On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:48:12 GMT, "Private"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 17:18:15 GMT, "Private"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 21:15:11 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 00:10:48 -0500, Roger wrote:
The thing is, at present yields we can not come near producing enough
to make it competitive. We'd need about 5 to 6 times the acreage in
corn than we have at present just to feed our cars. If you do the
math that doesn't leave much of anything for growing food.

This is why many are looking to hemp as our source for ethanol.
Using current technology, hemp yeilds almost twice the ethanol per acre
corn does. Hemp does not require pesticides and is drought resistent.
snip
but there are many other uses as you stated that could wring the last
penny per pound out of the stuff.


I have read that the hemp fiber is longer and tougher than the celulose?
fiber from wood normally used to produce paper. This shorter wood fiber
is
further shortened by the pulping process durring recycling and requires
the
addition of new fiber in the process to create quality recycled paper.
One
of the largest sources of raw material for paper is now what is termed the
urban forest of waste paper. It is suggested that the best place for
future
paper mills is not close to the trees but rather close to the waste paper
and that the addition of hemp fiber to waste paper will mean we will not
want to cut as many trees.

The last I read it takes more energy to recycle paper than to make new
paper. OTOH trees used for pulp grow quite fast which makes it/them a
renewable energy and material source. So which way is really best for
the environment and economy
?

Interesting and counterintuitive. I wonder how inclusive the analysis is
and if it includes all the energy inputs including logging and freight to
deliver new paper and cost of disposal of waste paper.

Supposedly it does.

It is my uninformed
understanding that paper recycling is only viable in a micro economy where
the source of the waste and the location of consumption of the recycled
paper is close geographically.

One way to tell is a recycling system saves energy is whether thy pay
you for the waste (Aluminum cans) or charge you for your efforts
(paper)

The analysis of hemp as new fiber for
recycled paper supposed that the urban forest was Los Angeles or similar and

The LA urban forrest is the wrong kind of hemp. :-)) OTOH I think
Canada has the right idea.

that the hemp would be grown close by thus saving transportation to/from the

I would guess that the transportation is one of the smaller costs, but
if you are operating on a thin margin it could make the difference
between profitability and failure.

normal paper mills. I have read that deinking is the biggest problem.

It gets bleached out or taken care of in the acid wash which is one of
the reasons paper mills smell so bad.

Recycling paper uses a lot of water and energy. It also takes a lot
of labor to sort and seperate out the "unwanted" stuff.


I agree that the big picture often provides a perspective that is missing
from obvious but short sighted solutions and strategies. Both government
and business claim the former but IMHO usually deliver the latter.

The continued creation of large amounts of waste paper reminds me of the
wags claim that 'the paperless office is as likely as the paperless
bathroom'.

My degree is in CS and I retired from the profession a few years back.
I never really saw computers sucessfully reduce the amount of paper in
offices. Where I did see serious work to eliminate paper from the
office the result was usually deep and expensive regret. Depending on
how important, most things that are stored digitally are also stored
on paper or film. As it stands today, microfilm and regular film will
probably outlast the digital data to which they are transfered. The
problem with microfilm is handling the stuff can be hard on it. OTOH
handling CDs and DVDs is hard on them as well. Still, a trashed
digital doc is one whale of a lot easier to reproduce from the
archives than microfilm. It's also a lot easier to migrate to new
storage media with digital than other forms of storage.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Happy landings,