natural fibers as well as synthetic fibers
increased competition for hemp’s uses as a textile fiber
and for cordage. Hemp rag had been much used for paper, but the 19th
century introduction of the chemical woodpulping
process considerably lowered demand for hemp. The demise of the sail diminished
the market for canvas. Increasing use of the plant for drugs gave hemp a bad
image. All this led to the discontinuation of hemp cultivation in the early and
middle parts of the present century in much of the world where cheap labor was limited. In the 19th century softer fabrics
took over the clothing market, and today, hemp constitutes only about 1% of the
natural fiber market. At least some production of
hemp for fiber still occurs in Russia, China, the
Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, the countries of the former
Yugoslavia, Romania, Korea, Chile, and Peru. There has been renewed interest in
England, Australia, and South Africa in cultivating fiber
hemp. Italy has an outstanding reputation for high-quality hemp, but
productivity has waned for the last several decades. In France, a market for high-quality
paper, ironically largely cigarette paper, has developed (such paper is
completely free of the intoxicating resin). Modern plant breeding in Europe has
produced several dozen hemp strains, although by comparison with other fiber crops there are relatively few described varieties of
hemp. Since World War II, breeding has been concerned most particularly with
the development of monoecious varieties. Gehl (1995) reviewed fiber hemp
development in Canada in the early 20th century, and concluded that
the prospects for a traditional fiber industry were
poor. However, as outlined below, there are now many non-traditional usages for
hemp fiber which require consideration. Hemp long fiber is one of the strongest
and most durable of natural fibers, with high tensile
strength, wet strength, and other characteristics that make it technically
suited for various industrial products (Karus and Leson 1996).
From
1982 to 2002 the EU provided the equivalent of about 50 million dollars to
develop new flax and hemp harvesting and fiber
processing technologies (Karus et al. 2000). Because
of the similarities of flax and hemp, the technologies developed for one
usually are adaptable to the other. In addition, various European nations and
private firms contributed to the development of hemp technologies. Accordingly,
Europe is far more advanced in hemp development with respect to all fiber-based applications than other parts of the world. The
EU currently dedicates about 30,000 ha to hemp production. France is the leading
country in hemp cultivation in the EU, and 95% of the non-seed production is
used for “specialty pulp” as described below. Harvesting and processing
machinery for fiber hemp is highly advanced in
Europe, and some has been imported into Canada. However, there is insufficient fiber processing capacity to handle hemp produced in
Canada.
Hemp
is a bast fiber crop, i.e.
the most desirable (“long”) fibers are found in the
phloem-associated tissues external to the phloem, just under the “bark.” The traditional
and still major first step in fiber extraction is to
ret (“rot”) away the softer parts of the plant, by exposing the cut stems to
microbial decay in the field (“dew retting,” shown in Figs. 46 and 47) or
submerged in water (“water retting, ” shown in Fig. 13). The result is to
slough off the outer parts of the stem and to loosen the inner woody core (the
“hurds”) from the phloem fibers
(Fig. 14). Water retting has been largely abandoned in countries where labor is expensive or environmental regulations exist.
Water retting, typically by soaking the stalks in ditches, can lead to a high
level of pollution. Most hemp fiber used in textiles
today is water retted in China and Hungary. Retting in tanks rather than in
open bodies of water is a way of controlling the effluents while taking
advantage of the high-quality fiber that is produced.
Unlike flax, hemp long fiber requires water retting
for preparation of high-quality spinnable fibers for production of fine textiles. Improved microorganisms or enzymes could augment or replace
traditional water retting. Steam explosion is another potential technology that
has been experimentally applied to hemp (Garcia-Jaldon
et al. 1998). Decorticated material (i.e. separated at least into crude fiber) is the raw material, and this is subjected to steam
under pressure and increased temperature which “explodes” (separates) the fibers so that one has a more refined (thinner) hemp fiber that currently is only available from water retting.
Even when one has suitably separated long fiber,
specialized harvesting, processing, spinning and weaving equipment are required
for preparing fine hemp textiles. The refinement of equipment and new
technologies are viewed as offering the possibility of making fine textile
production practical in western Europe and North
America, but at present China controls this market, and probably will remain
dominant for the foreseeable future.
There
are practical, if cruder alternatives to separate the long fiber
for high-quality textile production, but in fact such techniques are used
mostly for non-textile applications. This involves production of “whole fibers” (i.e. harvesting both the long fibers
from the cortex and the shorter fibers from
throughout the stem), and technologies that utilize shortened hemp fibers. This approach is currently dominant in western Europe and Canada, and commences with field dew
retting (typically 2-3 weeks). A principal limitation is climatic - the local
environment should be suitably but not excessively moist at the close of the
harvest season. Once stalks are retted, dried and baled, they are processed to
extract the fiber. In traditional hemp processing,
the long fiber was separated from the internal woody hurds in two steps, breaking (stalks were crushed
under rollers that broke the woody core into short pieces, some of which were
separated) and scutching (the remaining hurds, short fibers (“tow”) and
long fibers (“line fiber, ”
“long-line fiber”) were separated). A single,
relatively expensive machine called a decorticator can do these two steps as
one. In general in the EU and Canada, fibers are not
separated into tow and line fibers, but are left as
“whole fiber.” In western Europe, the fiber is often “cottonized,” i.e.
chopped into short segments the size of cotton and flax fiber,
so that the fibers can be processed on flax
processing machinery, which is very much better developed than such machinery
is for hemp. In North America the use of hemp for production of even crude
textiles is marginal. Accordingly, the chief current fiber
usages of North American, indeed of European hemp, are non-textile.
Although
always sold at a premium price, hemp clothing has a natural appeal to a sector
of the population. Hemp clothes are resistant to abrasion, but are typically abrasive.
However, appropriate processing and blending with other natural fibers has significantly improved the “feel” of the
product, and in China hemp textiles indistinguishable from fine linens in
texture are available. Weaving of hemp fibers into
textiles and apparel is primarily done in China, Hungary, Romania, Russia, and
the Ukraine. Processing costs are higher for industrial hemp because the fibers vary from the standard specifications for fiber length and diameter established for the equipment
used in most textile and apparel factories, necessitating the use of specialty
machines. The North American hemp apparel industry today is based on fiber, yarn, and fabrics imported from Eastern Europe and
China. The extraction technology and spinning facilities, to say nothing of
much lower labor costs, make it very difficult for
the potential development of a hemp textile industry in North America. The fact
that spinning facilities for natural fibers are so
concentrated in China is making it increasingly difficult to competitively
produce hemp fabrics elsewhere. This of course lessens the value-added
potential of growing hemp for a potential textile industry in North America. It
is possible, however, that new technologies could change this situation, and
especially in the EU development is underway to establish a fledgling domestic
hemp textile industry. In addition to textiles used in clothing, coarser woven
cloth (canvas) is used for upholstery, bags, sacks, and tarpaulins. There is
very little effort in North America to produce such woven products,
and non-woven material (e.g. Fig. 15) can be more easily produced. Hempline in Ontario, the first firm to grow hemp for
commercial purposes in North America since the second word war (starting with
experimental cultivation in 1994), is the exception, and is concerned with
production of fiber for upholstery and carpeting.
Van
Roekel (1994) has pointed out that Egyptian papyrus
sheets are not “paper,” because the fiber strands are
woven, not “wet-laid;” the oldest surviving paper is over 2,000 years of age,
from China, and was made from hemp fiber (Fleming and
Clarke 1998). Until the early 19th century, hemp and flax were the
chief paper-making materials. In historical times, hemp rag was processed into
paper. Using hemp directly for paper was considered too expensive, and in any
event the demand for paper was far more limited than today. Wood-based paper
came into use when mechanical and chemical pulping was developed in the mid
1800s in Germany and England. Today, at least 95% of paper is made from wood
pulp.
The
pulp and paper industry based on wood has considered the use of hemp for pulp,
but only on an experimental basis. Hemp’s long fibers could make paper more
recyclable. Since virgin pulp is required for added strength in the recycling
of paper, hemp pulp would allow for at least twice as many cycles as wood pulp. However, various analyses have concluded that the use of hemp for
conventional paper pulp is not profitable (e.g. Fertig
1996).
“Specialty
pulp” is the most important component of the hemp industry of the EU, and is
expected to remain its core market for the foreseeable future. The most
important specialty pulp products made from hemp are cigarette paper (Fig. 16),
bank notes, technical filters, and hygiene products. Other uses include art
papers and tea bags. Several of these applications take advantage of hemp’s
high tear and wet strength. This is considered to be a highly stable,
high-priced niche market in Europe, where hemp has an 87% market share of the
“specialty pulp” sector (Karus et al. 2000). In
Europe, decortication/refining machines are available
that can produce 10 tonnes/hour of hemp fiber
suitable for such pulp use. North American capacity for hemp pulp production
and value-added processing is much more limited than that of Europe, and this
industry is negligible in North America.
Hemp
paper is useful for specialty applications such as currency and cigarette
papers where strength is needed. The bast fiber is of greatest interest to the pulp and paper
industry because of its superior strength properties compared to wood. However,
the short, bulky fibers found in the inner part of
the plant (hurds) can also be used to make cheaper
grades of paper, apparently without greatly affecting quality of the printing
surface. Hemp is not competitive for newsprint, books, writing papers and
general paper (grocery bags, coffee cups, napkins), although there is a
specialty or novelty market for those specifically wishing to support the hemp
industry by purchasing hemp writing or printing paper despite the premium price
(Fig. 17).
A
chief argument that has been advanced in favor of
developing hemp as a paper and pulp source has been that as a non-wood or
tree-free fiber source, it can reduce harvesting of
primary forests and the threat to associated biodiversity. It has been claimed
that hemp produces three to four times as much useable fiber
per hectare per annum as forests. However, Wong (1998) notes evidence that in the southern
US hemp would produce only twice as much pulp as does a pine plantation (but
see discussion below on suitability of hemp as a potential lumber substitute in
areas lacking trees).
Hemp
paper is high-priced for several reasons. Economies of scale are such that the
supply of hemp is minute compared to the supply of wood fiber.
Hemp processing requires non-wood-based processing facilities. Hemp paper is
typically made only from bast fibers,
which require separation from the hurds, thereby
increasing costs. This represents less than 50% of the possible fiber yield of the plant, and future technologies that pulp
the whole stalks could decrease costs substantially. Hemp is harvested once a
year, so that it needs to be stored to feed mills throughout the year. Hemp stalks
are very bulky, requiring much handling and storage. Transportation costs are
also very much higher for hemp stalks than for wood chips. Waste straw is
widely available from cereals and other crops, and although generally not
nearly as desirable as hemp, can produce bulk pulp far more cheaply than can be
made from hemp. In addition to agricultural wastes, there are vast quantities
of scrub trees, especially poplar, in northern areas, that can supply large
amounts of low-quality wood fiber extremely cheaply.
Moreover, in northern areas fast-growing poplars and willows can be grown, and
such agro-forestry can be very productive and environmentally benign. And,
directly or indirectly, the lumber/paper industry receives subsidies and/or
supports, which is most unlikely for hemp.
Plastic Composites for the Automobile
and Other Manufacturing Sectors
With
respect to fiber, a “composite” is often defined as a
material consisting of 30-70% fiber and 70-30% matrix
(Bolton 1995). However, in North America particleboards and fiberboards, which
generally contain less than 10% adhesive or matrix, are sometimes referred to
as composites. This section addresses plastic-type composites. In plastics, fibers are introduced to improve physical properties such
as stiffness, impact resistance, bending and tensile strength. Man-made fibers of glass, kevlar and
carbon are most commonly used today, but plant fibers
offer considerable cost savings along with comparable strength properties.
Plastic
composites for automobiles are the second most important component of the hemp
industry of the EU. Natural fibers in automobile
composites are used primarily in press-molded parts
(e.g. Fig. 18). There are two widespread technologies. In thermoplastic
production, natural fibers are blended with
polypropylene fibers and formed into a mat, which is
pressed under heat into the desired form. In thermoset
production the natural fibers are soaked with binders
such as epoxy resin or polyurethane, placed in the desired form, and allowed to
harden through polymerisation. Hemp has also been used in other types of
thermoplastic applications, including injection molding.
The characteristics of hemp fibers have proven to be
superior for production of molded composites. In
European manufacturing of cars, natural fibers are
used to reinforce door panels, passenger rear decks, trunk linings and pillars.
In 1999 over 20,000 tonnes of natural fiber were used
for these purposes in Europe, including about, 2,000 tonnes of hemp. It has
been estimated that 5-10 kg of natural fibers can be
used in the molded portions of an average automobile
(excluding upholstery). The demand for automobile applications of hemp is
expected to increase considerably, depending on the development of new
technologies (Karus et al. 2000).
