Hemp Fibers Make Better Supercapacitors Than Graphene

biodata (1981610) writes "BBC News is reporting findings published in the journal ACS Nano by Dr David Mitlin from Clarkson University. Dr. Mitlin's team took waste hemp stems and recycled the material into supercapacitors with performance as good, or better, than those built from graphene, at a fraction of the raw materials cost. "We're making graphene-like materials for a thousandth of the price - and we're doing it with waste. The hemp we use is perfectly legal to grow. It has no THC in it at all - so there's no overlap with any recreational activities," Mitlin says.

Comments

Uh, no

[Anonymous Coward]

Graphene and 3D printing is the future, not hippy rope.

Re:Uh, no

[Anonymous Coward]

'hippy rope' and development, and funny story... :}

How do we really know..

[Anonymous Coward]

.. that these hippies are not just high?

suitable for home use?

[russejl]

This is potentially exciting... no pun intended :-)

The article abstract says:
The nanosheets are ideally suited for low (down to 0 C) through high (100 C) temperature ionic-liquid-based supercapacitor applications: At 0 C and a current density of 10 A g–1, the electrode maintains a remarkable capacitance of 106 F g–1. At 20, 60, and 100 C and an extreme current density of 100 A g–1, there is excellent capacitance retention (72–92%) with the specific capacitances being 113, 144, and 142 F g–1, respectively. These characteristics favorably place the materials on a Ragone chart providing among the best power–energy characteristics (on an active mass normalized basis) ever reported for an electrochemical capacitor: At a very high power density of 20 kW kg–1 and 20, 60, and 100 C, the energy densities are 19, 34, and 40 Wh kg–1, respectively. "

Which possibly suggests that the materials are suitable for indoor use (but not in cars unless you happen to operate in a non-freezing climate) which could have some very practical applications. Solar panels are becoming attractive and I'd like a storage bank but would like to avoid batteries because of the slow charge, expense, and maintenance. A super capacitor, of course, is attractive. Off the top of my head, I don't know what the power density of this type of capacitor is relative to lead acid deep cycle batteries. Still, I smile though :)

Re:suitable for home use?

[cbhacking]

The power density is really nowhere close to a battery. Supercaps make sense for things where you actually need really massive charge and/or discharge spikes, over very short times. Think railguns, or a camera flash that can fire multiple times without needing to recharge between shots (if it charged enough to begin with), or possibly a smoothing system for charging batteries from a very spiky power source (hypothetically, this could scale to things like harvesting lightning, though at present that's not at all practical). They aren't practical for long-term storage, either due to energy density or due to their tendency to lose power over time pretty quickly.

A sufficiently large battery bank will have no problem with the charge speed of a photovoltaic array (which is actually rather slow). A small bank might reach saturation voltage - where the batteries are still charging but can't charge any *faster* or they'll take damage from overvolting - fairly quickly if fed by a large array, but that's not the real problem with a small bank; the real problem is not having enough storage capacity.

Expense is considerable, especially if you go with the low-maintenance options like gel-cells. However, supercaps are, at this time, not something you can buy a huge bank of at any price (certainly not the hemp-based ones). If you could get a meaningful capacity of the graphene ones it would probably cost many times as much. Maybe the hemp ones will change that, but don't hold your breath.

Maintenance is much less than it sounds. Wet-cells (typical lead-acid batteries) need topping up with water periodically, and occasionally may need equalization charges; the first can be done by a reminder to go do so every month, and the latter doesn't even need to be that often. Pretty much every other aspect of maintenance should be handled by a good enclosure for the batteries and a good charge controller. The controller costs a bit but you want one of the good ones anyhow; they perform DC-DC voltage conversion to take the output of the solar cells (which can easily be at least 25% higher voltage than the batteries will charge at) and down-convert it, extracting some extra current in the process (some energy is lost in this process, but it's typically a 10%-20% net positive for the 12V gel-cells my family uses). Speaking of gel-cells, those will save you on maintenance (at a cost of more money up front and a more severe voltage sensitivity that limits charge rate a bit harder). Such batteries are basically install-and-forget, but you'd need to be tremendously lazy for them to be worthwhile for a home installation; they are typically for marine usage (as my parents do) where never needing to open the cells (to add water) is a significant plus.