Henry
Ford recognized the utility of hemp in early times. In advance of today’s
automobile manufacturers, he constructed a car with certain components made of
resin stiffened with hemp fiber (Fig. 19). Rather
ironically in view of today’s parallel situation, Henry Ford’s hemp innovations
in the 1920’s occurred at a time of crisis for American farms, later to
intensify with the depression. The need to produce new industrial markets for
farm products led to a broad movement for scientific research in agriculture
that came to be labelled “Farm Chemurgy,” that today
is embodied in chemical applications of crop constituents.
There
is also considerable potential for other industries using hemp in the manner
that the automobile industry has demonstrated is feasible. Of course, all other
types of transportation vehicles from bicycles to airplanes might make use of
such technology. Natural fibers have considerable
advantages for use in conveyance (Karus et al. 2000):
low density and weight reduction, favorable mechanical,
acoustical, and processing properties (including low wear on tools), no
splintering in accidents, occupational health benefits (compared to glass fibers), no off-gassing of toxic compounds, and price
advantages.
Additional
types of composite using hemp in combination with other natural fibers, post-industrial plastics or other types of resins, are being used to produce non-woven matting for
padding, sound insulation, and other applications.
Building Construction Products
Thermal
insulation products (e.g. Figs. 20, 21) are the third most important sector of
the hemp industry of the EU. These are in very high demand because of the
alarmingly high costs of heating fuels, ecological concerns about conservation
of non-renewable resources, and political-strategic concerns about dependence
on current sources of oil. This is a market that is growing very fast, and hemp
insulation products are increasing in popularity. In Europe, it has been
predicted that tens of thousands of tonnes will be sold by 2005, shared between
hemp and flax (Karus et al. 2000).
In
North America the use of nonwood fibers
in sheet fiberboard (“pressboard” or “composite board”) products is relatively
undeveloped. Flax, jute, kenaf, hemp and wheat straw
can be used to make composite board. Wheat straw is the dominant nonwood fiber in such
applications. Although it might seem that hemp bast fibers are desirable in composite wood products because of
their length and strength, in fact the short fibers
of the hurds have been found to produce a superior
product (K. Domier, personal communication).
Experimental production of hemp fiberboard has produced extremely strong
material (e.g. Fig. 22). The economic viability of such
remains to be tested. Molded fiberboard
products are commercially viable in Europe (e.g. Fig. 23), but their potential
in North America remains to be determined.
Utilizing
the ancient technique of reinforcing clay with straw to produce reinforced bricks
for constructing domiciles, plant fibers have found a
number of comparable uses in modern times. Hemp fibers
added to concrete increase tensile strength while reducing shrinkage and
cracking. Whole houses have been made based on hemp fiber
(Figs. 24, 25). In North America, such usage has only reached the level of a
cottage industry. Fiber-reinforced cement boards and fiber-reinforced plaster are other occasionally produced
experimental products. Hemp fibers are produced at
much more cost than wood chips and straw from many other crops, so high-end
applications requiring high strength seem most appropriate.
The
above uses are based on hemp as a mechanical strengthener
of materials. Hemp can also be chemically combined with materials. For example,
hemp with gypsum and binding agents may produce light panels that might compete
with drywall. Hemp and lime mixtures make a high quality plaster. Hemp hurds are rich in silica (which occurs naturally in sand
and flint), and the hurds mixed with lime undergo mineralisation, to produce a stone-like material. The
technology is most advanced in France (e.g. Fig. 26). The mineralized material
can be blown or poured into the cavities of walls and in attics as insulation.
The foundations, walls, floors, and ceilings of houses have been made using
hemp hurds mixed with natural lime and water.
Sometimes plaster of Paris (pure gypsum), cement, or sand is added. The
resulting material can be poured like concrete, but has a texture vaguely
reminiscent of cork - much lighter than cement, and with better heat and
sound-insulating properties. An experimental “ceramic tile” made of hemp has
recently been produced (Fig. 27).
The
woody core (hurds, sometimes called shives) of hemp makes remarkably good animal bedding (Figs.
28, 29). The hurds are sometimes molded
into small pellets for bedding applications (Fig. 30). Such appears to be
unsurpassed for horse bedding, and also make an excellent litter for cats and
other pets (e.g. Fig. 31). The hurds can absorb up to
five times their weight in moisture (typically 50% higher than wood shavings),
do not produce dust (following initial dust removal), and are easily composted.
Hemp bedding is especially suited to horses allergic to straw. In Europe, the
animal bedding market is not considered important (Karus
et al. 2000), but in North America, there are insufficient hemp hurds available to meet market demand.
The
high absorbency of hemp hurds has led to their
occasional use as an absorbent for oil and waste spill cleanup. Hemp as an
industrial absorbent has generated some interest in Alberta, for use in land
reclamation in the oil and gas industry. Because hemp hurds
are a costly product, it is likely that animal bedding will remain the most
important application.
Geotextiles
In
the EU and Canada, hemp has often been grown as a dual-purpose crop, i.e. for
both fiber and oilseed. In France, dual purpose hemp
is typically harvested twice - initially the upper seed-bearing part of the
stems is cut and threshed with a combine, and subsequently the remaining stems
are harvested. Growing hemp to the stage that mature seeds are present
compromises the quality of the fiber, because of lignification. As well, the hurds
become more difficult to separate. The lower quality fiber,
however, is quite utilizable for pulp and non-woven usages.
In North America, oilseed hemp
has several advantages over fiber hemp. Hemp seed and
oil can fetch higher prices than hemp fiber. Hemp
seed can be processed using existing equipment, while processing of hemp fiber usually requires new facilities and equipment.
Canada
is specialized on oilseed production and processing, so that hemp oil and grain
are much more suitable than fiber. Because of the
extensive development of oilseeds in Canada, there is extensive capacity to
produce high-quality cold-pressed hemp oil. Canada in the last 5 years has made
great advances in the growing, harvesting and processing of hempseed, and
indeed has moved ahead of the EU in the development of raw materials and
products for the natural foods, nutraceuticals, and
cosmetics industries. In the EU, a yield of 1 tonne/ha is considered good. In
Canada, extraordinary yields of 1.5 tonne/ha have been realized, at least
locally, although in the initial years of hempseed development in Canada yields
were often less than 500 kg/ha. In 1999, the year of largest Canadian hemp
acreage, yields averaged 900 kg/ha. (Ideally, hemp seed yield should be based
on air dry weight - with about 12% moisture. Hemp yields are sometime
uncertain, and could be exaggerated by as much as 50% when moist weights are
reported.)
Canadian
experience with growing hemp commercially for the last 4 years has convinced
many growers that it is better to use a single-purpose cultivar, seed or fiber, than a dual-purpose cultivar. The recent focus of
Canadian hemp breeders has been to develop cultivars with high seed yields, low
stature (to avoid channelling the plants’ energy into stalk, as is the case in fiber cultivars), early maturation (for the short growing
seasons of Canada), and desirable fatty acid spectrum (especially gamma-linolenic acid).
Dehulled (i.e. hulled) hemp seed is a very recent phenomenon, first produced
in quantity in Europe. Hemp seeds have been used as food since ancient times,
but generally the whole seed, including the hull, was eaten. Hemp seed was a grain used in ancient China, although
there has been only minor direct use of hempseed as food by humans. In the past, hemp seed has generally been a food of the lower
classes, or a famine food. Peanut-butter type preparations have been produced
from hemp seed in Europe for centuries, but were rather gritty since technology
for removing the hulls was rudimentary. Modern seed dehulling
using mechanical separation produces a smooth, white, gritless hemp seed meal
that needs no additional treatment before it is consumed. It is important to
understand, therefore, that the quality of modern hemp seed for human
consumption far exceeds anything produced historically. This seed meal should
be distinguished from the protein-rich, oil-poor seed cake remaining after oil
has been expressed, that is used for livestock feed. The seed cake is also
referred to as “seed meal,” and has proven to be excellent for animals (Mustafa
et al. 1999).
Hemp
seeds have an attractive nutty taste, and are now incorporated into many food
preparations (Fig. 34), often mimicking familiar foods. Those sold in North
America include nutritional (granola-type) or snack bars, “nut butters” and
other spreads, bread, pretzels, cookies, yogurts, pancakes, porridge, fruit
crumble, frozen dessert (“ice cream”), pasta, burgers, pizza, salt substitute,
salad dressings, mayonnaise, “cheese,” and beverages (“milk,” “lemonade,”
“beer,” “wine,” “coffee nog”). Hemp seed is often
found canned or vacuum-packed (Fig. 35). Alcoholic beverages made with hemp
utilize hempseed as a flavorant. Hemp food products
currently have a niche market, based particularly on natural food and specialty
food outlets.
The use of Cannabis for
seed oil (Fig. 36) began at least 3 millennia ago. Hempseed oil is a drying
oil, formerly used in paints and varnishes and in the manufacture of soap.
Present cultivation of oilseed hemp is not competitive with linseed for
production of oil for manufacturing, or to sunflower and canola for edible
vegetable oil. However, as noted below, there are remarkable dietary advantages
to hempseed oil, which accordingly has good potential for penetrating the salad
oil market, and for use in a very wide variety of food products. There is also good
potential for hemp oil in cosmetics and skin-care products.
Foreign
sources, China in particular, can produce hemp seed cheaply, but imported seed
must be sterilized, and the delays this usually requires are detrimental. Seed
that has been sterilized tends to go rancid quickly, and so it is imperative
that fresh seed be available, a great advantage for domestic production. An
additional extremely significant advantage that domestic producers have over
foreign sources is organic production, which is important for the image desired
by the hemp food market. Organic certification is much more reliable in North
America than in the foreign countries that offer cheap seeds. Whereas China
used to supply most of the hempseed used for food in North America, Canadian-grown
seeds have taken over this market.
About
half of the world market for hemp oil is currently used for food and food
supplements (De Guzman 2001). For edible purposes, hempseed oil is extracted by
cold pressing. Quality is improved by using only the first pressing,
and minimizing the number of green seeds present. The oil varies in color from
off-yellow to dark green. The taste is pleasantly nutty, sometimes with a touch
of bitterness. Hemp oil is high in unsaturated fatty acids (of the order of 75%),
which can easily oxidize, so it is unsuitable for frying or baking. The high
degree of unsaturation is responsible for the extreme
sensitivity to oxidative rancidity. The oil has a relatively short shelf life.
It should be extracted under nitrogen (to prevent oxidation), protected from
light by being kept in dark bottles, and from heat by refrigeration. Addition
of anti-oxidants prolongs the longevity of the oil. Steam sterilization of the
seeds, often required by law, allows air to penetrate and so stimulates
rancidity. Accordingly, sterilized or roasted hemp seeds, and products made
from hemp seed that have been subjected to cooking, should be fresh. The value
of hemp oil from the point of view of the primary components is discussed
below. In addition, it has been suggested that other components, including
trace amounts of terpenes and cannabinoids,
could have health benefits (Leizer et al. 2000). According to an ancient legend
(Abel 1980), Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, survived a 6-year interval of asceticism
by eating nothing but one hemp seed daily. This apocryphal story holds a germ
of truth -- hemp seed is astonishingly nutritional.
The
quality of an oil or fat is most importantly determined by its fatty acid
composition. Hemp is of high nutritional quality because it contains high
amounts of unsaturated fatty acids, mostly oleic acid (C18:1 - 10-16%), linoleic acid (C18:2 - 50-60%), alpha-linolenic
acid (C18:3 - 20-25%), and gamma-linolenic acid
(C18:3 - 2-5%) (Fig. 37). Linoleic
acid and alpha-linolenic acid are the only two fatty acids that must
be ingested and are considered essential to human health (Callaway 1998). In contrast to shorter-chain and more saturated fatty acids, these
essential fatty acids do not serve as energy sources, but as raw materials for
cell structure and as precursors for biosynthesis for many of the body’s
regulatory biochemicals. The essential fatty acids
are available in other oils, particularly fish and flaxseed, but these tend to
have unpleasant flavors compared to the mellow,
slightly nutty flavor of hempseed oil. While the
value of unsaturated fats is generally appreciated, it is much less well known
that the North American diet is serious nutritionally unbalanced by an excess
of linoleic over alpha-linonenic
acid. In hempseed, linoleic and alpha-linolenic occur in a ratio of about 3:1, considered optimal
in healthy human adipose tissue, and apparently unique among common plant oils
(Deferne and Pate 1996). Gamma-linolenic
acid or GLA is another significant component of hemp oil (1-6%, depending on
cultivar). GlA is a widely consumed supplement known
to affect vital metabolic roles in humans, ranging from control of inflammation
and vascular tone to initiation of contractions during childbirth. GLA has been
found to alleviate psoriasis, atopic eczema, and mastalgia, and may also benefit cardiovascular, psychiatric
and immunological disorders. Ageing and pathology (diabetes, hypertension,
etc.) may impair GLA metabolism, making supplementation desirable. As much as
15% of the human population may benefit from addition of GLA to their diet. At
present, GLA is available in health food shops and pharmacies primarily as soft
gelatin capsules of borage or evening primrose oil,
but hemp is almost certainly a much more economic source. Although the content
of GLA in the seeds is lower, hemp is far easier to cultivate and
higher-yielding. It is important to note that hemp is the only current natural
food source of GLA, i.e. not requiring the consumption of extracted dietary
supplements. There are other fatty acids in small concentrations in hemp seed
that have some dietary significance, including stearidonic
acid (Callaway et al. 1996) and eicosenoic acid (Mölleken and Theimer 1997).
Because of the extremely desirable fatty acid constitution of hemp oil, it is
now being marketed as a dietary supplement in capsule form (Fig. 38).
Tocopherols are major antioxidants in human serum. Alpha-
beta-, gamma- and delta- tocopherol represent the
Vitamin E group. These fat-soluble vitamins are essential for human nutrition,
especially the alpha-form, which is commonly called vitamin E. About 80% of the
tocopherols of hempseed oil is
the alpha form. The vitamin E content of hempseed is comparatively high.
Antioxidants in hempseed oil are believed to stabilize the highly
polyunsaturated oil, tending to keep it from going rancid. Sterols in the seeds
probably serve the same function, and like the tocopherols
are also desirable from a human health viewpoint.
Hemp
seeds contain 25-30% protein, with a reasonably complete amino acid spectrum.
About two thirds of hempseed protein is edestin. All
eight amino acids essential in the human diet are present, as well as others.
Although the protein content is smaller than that of soybean, it is much higher
than in grains like wheat, rye, maize, oat and barley. As noted above, the oilcake remaining after
oil is expressed from the seeds is a very nutritious
feed supplement for livestock, but it can also be used for production of a
high-protein flour.
In
the 1990s, European firms introduced lines of hemp oil-based personal care
products, including soaps, shampoos, bubble baths, and perfumes. Hemp oil is
now marketed throughout the world in a range of body care products, including
creams, lotions, moisturizers, and lip balms. In Germany, a laundry detergent
manufactured entirely from hemp oil has been marketed. Hemp-based cosmetics and
personal care products account for about half of the world market for hemp oil
(De Guzman 2001).
One
of the most significant developments for the North American hemp industry was
investment in hemp products by Anita and Gordon Roddick,
founders of The Body Shop, a well known international chain of hair and body
care retailers. This was a rather courageous and principled move that required
overcoming American legal obstacles related to THC content. The Body Shop now
markets an impressive array of hemp nutraceutical
cosmetics (Fig. 39), and this has given the industry considerable credibility.
The Body Shop has reported gross sales of about a billion dollars annually, and
that about 4% of sales in 2000 were hemp products.
The
vegetable oils have been classified by “iodine value” as drying (120-200), semi-drying
(100-120), and non-drying (80-100), which is
determined by the degree of saturation of the fatty acids present (Raie et al. 1995). Good coating materials prepared from
vegetable oil depend on the nature and number of double bonds present in the fatty
acids. Linseed oil, a drying oil, has a very high percentage of linolenic acid. Hempseed oil has been classified as a semi-drying oil, like soybean oil, and is therefore more
suited to edible than industrial oil purposes. Nevertheless hemp oil has found
applications in the past in paints, varnishes, sealants, lubricants for
machinery, and printing inks. However, such industrial end uses are not
presently feasible as the oil is considered too expensive (de Guzman 2001).
Larger production volumes and lower prices may be possible, in which case hemp
oil may find industrial uses similar to those of linseed (flax), soybean, and
sunflower oils, which are presently used in paints, inks, solvents, binders,
and in polymer plastics. Hemp shows a remarkable range of variation in oil
constituents, and selection for oilseed cultivars with high content of valued
industrial constituents is in progress.
Marijuana has in fact been grown
for medicinal research in North America by both the Canadian (Fig. 40) and
American governments, and this will likely continue. The possibility of
marijuana becoming a legal commercial crop in North America is, to say the
least, unlikely in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless the private sector is
currently producing medicinal marijuana in Europe and Canada, so the following
orientation to marijuana as a potential authorized crop is not merely academic.
The objectivity of scientific
evaluation of the medicinal value of marijuana to date has been questioned. In
the words of Hirst et al. (1998): “The ...status of
cannabis has made modern clinical research almost impossible. This is primarily
because of the legal, ethical and bureaucratic difficulties in conducting
trials with patients. Additionally, the general attitude towards cannabis, in
which it is seen only as a drug of abuse and addiction, has not helped.” In a
recent editorial, the respected journal Nature (2001) stated: “Governments,
including the US federal government, have until recently refused to sanction
the medical use of marijuana, and have also done what they can to prevent its
clinical testing. They have defended their inaction by claiming that either
step would signal to the public a softening of the so-called ‘war on drugs.’...
The pharmacology of cannabinoids is a valid field of
scientific investigation. Pharmacologists have the tools and the methodologies
to realize its considerable potential, provided the political climate permits
them to do so.” Given these current demands for research on medicinal
marijuana, it will be necessary to produce crops of drug types of C. sativa.
Earliest reference to euphoric
use of C. sativa appears to date to China of 5
millennia ago, but it was in India over the last millennium that drug
consumption became more firmly entrenched than anywhere else in the world. Not
surprisingly, the most highly domesticated drug strains were selected in India.
While C. sativa has been used as a euphoriant in India, the Near East, parts of Africa, and
other Old World areas for thousands of years, such use simply did not develop
in temperate countries where hemp was raised. The use of C. sativa as a recreational inebriant in sophisticated,
largely urban settings is substantially a 20th century phenomenon.
Cannabis drug
preparations have been employed medicinally in folk medicine since antiquity,
and were extensively used in western medicine between the middle of the 19th
century and World War II, particularly as a substitute for opiates (Mikuriya 1969; a bottle of commercial medicinal extract is
shown in Fig. 41). Medical use declined with the introduction of synthetic
analgesics and sedatives, and there is very limited authorized medical use
today, but considerable unauthorized use, including so-called “compassion clubs”
dispensing marijuana to gravely ill people, which has led to a momentous
societal and scientific debate regarding the wisdom of employing cannabis drugs
medically, given the illicit status. There is anecdotal evidence that cannabis
drugs are useful for: alleviating nausea, vomiting and anorexia following
radiation therapy and chemotherapy; as an appetite stimulant for AIDS patients;
for relieving the tremors of multiple sclerosis and epilepsy; and for pain
relief, glaucoma, asthma, and other ailments (see Mechoulam
and Hanus (1997) for an authoritative medical review,
and Pate (1995) for a guide to the medical literature). To date, governmental
authorities in the US, on the advice of medical experts, have consistently
rejected the authorization of medical use of marijuana except in a handful of
cases. However, in the UK medicinal marijuana is presently being produced
sufficient to supply thousands of patients, and Canada recently authorized the
cultivation of medicinal marijuana for compassionate dispensation, as well as
for a renewed effort at medical evaluation.
Several
of the cannabinoids are reputed to have medicinal
potential: THC for glaucoma, spasticity from spinal
injury or multiple sclerosis, pain, inflammation, insomnia, and asthma; CBD for
some psychological problems. The Netherlands firm HortaPharm
developed strains of Cannabis rich in particular cannabinoids.
The British firm G.W. Pharmaceuticals acquired proprietary access to these for
medicinal purposes, and is developing medicinal marijuana. In the US, NIH
(National Institute of Health) has a program of research into medicinal
marijuana, and has supplied a handful of individuals for years with maintenance
samples for medical usage. The American Drug Enforcement Administration is
hostile to the medicinal use of Cannabis, and for decades research on
medicinal properties of Cannabis in the US has been in an extremely
inhospitable climate, except for projects and researchers concerned with
curbing drug abuse. Synthetic preparations of THC - dronabinol
(Marinol®) and nabilone (Cesamet®) - are permitted in some cases, but are expensive
and widely considered to be less effective than simply smoking preparations of
marijuana. Relatively little material needs to be cultivated for medicinal
purposes (Small 1971), although security considerations considerably inflate
costs. The potential as a “new crop” for medicinal cannabinoid
uses is therefore limited. However, the added-value potential in the form of
proprietary drug derivatives and drug-delivery systems is huge. The medicinal
efficacy of Cannabis is extremely controversial, and regrettably is
often confounded with the issue of balancing harm and liberty concerning the
proscriptions against recreational use of marijuana. This paper is principally
concerned with the industrial uses of Cannabis. In this context, the
chief significance of medicinal Cannabis is that, like the issue of
recreational use, it has made it very difficult to rationally consider the
development of industrial hemp in North America for purposes that everyone
should agree are not harmful.
Key
analyses of the medicinal use of marijuana are: Le Dain
(1972), Health Council of the Netherlands (1996), American Medical Association
(1997), British Medical Association (1997), National Institutes of Health
(1997), World Health Organization (1997), House of Lord (1998), and Joy et al.
(1999).
It
has been contended that hemp is notably superior to most crops in terms of
biomass production, but van der Werf
(1994b) noted that the annual dry mater yield of hemp (rarely approaching 20
tonnes/ha) is not exceptional compared to corn, beets, or potato. Nevertheless,
hemp has been rated on a variety of criteria as one of the best crops available
to produce energy in Europe (Biewinga and van der Bijl 1996). Hemp, especially
the hurds, can be burned as is or processed into
charcoal, methanol, methane, or gasoline through pyrolysis
(destructive distillation). As with corn, hemp can also be used to create
ethanol. However, hemp for such biomass purposes is a doubtful venture in North
America. Conversion of hemp biomass into fuel or alcohol is impractical on this
continent, where there are abundant supplies of wood, and energy can be
produced relatively cheaply from a variety of sources. Mallik
et al. (1990) studied the possibility of using hemp for “biogas” (i.e. methane)
production, and concluded that it was unsuitable for this purpose. Pinfold
Consulting (1998) concluded that while there may be some potential for hemp
biomass fuel near areas where hemp is cultivated, “a fuel ethanol industry is
not expected to develop based on hemp.”
Essential
(volatile) oil in hemp is quite different from hempseed oil. Examples of
commercial essential oil product products are shown in Fig. 42. The essential
oil is a mixture of volatile compounds, including monoterpenes,
sesquiterpenes, and other terpenoid-like
compounds that are manufactured in the same epidermal glands in which the resin
of Cannabis is synthesized (Meier and Mediavilla
1998). Yields are very small - about 10 L/ha (Mediavilla
and Stenemann 1997), so essential oil of C. sativa is expensive, and today
is simply a novelty. Essential oil of different strains varies considerably in odor, and this may have economic importance in imparting a
scent to cosmetics, shampoos, soaps, creams, oils, perfumes, and foodstuffs.
Switzerland has been a centre for the production of essential oil for the
commercial market. Narcotic strains tend to be more attractive in odor than fiber strains, and
because they produce much higher numbers of flowers than fiber
strains, and the (female) floral parts provide most of the essential oil,
narcotic strains are naturally adapted to essential oil production. Switzerland
has permitted strains with higher THC content to be grown than is allowed in
other parts of the world, giving the country an advantage with respect to the
essential oil market. However, essential oil in the marketplace has often been
produced from low-THC Cannabis, and the THC content of essential oil
obtained by steam distillation can be quite low, producing a product satisfying
the needs for very low THC levels in food and other commercial goods. The
composition of extracted essential oil is quite different from the volatiles
released around the fresh plant (particularly limonene and alpha-pinene), so that a pleasant odor
of the living plant is not necessarily indicative of a pleasant-smelling
essential oil. Essential oil has been produced in Canada by Gen-X Research
Inc., Regina. The world market for hemp essential oil is very limited at
present, and probably also has limited growth potential.
Pesticide and Repellent Potential
McPartland (1997) reviewed research on the pesticide and
repellent applications of Cannabis. Dried plant parts and extracts of Cannabis
have received rather extensive usage for these purposes in the past, raising the possibility that research could produce
formulations of commercial value. This possibility is currently hypothetical.
Non-Seed Use of Hemp as Livestock Feed
As
noted above, hemp seed cake makes an excellent feed for animals. However,
feeding entire plants is another matter, because the leaves are covered with
the resin-producing glands. While deer, groundhogs, rabbits, and other mammals
will nibble on hemp plants, mammals generally do not choose to eat hemp. Jain
and Aroroa (1988) fed narcotic Cannabis refuse
to cattle, and found that the animals “suffered variable degrees of depression
and revealed incoordination in movement.” By
contrast, Letniak et al. (2000) conducted an
experimental trial of hemp as silage. No significant differences were found
between yield of the hemp and of barley/oat silage fed to heifers, suggesting
that fermenting hemp plants reduces possible harmful constituents.
Hemp as an Agricultural Barrier
One
of the most curious uses of hemp is as a fence to prevent pollen transfer in
commercial production of seeds. Isolation distances for ensuring that seeds
produced are pure are considerable for many plants, and often impractical. At
one point in the 1980s, the only permitted use of hemp in Germany was as a
fence or hedge to prevent plots of beets being used for seed production from
being contaminated by pollen from ruderal beets. The
high and rather inpenetrable hedge that hemp can
produce was considered unsurpassed by any other species for the purpose. As
well, the sticky leaves of hemp were thought to trap pollen. However, Saeglitz et al. (2000) demonstrated that the spread of beet
pollen is not effectively prevented by hemp hedges. Fiber
(i.e. tall) varieties of hemp were also once used in Europe as wind-breaks,
protecting vulnerable crops against wind damage. Although hemp plants can
lodge, on the whole very tall hemp is remarkably resistant against wind.
Preliminary
work in Germany (noted in Karus and Leson 1994) suggested that hemp could be grown on soils
contaminated with heavy metals, while the fiber
remained virtually free of the metals. Koz»owski
et al. (1995) observed that hemp grew very well on copper-contaminated soil in
Poland (although seeds absorbed high levels of copper). Baraniecki
(1997) found similar results. Mölleken et al. (1997)
studied effects of high concentration of salts of copper, chromium and zinc on
hemp, and demonstrated that some hemp cultivars have potential application to
growth in contaminated soils. It would seem unwise to grow hemp as an oilseed
on contaminated soils, but such a habitat might be suitable for a fiber or biomass crop. The possibility of using hemp for
bioremediation deserves additional study.
Hemp
is plagued by bird predation, which take a heavy toll
on seed production. The seeds are well know to provide
extremely nutritious food for both wild birds and domestic fowl. Hunters and
birdwatchers who discover wild patches of hemp often keep this information
secret, knowing that the area will be a magnet for birds in the fall when seed
maturation occurs. Increasingly in North America, plants are being established
to provide habitat and food for wildlife. Hemp is not an aggressive weed, and
certainly has great potential for being used as a wildlife plant. Of course,
current conditions forbid such usage in North America.
Hemp
has at times in the past been grown simply for its ornamental value. The short,
strongly-branched cultivar ‘Panorama’ (Fig. 43) bred by Iván
Bósca, the dean of the world’s living hemp breeders,
was commercialized in Hungary in the 1980s, and has been said to be the only
ornamental hemp cultivar available. It has had limited success, of course,
because there are very few circumstances that permit private gardeners can grow
Cannabis as an ornamental today. By contrast, beautiful ornamental
cultivars of opium poppy are widely cultivated in home gardens across North
America, despite their absolute illegality and the potentially draconian
penalties that could be imposed. Doubtless in the unlikely event that it became
possible, many would grow hemp as an ornamental.
The
following sketch of hemp cultivation is insufficient to address all of the
practical problems that are encountered by hemp growers. Bócsa
and Karus (1998) is the best overall presentation of
hemp growing available in English. The reader is warned that this book, as well
as almost all of the literature on hemp, is very much more concerned with fiber production than oilseed production. McPartland et al. (2000) is the best presentation available
on diseases and pests, which fortunately under most circumstances do limited
damage. The resource list presented below should be consulted by those wishing
to learn about hemp production. Provincial agronomists in Canada now have
experience with hemp, and can make local recommendations. Particularly good web
documents are: for Ontario (OMAFRA Hemp Series, several documents): ; for Manitoba (several documents): ; for British Columbia: (BC Ministry of Agriculture and Foods Fact
Sheet on Industrial Hemp, prepared by A. Oliver and H. Joynt):
http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/croplive/plant/horticult/specialty/specialty.htm
In the US, extension publications produced
up to the end of World War II are still useful, albeit outdated (e.g. Robinson
1935; Wilsie et al. 1942; Hackleman
and Domingo 1943; Wilsie et al. 1944).
Hemp
does best on a loose, well-aerated loam soil with high fertility and abundant
organic matter. Well-drained clay soils can be used, but poorly-drained clay
soils are very inappropriate because of their susceptibility to compaction,
which is not tolerated. Young plants are sensitive to wet or flooded soils, so
that hemp must have porous, friable, well-drained soils. Sandy soils will grow
good hemp, provided that adequate irrigation and fertilization are provided,
but doing so generally makes production uneconomical. Seedbed preparation
requires considerable effort. Fall plowing is
recommended, followed by careful preparation of a seedbed in the spring. The
seedbed should be fine, level, and firm. Seed is best planted at 2-3 cm (twice
as deep will be tolerated). Although the seedlings will germinate and survive
at temperatures just above freezing, soil temperatures of 8-10EC are preferable. Generally hemp should be planted afer danger of hard freezes, and slightly before the
planting date of corn. Good soil moisture is necessary for seed germination,
and plenty of rainfall is needed for good growth, especially during the first 6
weeks. Seeding rate is specific to each variety, and this information should be
sought from the supplier. Fiber strains are typically
sown at a minimum rate of 250 seeds per m2 (approximately 45 kg/ha),
and up to three times this density is sometimes recommended. In western Europe, seeding rates range from 60 to 70 kg/ha for fiber cultivars. Recommendations for seeding rates for
grain production vary widely, from 10-45 kg/ha. Densities for seed production
for tall, European, dual-purpose cultivars are less than for short oilseed
cultivars. Low plant densities, as commonly found in growing tall European
cultivars for seed, may not suppress weed growth adequately, and under these
circumstances resort to herbicides may pose a problem for those wishing to grow
hempseed organically. Hemp requires about the same fertility as a high-yielding
crop of wheat. Industrial hemp grows well in areas that corn produces high
yields. Growing hemp may require addition of up to 110 kg/ha of nitrogen, and 40-90-
kg/ha of potash. Hemp particularly requires good nitrogen fertilization, more
so for seed production than fiber. Adding nitrogen
when it is not necessary is deleterious to fiber
production, so that knowledge of the fertility of soils being used is very
important. Organic matter is preferably over 3.5%, phosphorus should be medium
to high (>40 ppm), potassium should be medium to
high (>250 ppm), sulfur
good (>5,000 ppm) and calcium not in excess
(<6,000 ppm).
Finding
cultivars suited to local conditions is a key to success. Hemp prefers warm
growing conditions, and the best European fiber
strains are photoperiodically adapted to flowering in
southern Europe, which provides seasons of at least 4 months for fiber, and 5.5 months for seed production. Asian land races
are similarly adapted to long seasons. In Canada, many of the available
cultivars flower too late in the season for fiber
production, and the same may be predicted for the northern US. Fiber production should also be governed by availability of
moisture throughout the season, and the need for high humidity in the late
summer and fall for retting, so that large areas of the interior and west of
North America are not adapted to growing fiber hemp.
The US Corn Belt has traditionally been considered to be best for fiber hemp. There are very few cultivars dedicated to
oilseed production (such as ‘Finola’ and ‘Anka’) or that at least are known to produce good oilseed
crops (such as ‘Fasamo’ and ‘Uniko-B’).
Oilseed production was a specialty of the USSR, and there is some likelihood
that northern regions of North America may find short-season, short-stature
oilseed cultivars ideal.
Although
hemp can be successfully grown continuously for several years on the same land,
rotation with other crops is desirable. A 3- or preferably 4-year rotation may
involve cereals, clover or alfalfa for green manure, corn, and hemp. In Ontario
it has been recommended that hemp not follow canola, edible beans, soybeans or
sunflowers. However, according to Bócsa and Karus (1998), “it matters little what crops are grown prior
to hemp.”
For
a fiber crop, hemp is cut in the early flowering
stage or while pollen is being shed, well before seeds are set. Tall European
cultivars (greater than 2 m) plants have mostly been grown in Canada to date,
and most of these are photoperiodically adapted to
mature late in the season (often too late). Small crops have been harvested
with sickle-bar mowers and hay swathers, but plugging
of equipment is a constant problem. Hemp fibers tend
to wrap around combine belts, bearings, indeed any moving part, and have
resulted in large costs of combining repairs (estimated at $10.00/ha). Slower
operation of conventional combines has been recommended (0.6 - 2 ha/hour).
Large crops may require European specialized equipment, but experience in North
America with crops grown mainly for fiber is limited.
The Dutch company HempFlax has developed or adapted
several kinds of specialized harvesting equipment (Figs. 44, 45).
Retting
is generally done in the field (Figs. 46, 47). This typically requires weeks.
The windrows should be turned once or twice. If not turned, the stems close to
the ground will remain green while the top ones are retted and turn brown. When
the stalks have become sufficiently retted requires experience - the fibers should have turned golden or grayish
in color, and should separate easily from the interior wood. Baling can be done
with any kind of baler (Fig. 48). Stalks should have less than 15% moisture
when baled, and should be allowed to dry to about 10% in storage. Bales must be
stored indoors. Retted stalks are loosely held together, and for highest
quality fiber applications, need to be decorticated, scutched, hackled and combed to remove the remaining pieces
of stalks, broken fibers, and extraneous material.
The equipment for this is rare in North America, and consequently use of
domestically-produced fiber for high quality textile
applications is extremely limited. However, as described above relatively crude
fiber preparations also have applications.
Harvesting
tall varieties for grain is difficult. In France, the principal grower of
dual-purpose varieties, the grain is taken off the field first, leaving most of
the stalks for later harvest (Fig. 49). Putting tall whole
plants through a conventional combine results in the straw winding around
moving parts, and the fibers working into bearing,
causing breakdown, fires, high maintenance, and frustration. Following
the French example of raising the cutting blade to harvest the grain is advisable.
Growing short varieties dedicated to grain production eliminates many of the
above problems, and since the profitability of hemp straw is limited at
present, seems preferable. Grain growers should be aware that flocks of
voracious birds are a considerable source of damage to hempseed, particularly
in small plantations.
ECOLOGICAL FRIENDLINESS OF HEMP
Although the environmental and
biodiversity benefits of growing hemp have been greatly exaggerated in the
popular press, C. sativa is nevertheless
exceptionally suitable for organic agriculture, and is remarkably less “ecotoxic” in comparison to most other crops (Montford and Small 1999b). Figure 50 presents a comparison
of the ecological friendliness of Cannabis crops (fiber,
oilseed, and narcotics) and 21 of the world’s major crops, based on 26 criteria
used by Montford and Small (1999a) to compare the
ecological friendliness of crops.
The most widespread claim for
environmental friendliness of hemp is that it has the potential to save trees
that otherwise would be harvested for production of lumber and pulp. Earlier,
the limitations of hemp as a pulp substitute were examined. With respect to
wood products, several factors appear to favor
increased use of wood substitutes, especially agricultural fibers
such as hemp. Deforestation, particularly the destruction of old growth
forests, and the world’s decreasing supply of wild
timber resources are today major ecological concerns. Agroforestry
using tree species is one useful response, but nevertheless sacrifices wild
lands and biodiversity, and is less preferable than sustainable wildland forestry. The use of agricultural residues (e.g.
straw bales in house construction) is an especially environmentally friendly
solution to sparing trees, but material limitations restrict use. Another chief
advantage of several annual fiber crops over forestry
crops is relative productivity, annual fiber crops
sometimes producing of the order of four times as much per unit of land. Still
another important advantage is the precise control over production quantities
and schedule that is possible with annual crops. In many parts of the world,
tree crops are simply not a viable alternative. “By the turn of the century 3
billion people may live in areas where wood is cut faster than it grows or
where fuelwood is extremely scarce” (World Commission
on Environment and Development 1987). “Since mid-century, lumber use has
tripled, paper use has increased six-fold, and firewood use has soared as Third
World populations have multiplied” (Brown et al. 1998). Insofar as hemp reduces
the need to harvest trees for building materials or other products, its use as
a wood substitute will tend to contribute to preserving biodiversity. Hemp may
also enhance forestry management by responding to short-term fiber demand while trees reach their ideal maturation. In
developing countries where fuelwood is becoming
increasingly scarce and food security is a concern, the introduction of a
dual-purpose crop such as hemp to meet food, shelter and fuel needs may
contribute significantly to preserving biodiversity.
The most valid claims to
environmental friendliness of hemp are with respect to agricultural biocides
(pesticides, fungicides, herbicides). Cannabis sativa
is known to be exceptionally resistant to pests (note Fig. 51), although, the
degree of immunity to attacking organisms has been greatly exaggerated, with
several insects and fungi specializing on hemp. Despite this, use of pesticides
and fungicides on hemp is usually unnecessary, although introduction of hemp to
regions should be expected to generate local problems. Cannabis sativa is also relatively resistant to weeds, and so
usually requires relatively little herbicide. Fields intended for hemp use are
still frequently normally cleared of weeds using herbicides, but so long as
hemp is thickly seeded (as is always done when hemp is grown for fiber), the rapidly developing young plants normally shade
out competing weeds.
BREEDING HEMP FOR NORTH AMERICA
The
basic commercial options for growing hemp in North America is
as a fiber plant, an oilseed crop, or for dual
harvest for both seeds and fiber. Judged on
experience in Canada to date, the industry is inclined to specialize on either fiber or grain, but not both. Hemp in our opinion is particularly
suited to be developed as an oilseed crop in North America. The first and
foremost breeding goal is to decrease the price of hempseed by creating more
productive cultivars. While the breeding of hemp fiber
cultivars has proceeded to the point that only slight improvements can be
expected in productivity in the future, the genetic potential of hemp as an
oilseed has scarcely been addressed. From the point of view of world markets,
concentrating on oilseed hemp makes sense, because Europe has shown only
limited interest to date in developing oilseed hemp, whereas a tradition of
concentrating on profitable oilseed products is already well established in the
US and Canada. Further, China’s supremacy in the production of high-quality
hemp textiles at low prices will be very difficult to match, while domestic
production of oilseeds can be carried out using technology that is already
available. The present productivity of oilseed hemp - about 1 tonne/ha under
good conditions, and occasional reports of 1.5 to 2 tonnes/ha, is not yet
sufficient for the crop to become competitive with North America’s major
oilseeds. We suggest that an average productivity of 2 tonnes/ha will be
necessary to transform hempseed into a major oilseed, and that this breeding
goal is achievable. At present, losses of 30% of the seed yields are not
uncommon, so that improvements in harvesting technology should also contribute
to higher yields. Hemp food products cannot escape their niche market status
until the price of hempseed rivals that of other oilseeds, particularly
rapeseed, flax, and sunflower. Most hemp breeding that has been conducted to
date has been for fiber characteristics, so that
there should be considerable improvement possible. The second breeding goal is
for larger seeds, as these are more easily shelled. Third is breeding for
specific seed components. Notable are the health-promoting gamma-linolenic acid; improving the amino acid spectrum of the
protein; and increasing the antioxidant level, which would not only have health
benefits but could increase the shelf life of hemp oil and foods.
Germplasm for the improvement of hemp is vital for the
future of the industry in North America. However, there are no publically available germplasm
banks housing C. sativa in North America. The
hundreds of seed collections acquired for Small’s
studies (reviewed in Small 1979) were destroyed in 1980 because Canadian
government policy at that time envisioned no possibility that hemp would ever
be developed as a legitimate crop. An inquiry regarding the 56 United States
Department of Agriculture hemp germplasm collections
supplied to and grown by Small and Beckstead (1973)
resulted in the reply that there are no remaining hemp collections in USDA germplasm holdings, and indeed that were such to be found
they would have to be destroyed. While hemp has been and still is cultivated in
Asia and South America, it is basically in Europe that germplasm
banks have made efforts to preserve hemp seeds. The Vavilov
Institute of Plant Research in St. Petersburg, Russia has by far the largest germplasm collection of hemp of any public gene bank, with
about 500 collections (detailed information on the majority of hemp accessions
of the Vavilov Institute can be found in Anonymous
(1975)). Budgetary problems in Russia have endangered the survival of this
invaluable collection, and every effort needs to be made to find new funding to
preserve it. Maintenance and seed generation issues for the Vavilov
hemp germplasm collection are discussed in a number
of articles in the Journal of the International Hemp Association (e.g.Clarke 1998b; Lemeshev et al.1993, 1994). The Gatersleben
gene bank of Germany, the 2nd largest public gene bank in Europe,
has a much smaller Cannabis collection, with less than 40 accessions
(detailed information on the hemp accessions of the Gatersleben
gene bank are available at ). Because hemp is regaining its ancient status as an important
crop, a number of private germplasm collections have
been assembled for the breeding of cultivars as commercial ventures (for
examples see de Meijer 1999; de Meijer
and van Soest 1992), and of course these are
available only on a restricted basis, if at all.
The
most pressing need of the hemp industry in North America is for the breeding of
more productive oilseed cultivars. At present, mainly European cultivars are
available, of which very few are suitable for specialized oilseed production.
More importantly, hempseed oil is not competitive, except in the novelty niche
market, with the popular food oils. As argued above, to be competitive, hemp
should produce approximately 2 tonnes/ha; at present 1 tonne/ha is considered
average to good production. Doubling the productive capacity of a conventional
crop would normally be considered impossible, but it needs to be understood
just how little hemp has been developed as an oilseed. There may not even be
extant land races of the kind of hemp oilseed strains that were once grown in
Russia, so that except for a very few very recent oilseed cultivars, there has
been virtually no breeding of oilseed hemp. Contrarily, hemp has been selected
for fiber to the point that some breeders consider
its productivity in this respect has already been maximised. Fiber strains have been selected for low seed production,
so that most hemp germplasm has certainly not been
selected for oilseed characteristics. By contrast, drug varieties have been
selected for very high yield of flowers, and accordingly produce very high
yield of seeds. Drug varieties have been observed to produce more than a
kilogram of seed per plant, so that a target yield of several tonnes per hEctare is conceivable (Watson and Clarke 1997). Of course,
the high THC in drug cultivars makes these a difficult source of germplasm. However, wild plants of C. sativa have naturally undergone selection for high seed
productivity, and are a particularly important potential source of breeding germplasm.
Wild North American hemp is
derived mostly from escaped European cultivated hemp imported in past
centuries, perhaps especially from a revival of cultivation during World War
II. Wild Canadian hemp is concentrated along the St. Lawrence and lower Great Lakes, where considerable cultivation occurred
in the 1800s. In the US, wild hemp is best established in the American Midwest
and Northeast, where hemp was grown historically in large amounts. Decades of
eradication have exterminated many of the naturalized populations in North
America. In the US, wild plants are rather contemptuously called “ditch weed”
by law enforcement personnel. However, the attempts to destroy the wild
populations are short-sighted, because they are a natural genetic reservoir,
mostly low in THC. Wild North American plants have undergone many generations
of natural adaptation to local conditions of climate, soil and pests, and
accordingly it is safe to conclude that they harbor
genes that are invaluable for the improvement of hemp cultivars. We have
encountered exceptionally vigorous wild Canadian plants (Fig. 52), and grown
wild plants from Europe (Fig. 46) which could prove valuable. Indeed, studies
are in progress in Ontario to evaluate the agronomic usefulness of wild North
American hemp. Nevertheless, present policies in North America require the
eradication of wild hemp wherever encountered. In Europe and Asia, there is
little concern about wild hemp, which remains a valuable resource.
It
is clear that there is a culture of idealistic believers in hemp in North
America, and that there is great determination to establish the industry. As
history has demonstrated, unbridled enthusiasm for largely untested new crops
touted as gold mines sometimes leads to disaster. The attempt to raise silk in
the US is probably the most egregious example. In 1826 a Congressional report
that recommended the preparation of a practical manual on the industry resulted
in a contagious desire to plant mulberries for silk production, with the
eventual collapse of the industry, the loss of fortunes, and a legacy of
“Mulberry Streets” in the US (Chapter 2, Bailey 1898). In the early 1980s in
Minnesota, Jerusalem artichoke was touted as a fuel, a feed, a food, and a
sugar crop. Unfortunately there was no market for the new “wonder crop” and
hundreds of farmers lost about $20 million (Paarlberg
1990). The level of “hype” associated with industrial hemp is far more than has
been observed before for other new crops (Pinfold Consulting 1998). Probably
more so than any plant in living memory, hemp attracts people to attempt its
cultivation without first acquiring a realistic appreciation of the possible
pitfalls. American presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson encouraged
the cultivation of hemp, but both lost money trying to grow it. Sadly in Canada
in 1999 numerous farmers contracted to grow half of Canada’s acreage or hemp
for the American-based Consolidated Growers and Processors, and with the
collapse of the firm were left holding very large amounts of unmarketable grain
and baled hemp straw. This has represented a most untimely setback for a
fledgling industry, but at least has had a sobering effect on investing in
hemp. In this section we emphasize why producers should exercise caution before
getting into hemp.
In
Europe and Asia, hemp farming has been conducted for millennia. Although most
countries ceased growing hemp after the second word war, some didn’t, including
France, China, Russia, and Hungary, so that essential knowledge of how to grow
and process hemp was maintained. When commercial hemp cultivation resumed in
Canada in 1997, many farmers undertook to grow the crop without appreciating
its suitability for their situation, or for the hazzards
of an undeveloped market. Hemp was often grown on farms with marginal incomes
in the hopes that it was a saviour from a downward financial spiral. The myth
that hemp is a wonder crop that can be grown on any soil led some to cultivate
on soils with a history of producing poor crops; of course, a poor crop was the
result.
Market
considerations also heavily determine the wisdom of investing in hemp. Growing
hemp unfortunately has a magnetic attraction to many, so there is danger of
overproduction. A marketing board could be useful to prevent unrestrained
competition and price fluctuations, but is difficult to establish when the
industry is still very small. As noted above, unwise investment in Canada
produced a glut of seeds that resulted in price dumping and unprofitable levels
for the majority. Cultural and production costs of hemp have been said to be
comparable to those for corn, and while the truth of this remains to be
confirmed, the legislative burden that accompanies hemp puts the crop at a
unique disadvantage. Among the problems that Canadian farmers have faced are
the challenge of government licensing (some delays, and a large learning
curve), very expensive and sometime poor seed (farmers are not allowed to
generate their own seed), teenagers raiding fields in the mistaken belief that
marijuana is being grown, and great difficulties in exportation because of the
necessity of convincing authorities that hemp is not a narcotic. Unless the
producer participates in sharing of value-added income, large profits are
unlikely. The industry widely recognizes that value added to the crop is the
chief potential source of profit, as indeed for most other crops.
THE POLITICS OF CANNABIS WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE US
Cannabis has long had an image problem, because of the extremely widespread
use of “narcotic” cultivars as illegal intoxicants. The US Drug Enforcement
Administration has the mandate of eliminating illicit and wild marijuana, which
it does very well (Figs. 54-56). Those interested in establishing and
developing legitimate industries based on fiber and
oilseed applications have had to struggle against considerable opposition from
many in the political and law enforcement arenas. The United States National
Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) information web site on marijuana, which
reflects a negative view of cannabis, is at and reflects several basic fears:
a) Growing Cannabis plants makes law
enforcement more difficult, because of the need to ensure that all plants
cultivated are legitimate.
b) Utilization of legitimate Cannabis
products makes it much more difficult to maintain the image of the illegitimate
products as dangerous.
c) Many in the movements backing
development of hemp are doing so as a subterfuge to promote legalization of
recreational use of marijuana.
d) THC (and perhaps other constituents) in Cannabis
are so harmful that their presence in any amount in any material (food,
medicine or even fiber product) represents a health
hazard that is best dealt with by a total proscription.
Ten
years ago hemp cultivation was illegal in Germany, England, Canada, Australia,
and other countries. Essential to overcoming governmental reluctance in each
country was the presentation of an image that was business-oriented, and
conservative. The merits of environmentalism have acquired some political
support, but unless there is a reasonable possibility that hemp cultivation is
perceived as potentially economically viable, there is limited prospect of
having anti-hemp laws changed. Strong support from business and farm groups is
indispensable; support from pro-marijuana interests and what are perceived of
as fringe groups is generally counterproductive. It is a combination of
prospective economic benefit coupled with assurance that hemp cultivation will
not detrimentally affect the enforcement of marijuana legislation that has led
most industrially advanced countries to reverse prohibitions against growing
hemp. Should the US permit commercial hemp cultivation to resume, it will
likely be for the same reasons.
The
US Office of National Drug control Policy issued a statement on industrial hemp
in 1997 () which included the following: “Our primary concern about the
legalization of the cultivation of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa) is the message it would send to the public at
large, especially to our youth at a time when adolescent drug use is rising
rapidly... The second major concern is that legalizing hemp production may mean
the de facto legalization of marijuana cultivation. Industrial hemp and
marijuana are the product of the same plant, Cannabis
sativa... Supporters of the hemp legalization
effort claim hemp cultivation could be profitable for U.S. farmers. However,
according to the USDA and the U.S. Department of Commerce, the profitability of
industrial hemp is highly uncertain and probably unlikely. Hemp is a novelty
product with limited sustainable development value even in a novelty market...
For every proposed use of industrial hemp, there already exists an available
product, or raw material, which is cheaper to manufacture and provides better
market results.... Countries with low labor costs
such as the Philippines and China have a competitive advantage over any U.S.
hemp producer.”
Recent
European Commission proposals to change its subsidy regime for hemp contained
the following negative evaluation of hemp seed: “The use of hemp seed...would,
however, even in the absence of THC, contribute towards making the narcotic use
of cannabis acceptable... In this light, subsidy will be denied producers who
are growing grain for use in human nutrition and cosmetics.”
A
USDA analysis of hemp, “Industrial hemp in the United States: status and market
potential,” was issued in 2000, and is available at This is anonymously-authored, therefore
presumably represents a corporate or “official” evaluation. The conclusion was
that “U.S. markets for hemp fiber (specialty
textiles, paper, and composites) and seed (in food or crushed for oil) are, and
will likely remain, small, thin markets. Uncertainty about longrun
demand for hemp products and the potential for oversupply discounts the
prospects for hemp as an economically viable alternative crop for American
farmers.” Noting the oversupply of hempseeds associated with Canada’s 30,000
acres in 1999, the report concluded that the long term demand for hemp products
is uncertain, and predicts that the hemp market in the US will likely remain
small and limited. With respect to textiles, the report noted the lack of a thriving textile flax (linen) US industry (despite lack of
legal barriers), so that it would seem unlikely that hemp could achieve a
better market status. With respect to hemp oil, the report noted that hemp oil
in food markets is limited by its short shelf life, the fact that it can not be
used for frying, and the lack of US Food and Drug Administration approval as
GRAS (“generally recognized as safe”). Moreover, summarizing four state
analyses of hemp production (McNulty 1995, Ehrensing
1998, Kraenzel et al. 1998, Thompson et al. 1998),
profitability seemed doubtful.
Without
arguing the merits of the above contentions, we point out that the legitimate
use of hemp for non-intoxicant purposes has been inhibited by the continuing
ferocious war against drug abuse. In this atmosphere, objective analysis has
often been lacking. Unfortunately both proponents and opponents have tended to
engage in exaggeration. Increasingly, however, the world is testing the
potential of hemp in the field and marketplace, which surely must be the
ultimate arbiters. De Guzman (2001), noting the pessimistic USDA report,
observed that “Nevertheless, others point to the potential of [the] market.
Hemp products have a growing niche market of their own, and the market will
remain healthy and be well supported with many competing brands.”
A
wide variety of hemp clothing, footwear, and food products are now available in
North America. Some American manufacturers and distributors have chosen to
exploit the association of hemp products with marijuana in their advertising.
Such marketing is unfortunate, sending the message that some in the industry
are indifferent to the negative image that this generates in the minds of much
of the potential consuming public. Admittedly, such advertising works. But
marketing based on the healthful and tasteful properties of hemp food products,
the durable nature of hemp textiles, and the environmental advantages of the
crop has proven to be widely acceptable, and is likely to promote the long term
development of hemp industries.
Will
hemp commercial cultivation resume in the US in the foreseeable future? This is
difficult to judge, but the following considerations suggest this might occur:
a) Increasing awareness of the differences
between industrial hemp and marijuana
b) Growing appreciation of the
environmental benefits of hemp cultivation
c) Continuing demonstration of successful
hemp cultivation and development in most of the remaining western world; all
the G8 countries, except the US, produce and export industrial hemp
d) Increasing pressure on state and federal
governments to permit hemp cultivation by farmers, particularly wheat, corn,
and tobacco farmers in desperate need of substitute crops, but also for
rotation crops to break pest and disease cycles
More
than a century ago, an expert on hemp concluded his manual on hemp-growing in
the US by stating “There is no question that when the inventive genius,
comprehension and energies of the American people become interested, another
grand source of profitable employment and prosperity will be established”
(Boyce 1900).
Individual entrepreneurs, and
indeed whole industries, as a matter of economic survival need to adopt a clear
investment policy with respect to whether their market is to be output-driven
or demand-led. From the individual producer’s perspective, the old adage “find
your market before you plant your seed” remains sound advice.
In the mid 1990s, the EU
provided subsidization for hemp cultivation of ca. $1,050.00/ha. This support
was instrumental in developing a hemp industry in western
Europe. However, no comparable support is available in North America, and
indeed those contemplating entering into hemp cultivation are faced with
extraordinary costs and/or requirements in connection with licensing, security,
THC analysis, and record keeping. Those involved in value-added processing and
distribution are also faced with legal uncertainties and the regular threat of
idiosyncratic, indeed irrational actions of various governments. Simply
displaying a C. sativa leaf on advertising has
led to the threat of criminal charges in the last decade in several G8
countries. Attempting to export or import hemp products among countries is
presently a most uncertain activity.
It often takes 10 to 15 years
for the industry associated with a new agricultural crop to mature. While it is
true that foreign imports have been the basis for hemp products in North
America for at least a decade, North American production is only 4 years of age
in Canada, and farming of hemp in the US has not even begun. Viewed from this
perspective, the hemp industry in North America is still very much in its
infancy. Varieties of hemp specifically suited to given products and regions
have only started to be developed in North America. There is considerable uncertainty
regarding yields, costs of production, harvesting and processing equipment,
product characteristics, foreign competition, governmental support, and the
vagaries of the regulatory environment. Hemp is not presently a standard crop,
and is likely to continue experiencing the risks inherent in a small niche
market for some time. Hemp is currently a most uncertain crop, but has such a
diversity of possible uses, is being promoted by extremely enthusiastic market
developers, and attracts so much attention that it is likely to carve out a
much larger share of the North American marketplace than its detractors are
willing to concede.
Given
the uncertainties and handicaps associated with hemp, it is fortunate that
there are compensating factors. As noted, as a crop hemp offers some real
environmental advantages, particularly with regard to the limited needs for
herbicides and pesticides. Hemp is therefore pre-adapted to organic
agriculture, and accordingly to the growing market for products associated with
environmentally-friendly, sustainable production. Hemp products are an
advertiser’s dream, lending themselves to hyperbole (“healthiest salad oil in
the world,” “toughest jeans on the market”). While the narcotics image of C.
sativa is often disadvantageous, advertisers who
choose to play up this association do so knowing that it will attract a segment
of the consuming population. In general, the novelty of hemp means that many
consumers are willing to pay a premium price. It might also be said that those
who have entered the hemp industry have tended to be very highly motivated,
resourceful, and industrious, qualities that have been needed in the face of
rather formidable obstacles to progress.
North American Industrial Hemp Council Inc.
-
Hemp Industries Association -
International Hemp Association -
Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance – www.hemptrade.ca
Ontario Hemp Alliance -
International Association for Cannabis as
Medicine -
Journal of the International Hemp Association. Vol. 1 (1994) - vol. 6 (1999). (Vols.1-5
and part of vol. 6 available online at ). Superseded by Journal of Industrial Hemp.
Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics. Hawarth Press. Vol. 1 published 2001.
Journal of Industrial Hemp. Haworth Press. Vol. 1 to be published 2002.
Blade (1998), Bócsa and Karus (1998), Ceapoiu (1958), Clarke (1977, 1998a), Joyce and Curry
(1970), McPartland et al. (2000), de Meijer (1974), Nova Institute (1995, 1997a, 1997b, 2000), Ranalli (1998), Riddlestone et
al. 1994, Small (1979), Van der Werf
(1994a).
This
paper was considerably improved by criticism provided by A. McElroy.
Abel, E.L. 1980. Marihuana - the first
twelve thousand years. Plenum Press, New York, NY.
American Medical Association.1997. Report 10 of the Council on Scientific Affairs
(I-97) to the American Medical Association House of Delegates. Subject:
Medical Marijuana. American Medical Association, Chicago.
Anonymous. 1975.
Catalogue of the global collection of VIR. Issue 162, Fiber
crops. Vavilov Institute, Leningrad, USSR.
Bailey, L.H. 1898. The
evolution of our native fruits. MacMillan, Harrisburg, PA.
Baraniecki, P.
1997. Industrial plants in clean-up of heavy metal polluted soils. p. 277-283.
In: Nova Institute, Bioresource hemp - proceedings of
the symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Feb. 27 - March 2, 1997). Nova
Institute, Hürth, Germany.
Biewinga, E.E. and G. van der Bijl. 1996. Sustainability
of energy crops in Europe. A methodology developed and applied. Centre for
Agriculture and Environment, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Blade, S. (ed.). 1998. Alberta Hemp
Symposia proceedings, Red Deer, Alberta, March 10, 1998, and Edmonton Alberta,
April 8, 1998. Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural
Development, Edmonton, AB.
Bolton, J. 1995. The potential of plant fibres as
crops for industrial use. Outlook on Agric. 24:85-89.
Bócsa, I. 1998.
Genetic improvement: conventional approaches. p. 153-184. In: Paolo Ranalli, ed., Advances in hemp research. Food
Products Press (of Haworth Press), London, UK.
, Bócsa, I. and M. Karus. 1998. The
cultivation of hemp: botany, varieties, cultivation and harvesting. Hemptech,
Sebastopol, CA.
Boyce, S.S. 1900. Hemp (Cannabis sativa). A practical treatise
on the culture of hemp for seed and fiber with a
sketch of the history and nature of the hemp plant. Orange
Judd Company, New York, NY.
British Medical Association. 1997. Therapeutic uses of Cannabis. Harwood
Academic Publishers, UK.
Brown, L.R., C. Flavin,
H. French, and ten others. 1998. State of the
world, 1998, Worldwatch Institute report on progress
toward a sustainable society. W.W. Norton & Co., New
York, NY.
Callaway, J.C. 1998. Formation of trans-fatty acids in heated
hempseed oil: a rebuttal. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 5:106-108.
Callaway, J.C., T. Tennilä,
and D.W. Pate. 1996. Occurrence of “omega-3” stearidonic acid (cis-6,9,12,15-octadecatetraenoic
acid) in hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) seed. J.
Internat. Hemp Assoc. 3:61-63.
Ceapoiu, N. 1958. Hemp, monographic study. Bucharest. Editura Academiei
Republicii Populare Rominae, Bucharest, Romania. [In
Romanian.]
Clarke, R.C. 1977. The botany
and ecology of Cannabis. Pods Press, Ben Lomond,
CA.
Clarke, R.C. 1998a. Hashish! Red Eye Press, Los Angeles.
Clarke, R.C. 1998b. Maintenance of Cannabis
germplasm in the Vavilov
Research Institute gene bank - five year report. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc.
5:75-79.
Collins, L. 1999. Holland’s
half-baked drug experiment. Foreign Affairs 78(3): 82-98.
Dererne, J.-L. and D.W. Pate. 1996. Hemp seed oil: a source of valuable
essential fatty acids. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 3:1, 4-7.
Dewey, L.H. 1914. Hemp. p. 283-146. In:
Yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture - 1913.
Ehrensing, D.T.
1998. Feasibility of industrial hemp production in the United
States Pacific Northwest. Department of Crop and Soil
Science, Oregon State University Experiment Station Bulletin 681. Oregon State University, Corvallis.
Fertig, M. 1996. Analysis of the profitability of hemp cultivation for paper.
J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 3: 42-43. (Review of a German M.Sc. thesis.)
Garcia,-Jaldon, C., D. Dupreyre and M.R. Vignon. 1998. Fibres from semi-retted hemp bundles by steam explosion
treatment. Biomass and Energy 14:251-260.
Gehl, D. 1995. A summary of hemp research in Canada conducted by the fibre
division of Agriculture Canada, 1923-1942. Agriculture
and Agri-Food Canada, Indian Head, SK.
Fleming, M.P. and R.C. Clarke.1998. Physical evidence for the antiquity of Cannabis
sativa L. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc.
5:80-92.
Geiwitz, J. (and the Ad Hoc Committee on Hemp Risks). 2001. THC in hemp foods and cosmetics: the appropriate risk
assessment.
Groot, B. de, G.J. van Roeckel
Jr., and J.E.G. van Dam. 1998. p. 213-242. In:
P. Ranalli (ed.), Advances in hemp research. Food
Products Press (of Haworth Press), London.
Grotenhermen, F. and M. Karus. 1998. Industrial hemp is not marijuana: comments on the drug
potential of fiber Cannabis. J. Internat. Hemp
Assoc. 5:96-101.
Grotenhermen, F., M. Karus, and D. Lohmeyer. 1998. THC-limits
for food: a scientific study. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 5:101-105.
http://www.naihc.org/hemp_information/content/nova_report/part1.html
Guzman, D. de.
2001. Hemp oil shows huge gains in food and personal care. Chem. Market Reporter
259(10): 7.
Hackleman, J.C. and W.E. Domingo. 1943. Hemp, an Illinois war crop. University of
Illinois Extension Circ. 547.
Heading, R. 1998. Canada report 1998. J. Int. Hemp Assoc. 5:110-112.
Health Council of the Netherlands. 1996. Marihuana as medicine. Health Council of
the Netherlands, Standing Committee on Medicine, Publication no. 1996/21.
Rijswikj, the Netherlands. (summary:
)
Hirst R A, D.G. Lambert and W.G. Notcutt. 1998. Pharmacology and potential therapeutic uses of cannabis. Br.
J. Anaesthesia 81:77‑84.
House of Lords.
1998. Medical Use of Cannabis. House of Lords, Session 1997‑98,
Science and Technology Ninth Report.
http://mir.drugtext.org/druglibrary/schaffer/library/studies/hlords/15101.htm
also
Jain, M.C. and N. Arora. 1988. Ganja (Cannabis sativa) refuse as cattle feed. Indian J. anim. Sci. 58:865-867.
Joy, J.E., S.J. Watson Jr., and J.A. Benson Jr. (eds.).
1999. Marijuana and medicine: assessing the science base. U.S.
National Academy Press.
Joyce, C.R.B. and
S.H. Curry. (eds.). 1970. The botany and chemistry of Cannabis. J. & A. Churchill, London, UK.
Karus, M. 2000. Naturfasermärkte
weltweit. 3rd International
Symposium, Bioresource Hemp, Proceedings of the “Bioresource Hemp 2000 and other fibre crops.” http://www.nova‑institut.de/bioresource‑hemp/home.htm
(by subscription)
Karus, M. and G. Leson. 1994. Hemp research and market development in Germany. J. Internat.
Hemp Assoc. 1:52-56.
Karus, J. and G. Leson. 1996. Opportunities for German hemp. Results of
the ‘hemp product line project.’ J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 4:26-31. (A summary in English of Nova Institute 1997).
Karus, M., M. Kaup, and D. Lohmeyer. 2000. Study on
markets and prices for natural fibres (Germany and EU). 3rd
International Symposium, Bioresource Hemp,
Proceedings of the “Bioresource Hemp 2000 and other
fibre crops.” http://www.nova‑institut.de/bioresource‑hemp/home.htm
(by subscription)
Kraenzel, D.G., T. Petry, B.
Nelson, M.J. Anderson, D. Mathern, and R. Todd. 1998. Hemp as an alternative crop in North Dakota. Agricultural
Economics Report 402. North Dakota State University, Fargo.
Koz»owski, R.,
P. Baraniecki, L. Grabowska,
and J. Ma½kowski. 1995. p. 259-267. In: Nova Institute, Bioresource
hemp - proceedings of the symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 2-5,
1995). 2nd edition. Hemptech, Ojai, California.
Le Dain, G. (Chair). 1972. Cannabis - a
report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Non‑Medical Use of Drugs.
Information Canada, Ottawa.
Leizer, C., D. Ribnicky, A. Poulev, S. Dushenkov and I. Raskin. 2000. The
composition of hemp seed oil and its potential as an important source of
nutrition. J. Nutraceut., Functional & Medical
Foods 2:35-53.
Lemeshev, N., L., Rumyantseva,
and R.C. Clarke. 1993. Maintenance of Cannabis
germplasm in the Vavilov
Research Institute gene bank - 1993. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 1:1,3-5.
Lemeshev, N., L., Rumyantseva,
and R.C. Clarke. 1994. Report on the maintenance
of hemp (Cannabis sativa) germplasm
accessioned in the Vavilov Research Institute gene
bank - 1994. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 2:10-13.
Leson, G. 2000.
Evaluating interference of THC in hemp food produces with employee drug
testing. 3rd International Symposium, Bioresource
Hemp, Proceedings of the “Bioresource Hemp 2000 and
other fibre crops.” http://www.nova‑institut.de/bioresource‑hemp/home.htm
(by subscription)
Letniak, R.,
Weeks, C., Blade, S., and Whiting, A. 2000. Low THC hemp (Cannabis
sativa L.) Research
Report 99‑10028‑R11999 ‑ Hemaruka,
Alberta.
MacLoed, I. 1999.
‘Mindboggling’ marijuana crop tops 800 tonnes. p. C1,
The Ottawa Citizen May 28.
Mallik, M.K., U.K. Singh and N. Ahmad. 1990. Batch digester studies on biogas production from Cannabis sativa, water hyacinth and crop wastes mixed with dung
and poultry litter. Biological Wastes 31:315-319.
Marcus, D. 1998. Commercial hemp cultivation in Canada: an economic
justification. (Based on a 1996 thesis at the University of
Western Ontario.) ()
McNulty, S. (ed.). 1995. Report to the
Governor’s hemp and related fiber crops task force. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Frankfort, KE.
McPartland, J.M. 1997. Cannabis as repellent and
pesticide. J. Internat. Hemp Asoc.
4:87-92.
McPartland, J.M.,
Clarke, R.C. and Watson, D.P. 2000. Hemp diseases and pests: management and
biological control. CABI Publishing, New York, NY.
Mechoulan, R. and L. Hanus. 1997. Progress in basic research and medicinal uses of Cannabis
and cannabinoids. p. 670-683 In: Nova Institute, Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the symposium (Frankfurt
am Main, Germany, Feb. 27 - March 2, 1997). Hürth,
Germany.
Mediavilla, V. and S. Steinemann. 1997. Essential oil of Cannabis sativa
L. strains. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 4:80-82.
Meier, C. and V. Mediavilla. 1998. Factors influencing the yield and the quality of hemp (Cannabis
sativa L.) essential oil. J. Internat. Hemp
Assoc. 5:16-20.
Meijer, E. de. 1994.
Diversity in Cannabis. Published doctoral thesis.
Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Meijer, E.P.M. de. 1995.
Diversity in Cannabis. p. 143-151. In: Nova Institute, Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the symposium (Frankfurt
am Main, Germany, March 2-5, 1995). 2nd edition. Hemptech, Ojai,
California.
Meijer, E.P.M. de. 1998. Cannabis
germplasm resources. p. 133-151. In: P. Ranalli, ed., Advances in hemp research. Food Products
Press (of Haworth Press), London.
Meijer, E.P.M. de and L.J.M. van Soest. 1992. The CPRO Cannabis germplasm
collection. Euphytica 62:201-211.
Mikuriya, T.H.
1969. Marijuana in medicine - past, present and future.
California Medicine, Jan.: 34-40.
Mölleken, H. and
R.R. Theimer. 1997. Survey of minor fatty
acids in Cannabis sativa L. fruits of various
origins. p. 500-504. In: Nova Institute, Bioresource
hemp - proceedings of the symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Feb. 27 -
March 2, 1997). Nova Institute, Hürth, Germany. (In German.)
Mölleken, H., A. Oswald, and R.R. Theimer. 1997. In vitro studies of the cultivation of various hemp varieties
on heavy metal polluted soils and the evidence for phytochelatins
in hemp. p. 265-276. In: Nova Institute. Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany,
Feb. 27 - March 2, 1997). Nova Institute, Hürth,
Germany. (In German.)
Montford, S. and E. Small.
1999a. Measuring harm and benefit: the biodiversity friendliness of Cannabis
sativa. Global Biodiversity.
8(4):2-13.
Montford, S. and E. Small, 1999b. A comparison of the biodiversity friendliness of
crops with special reference to hemp (Cannabis sativa
L.). J. Internat. Hemp Assoc.6:53-63.
Mustafa, A.F., J.J. McKinnon and D.A. Christensen. 1999. The nutritive value of hemp meal for ruminants. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 79:91–95.
National Institutes of Health. 1997. Workshop on the medical utility of marijuana. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. (
Nature. 2001. Gathering the evidence on medical marijuana. Nature
410(6829):613.
Nova Institute. 1995. Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the
symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 2-5, 1995). 2nd
edition. Hemptech, Ojai, California. (Majority of
contributions in German.)
Nova Institute 1997a. Das Hanfproduktlinienprojekt.
Study of the Nova Institute in cooperation with IAF/FH Reutlingen and Ifeu-Institute
Heidelberg (Germany). Nova Institute, Hürth,
Germany. (In German.)
Nova Institute. 1997b.
Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the symposium
(Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Feb. 27 - March 2, 1997). Nova Institute, Hürth, Germany. (Majority of
contributions in German.)
Nova Institute. 2000. Bioresource hemp, Proceedings of conference “Bioresource hemp 2000 and other fibre crops.”
http://www.nova‑institut.de/bioresource‑hemp/home.htm (by
subscription) (Majority of contributions in German.)
Orr, J. and M. E. Starodub. 1999. Industrial hemp risk assessment. Product Safety Bureau,
Health Canada, Ottawa.
Paarlberg, D.
1990. The economics of new crops. p. 2-6. In: J. Janick and J.E. Simon (eds.), Advances in new crops. Timber
Press, Portand, OR.
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1990/v1‑002.html
Pate, D.W. 1995. Guide to the scientific literature
on potential medical uses of Cannabis and the cannabinoids.
J. Int. Hemp Assoc. 2:74-76.
Pate, D.W. 1998a. Development of Cannabis-based therapeutics. J.
Internat. Hemp Assoc. 5:36-39.
Pate, D.W. 1998b.
The phytochemistry of Cannabis: its ecological
and evolutionary implications. p. 21-42. In: P. Ranalli
(ed.), Advances in hemp research. Food Products Press (of
Haworth Press), London, UK.
Pinfold Consulting.
1998 (G. Pinfold Consulting Economists Ltd. and J. White, InfoResults Ltd.). A maritime
industrial hemp product marketing study. Prepared for
Nova Scotia Agriculture and Marketing (Marketing and Food Industry
Development), and New Brunswick Agriculture & Rural Development (Marketing
and Business Development).
Popular Mechanics.
1938. New billion-dollar crop. Popular Mechanics Feb.: 238-238, 144A. (Reproduced in Herrer, J. 1998.
The emperor wears no clothes. 11th edition.
AH HA Publishing, Austin, TX.)
Raie, M.Y., A. Ahmad, M. Ashraf
and S. Hussain. 1995.
Studies of Cannabis sativa and Sorghum bicolor oils. Fat Sci.
Technol. 97:428-429.
Ranalli, P. (ed.)
1998. Advances in hemp research. Food Products Press
(of Haworth Press), London.
Riddlestone, S., P. Desai, M. Evans, and A. Skyring. 1994. Bioregional fibers, the potential for a sustainable regional paper and
textile industry based on flax and hemp. Bioregional Development Group, Sutton
Ecology Centre, Carshalton, Surrey, U.K.
Robinson, B.B. 1935. Hemp.
USDA Farmers’ bulletin No. 1935 (revised 1952).
Saeglitz, C., M.
Pohl, and D. Bartsch. 2000. Monitoring gene
flow from transgenic sugar beet using cytoplasmic
male-sterile bait plants. Molec. Ecol. 9:2035-2040.
Scheifele, G.L. 2000. 1999
THC Summary report from northern Ontario and northwestern
Quebec for hemp tissue analysis collected from inflorescence at time of 50%
pollen shedding. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and
Rural Affairs. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/hort/hemp/info_THCsummary1999.htm
Scheifele, G.L. and P.P. Dragla. 2000.1999 report on environment and latitude effect on THC levels
of industrial hemp varieties grown in Ontario. Ontario
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/hort/hemp/info_hempeffect.htm
Scheifele, G.L., H. Hinz, K.
Davies, K.‑J. B. Calder, M. Bowman, and L. Guillemette.1999. 1998 Ontario studies in determining the genetic stability,
environment and latitude effect on the levels of delta‑9 THC for
industrial hemp varieties. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/hort/hemp/info_hempthcd9.htm
Schultes, R.E. 1970. Random
thoughts and queries on the botany of Cannabis. p. 11-38 In: R.B.
Joyce and S.H. Curry (eds.), The botany and chemistry
of Cannabis. J. & A. Churchill, London, UK.
Schultes, R.E. and A.
Hofmann.1980. The botany and chemistry of hallucinogens, 2d ed. Thomas,
Springfield, IL.
Small, E. 1971. An Agricultural Perspective of Marijuana. Canadian
Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into the Non-medical Use of Drugs, Research
Report No. 104. [unpublished report. On file, Health Canada, Ottawa.]
Small, E. 1979. The species problem in Cannabis, science and semantics.
Corpus, Toronto. 2 vols.
Small, E. and H.D. Beckstead. 1973. Common cannabinoid phenotypes in
350 stocks of Cannabis. Lloydia 35:144-165.
Small, E. and A. Cronquist. 1976. A practical and natural taxonomy for Cannabis. Taxon 25:405-435.
Small, E. and D. Marcus. 2000. Hemp germplasm trials in Canada. 3rd International Symposium, Bioresource
Hemp, Proceedings of the “Bioresource Hemp 2000 and
other fibre crops.” (by subscription); (free)
Small, E., H.D. Beckstead
and A. Chan. 1975. The
evolution of cannabinoid phenotypes in Cannabis.
Econ. Bot. 29:219-232.
Thompson, E.C., M.C. Berger, and S. Allen. 1998. Economic impact of industrial hemp in Kentucky. University of Kentucky, Center for Business and Economic Research,
Lexington, KY.
Van der Werf,
H.M.G. 1994a. Crop physiology of fibre hemp (Cannabis sativa L.). Published Doctoral
thesis. Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Van der Werf,
H.M.G. 1994b.Hemp facts and hemp fiction. J. Internat. Hemp Assoc. 1:58-59.
Van Roeckel, G.J.
Jr. 1994. Hemp pulp and paper production. J. Internat.
Hemp Assoc. 1:12-14.
Watson, D.P. and R.C. Clarke. 1997. The genetic future of hemp. p. 122-127 in Nova
Institute, Bioresource hemp - proceedings of the
symposium (Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Feb. 27 - March 2, 1997), Hürth, Germany.
Virovets, V.G.
1996. Selection for non-psychoactive hemp varieties (Cannabis
sativa L.) in the CIS (former USSR). J.
Internat. Hemp Assoc. 3:13-15.
Wilsie, C.P., C.A. Black and A.R. Aandahl. 1944. Hemp production experiments, cultural practices and soil
requirements. Iowa Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. P63, Iowa
State College, Ames.
Wilsie, C.P., E.S. Dyas and
A.G. Norman. 1942. Hemp, a war crop for Iowa. Iowa Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. P49, Iowa State College, Ames.
Wong, A. 1998. Using crop residues to save forests.
Global Biodiversity 7(4):7-11.
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future. Oxford, University Press.
World Health Organization. 1997. Cannabis: A health perspective and research agenda. World
Health Organization, Geneva. (abstract at
Table 1. Hemp fiber usage in the
European Union in 1999 (after Karus et al. 2000).
Class of Product |
Quantity consumed (metric tons) |
Relative Percentage |
Specialty pulp (cigarette paper, bank
notes, technical filters, and hygiene products) |
24,882 |
87 |
Composites for autos |
1,770 |
6 |
Construction & thermal insulation
materials |
1,095 |
4 |
Geotextiles |
234 |
0.8 |
Other |
650 |
2.2 |
Total |
26,821 |
100 |
Table 2. Analysis of commercial Cannabis product
potential in North America.
Decreasing
value |
“Seeds” (achenes) |
Long (“bark”) fiber |
Woody stem core |
Female floral (perigonal)
bract |
Whole plant |
Confectionary, baked goods |
Plastic-molded
products |
Animal bedding |
Medicinal cannabinoids |
Alcohol |
Salad oil |
Specialty papers |
Thermal insulation |
Essential oil (for flavor
& perfume) |
Fuel |
Body care “cosmetics” |
Construction fibreboard |
Construction (fiberboard, plaster board,
etc.) |
Insect repellant |
Silage |
Animal food (whole seeds for birds, presscake for mammalian livestock) |
Biodegradable landscape matting &
plant culture products |
|
|
|
Gamma-linolenic
acid dietary supplements |
Coarse textiles (carpets, upholstery) |
|
|
|
Specialty industrial oils |
Fine textiles |
|
|
|
Table 3. Comparative annual world economic significance of
categories of Cannabis activity.
___________________________________________________________________________
Category World ($) North America
($) Type
of investment
___________________________________________________________________________
Recreational
drugs > 1 trillion 100's
of billions Law enforcement,
eradication, education
Industrial
hemp 100's of millions1 10's
of millions Production, development, marketing,
research
Therapeutic
drugs 100's of millions 10's
of millions Production, development,
marketing, research
Phytoremediation 10's of thousands nil Research
Ornamental
hemp thousands nil Development
___________________________________________________________________________
1 “The global market for hemp-derived products is valued at between
$100 million and $200 million annually” (Pinfold Consulting 1998; De Guzman
2001).
Captions to figures
Fig. 1. Major uses of industrial hemp.
Fig. 2. Cannabis sativa.
This superb composite plate by artist Elmer Smith, often reproduced at a very
small scale and without explanation in marijuana books, is the best scientific
illustration of the hemp plant ever prepared. 1. Flowering branch of male
plant. 2. Flowering branch of female plant. 3. Seedling. 4. Leaflet. 5. Cluster
of male flowers. 6. Female flower, enclosed by perigonal
bract. 7. Mature fruit enclosed in perigonal bract.
8. Seed (achene), showing wide face. 9. Seed, showing
narrow face. 10. Stalked secretory gland. 11. Top of
sessile secretory gland. 12. Long section of cystolith hair (note calcium carbonate concretion at base).
Reproduced with the permission of Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA.
Fig. 3. Photograph of Cannabis sativa. Left, staminate (“male”) plant in flower;
right, pistillate (“female”) plant in flower.
Fig. 4. United
States National Institute of Health, University of Mississippi marijuana
plantation site, showing variation in plant size. A tall fiber-type
of hemp plant is shown at left, and a short narcotic variety
(identified as “Panama Gold”) at right.
Fig. 5. Typical architecture of categories of cultivated Cannabis sativa. Top left: narcotic plants are generally low,
highly branched, and grown well-spaced. Top right: plants grown for oilseed
were traditionally well-spaced, and the plants developed medium height and
strong branching. Bottom left: fiber cultivars are
grown at high density, and are unbranched and very
tall. Bottom centre: “dual purpose” plants are grown at moderate density, tend
to be slightly branched and of medium to tall height. Bottom right: some recent
oilseed cultivars are grown at moderate density and are short and relatively unbranched. Degree of branching and height are determined
both by the density of the plants and their genetic background.
Fig. 6. ‘Finola,’ the first cultivar of Cannabis
sativa bred exclusively for grain. (Courtesy of the breeder, J.C. Callaway, University of Kuopio, Finland.)
Fig. 7. ‘Anka,’ the first registered North
American bred cultivar of Cannabis sativa.
This variety is best suited for grain production. (Courtesy
of the breeder, P. Dragla, and of the Industrial Hemp
Seed Development Company, Chatham, Ontario.)
Fig. 8.
Scanning electron micrographs of the abaxial
surface of a perigonal bract (which envelops the
fruit). These bracts are the most intoxicating part of the plant, and
may contain 20% THC, dry weight. The resin is synthesized both in stalked and
sessile glands. Multicellular secretory
glands (of phallic appearance), some broken stalks of these (note cellular
appearance), and unicellular cystolith hairs
(claw-like structures) are pictured.
Fig. 9. Some important cannabinoids of cannabis
resin. )9-THC (delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol)
is the chief intoxicant chemical and predominates in intoxicant strains, while
the isomer )8-THC is usually present in no more than trace
amounts. CBD (cannabidiol) is the chief
non-intoxicant chemical, and predominates in non-intoxicant strains; it has
sedative effects. The non-intoxicant CBN (cannabinol)
is a frequent degradation or oxidation product. The non-intoxicaant
cannabichromene (CBC) is typically found in trace
amounts in intoxicant strains. The non-intoxicant cannabigerol
(CBG) is considered to be a precursor of the other cannbinoids
(see Fig. 10).
Fig. 10. Proposed biosynthetic pathways of the principal cannabinoids (after Pate 1998b).
Fig. 11. Frequency histograms of THC concentration in germplasm collections. Left, collection of E. Small
and D. Marcus; of the 167 accessions, 43% had THC levels >0.3%. Right, the
collection of the Vavilov Institute, St. Petersburg;
of the 278 accessions for which chemical analyses were reported in Anonymous
(1975), about 55% had THC levels >0.3%.
Fig. 12. Cross sections of stems at internodes of a fiber
plant (left) and of a narcotic plant (right). Fiber
cultivars have stems that are more hollow at the
internodes, i.e. less wood, since this allows more energy to be directed into
the production of bark fiber.
Fig. 13. Water retting of hemp in Yugoslavia. (Courtesy of Dr. J. Berenji, Institute of
Field and Vegetable Crops, Novi Sad.)
Fig. 14. Fiber in
retted hemp stem. This stem was bent sharply after retting, breaking the woody
central portion (hurds), leaving the bark fibers unbroken. The two portions of stem are separated in
this photograph, and are joined by the tough bark fibers.
Fig. 15. Multi-purpose matting, fabricated from hemp. (Courtesy
of Kenex Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 16. Hemp cigarette paper, the most profitable paper product currently
manufactured from hemp.
Fig. 17. Hemp paper products (writing paper, notebook,
envelopes).
Fig. 18. C-class Mercedes-Benz automobiles have more than 30 parts made of
natural fibers, including hemp. (Courtesy
of T. Schloesser, Daimler-Chrysler.)
Fig. 19. Henry Ford swinging an axe at his 1941 car to demonstrate the
toughness of the plastic trunk door made of soybean and hemp. (From the collections of Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village.)
Fig. 20. Spun, loosely compacted hemp insulation. (Manufactured
by La Chanvrière de l’Aube,
France.)
Fig. 21. Loose Isochanvre®
thermal insulation being placed between joists. (Courtesy
of M. Périer, Chènovotte
Habitat, France.)
Fig. 22. Experimental fiberboard made with hemp. (Courtesy
of Dr. K. Domier, University of Alberta, Edmonton.)
Fig. 23. Molded fiberboard products. (Courtesy of HempFlax,
Oude Pekela, The Netherlands).
Fig. 24. New building in France being constructed entirely
of hemp. Wall castings are a conglomerate of Isochanvre®
lime-hemp, for production of a 200 mm thick monolithic wall
without an interior wall lining. (Courtesy of M. Périer, Chènovotte Habitat,
France.)
Fig. 25. The “hemp house” under construction on the Oglala Lakota Nation (Pine Ridge Reservation), South
Dakota. Foundation blocks for the house are made with hemp fiber as a binder in cement. Stucco is also of hemp.
Shingles are 60% hemp in a synthetic polymer. Hemp insulation is used
throughout. (Courtesy of Oglala
Sioux Tribe, Slim Butte Land Use Association, and S. Sauser.)
Fig. 26. Renovation of plaster walls
of a traditional timber frame 16th century house (Mansion Raoul de la Faye, Paris) with Isochanvre®
lime-hemp conglomerate. (Courtesy of M. Périer,
Chènovotte Habitat, France.)
Fig. 27. Hemp “ceramic tile.” (Courtesy
of Kenex Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 28. Commercial warehouse of baled hemp animal
bedding. (Courtesy of Kenex
Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 29. Animal bedding made from hemp hurds.
Fig. 30. Pelleted hemp hurds.
(Courtesy of La Chanvrière de l’Aube,
Bar sur Aube,
France.)
Fig. 31. Songbirds on hemp litter. (Courtesy of La Chanvrière
de l’Aube, Bar sur Aube, France.)
Fig. 32. Hemp-based erosion control blanket. Top left: Close-up of 100% hemp
fiber blanket. Top right: Grass growing through
blanket. Bottom: Demonstration of installation of blanket, near La Rivière, Manitoba. (Courtesy of Mark Myrowich,
ErosionControlBlanket.com)
Fig. 33. “Seeds” (achenes) of
hemp, with a match for scale.
Fig. 34. Some North American food products
made with hemp seed and/or hemp seed oil.
Fig. 35. Canned hulled hemp seed. (Courtesy of Kenex Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 36. Hemp oil. (Courtesy of La Chanvrière de l’Aube, Bar sur Aube,
France.)
Fig. 37. Content of principal fatty acids in hempseed oil, based on means of
62 accessions grown in southern Ontario (reported in Small and Marcus 2000).
Fig. 38. Hemp oil in capsule form sold as a dietary supplement.
Fig. 39. Body care products offered by the Body Shop.
(“Chanvre” is French for hemp.)
Fig. 40. A truckload of Canadian medicinal marijuana from
a plantation in Ottawa in 1971. More than a ton of marijuana was
prepared for experimental research (described in Small et al. 1975).
Fig. 41. Medicinal tincture of Cannabis sativa. (Not legal in North America.)
Fig. 42. Bottles of hemp fragrance (left) and essential oil (centre), and
pastilles flavored with hemp essential oil (right).
Fig. 43. ‘Panorama,’ the world’s only ornamental cultivar,
with the breeder, Ivan Bócsa. (Courtesy of Professor Bócsa.)
Fig. 44. A John Deere Kemper harvester, with circular
drums that cut and chop hemp stalks, shown in operation in southern Ontario.
(Courtesy of Kenex Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 45. A hemp harvester operated by HempFlax
(Netherlands), with a wide mowing head capable of cutting 3 m long stems into
0.6 m pieces, at a capacity of 3 ha/hour. (Courtesy of HempFlax,
Oude Pekela, The Netherlands.)
Fig. 46. Windrowed fiber hemp in
process of dew retting. Photograph taken in 1930 on
the Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, Canada.
Fig. 47. Shocked fiber hemp in process of dew retting. Photograph taken in 1931, near Ottawa, Canada. The shocks
shed water like pup-tents, providing more even retting than windrows.
Fig. 48. Baled, retted hemp straw. (Courtesy of Kenex Ltd., Pain Court, Ontario.)
Fig. 49. Harvesting hemp in France. (Courtesy of La
Chanvrière de l’Aube, Bar sur Aube,
France.)
Fig. 50. A crude comparison of the biodiversity friendliness of selected major
crops and three Cannabis sativa crops (fiber, oilseed, drug) based on 26
criteria (after Montford and Small 1999a).
Fig. 51. Grasshopper on hemp. Most insects cause
only limited damage to hemp, and substantial insect damage is uncommon, so the
use of insecticides is very rarely required.
Fig. 52. Wild female hemp plant collected Oct. 17, 2000 near Ottawa, Canada.
This vigorous plant had a fresh weight of 1.5 kg.
Fig. 53. A wild female hemp plant grown in southern
Ontario (accession #16 from Georgia (formerly USSR), reported in Small and
Marcus (2000)). Such highly-branched plants can produce very large
quantities of seeds, and may be useful for breeding.
Fig. 54. The war on drugs: helicopter spraying of Paraquat
herbicide on field of marijuana. (Courtesy US Drug
Enforcement Administration.)
Fig. 55. The war on drugs: clandestine indoor marijuana cultivation. (Courtesy US Drug Enforcement Administration.)
Fig. 56. The war on drugs: burning seized marijuana. (Courtesy
US Drug Enforcement Administration.)