Re:suitable for home use?

[geoskd]

The power density is really nowhere close to a battery. Supercaps make sense for things where you actually need really massive charge and/or discharge spikes, over very short times.

That is the definition of power density. You're thinking energy density. The fact that you would get the two confused casts aspersions on your knowledge in the field.

It should also be noted that almost all types of batteries have leakage current which renders them unsuitable for long term energy storage. Most super caps have a higher than normal leakage current due to the lower operating resistance of the devices (the same trait which allows them very high power density).

Re:suitable for home use?

[Anonymous Coward]

The power density is really nowhere close to a battery.

A typical 100 Ah car battery weighs 33 Kg. At 12 volts that comes out to 1.2 KWh/33Kg or 36Wh/g. That is in the same neighborhood as the values cited by the grandparent post.

Re:suitable for home use?

[turp182]

Are the gel-cells you refer to also called "sealed lead acid" batteries? If so, then you are correct, they are maintenance free (and good for about 5 years if kept up properly and not overly discharged often).

Re:suitable for home use?

[mlts]

I'd love these for a solar array where energy stored for unit volume is important, but not critical (like it is in a car or RV) for a number of reasons:

1: Hemp is a lot less nasty for the environment than graphene.

2: This could be used as a buffer for the chemical batteries, since you don't have to worry about limiting amps coming in. Come "shoulder hours", the supercaps can be charging the batteries at exactly the amperage rate they need even after the sun is down, greatly improving the system's efficiency.

3: The lifespan of a capacitor is a lot longer than a battery because electricity is stored physically, not chemically. So, if space is less of an issue, large supercaps can be used without worrying about replacement every 5-10 years (or 2-3 years with Li-ion) batteries.

So, for an off-grid circuit (one that never goes near mains power and pretty much acts as a UPS), having this technology would go far.

Re:suitable for home use?

[blackpaw]

They aren't practical for long-term storage, either due to energy density or due to their tendency to lose power over time pretty quickly.

I'd be curious to know what you consider long term, as it might not be as long as you think for a home storage situation.

I have a 1.5kwh array on my home, which generates a little excess during the day and of course, is useless at night :)

I've considered bumping it up to 3 or 5kwh as I get no effective use out of the excess generation (8c/KwH). However if I could buffer it for 24-48 hours then I could effectively power my house overnight. I live in Brisbane, Australia, so it would be effectively off grid for 80% of the year.

Re:suitable for home use?

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot less nasty for the environment?

You're aware that graphene is literally just a sheet of Carbon atoms, yes?

Re:suitable for home use?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can heat water in an well insulated boiler, for keeping water hot until the morning for showers/bads.
Also you could run your fridge harder during the day and not at night.

Re:suitable for home use?

[Dr_Barnowl]

There's another approach to this, but it's gone a bit quiet ; they use a novel dielecric and claim that they can get incredibly high voltages out of it which makes for high energy storage.

EEStor

Since the dielectric is one part and the electrode another, I wonder what kind of advantages you'd get from combining the two? (Not sure if hemp electrodes would be compatible with their manufacturing process which uses metal foils as electrodes at the moment, as per traditional capaciptors).

Re:suitable for home use?

[Dr_Barnowl]

Asbestos is just silicate rock. Structure makes a difference..

Graphene is just a sheet of carbon, but it's structure gives it novel properties - it wouldn't be a super-material if it didn't, just because it's all cool and awesome doesn't mean it's also inert and harmless.

Re:suitable for home use?

[blackpaw]

No need, my hot water is solar.

Just looking at ways to store my solar for use over night, a bit more extensively than the fridge. Plus I'd be very wary of turning a freezer or fridge off overnight here, defrosts very quickly.

Re:suitable for home use?

[mrchaotica]

And benzene is literally just a ring of Carbon atoms, but you wouldn't want to drink a cup of it!

Re:suitable for home use?

[schlachter]

The Mazda 6 uses capacitors for it's regenerative braking system...so they are relevant for hybrid car systems...for short term energy storage.

Re:suitable for home use?

[thegarbz]

The power density is really nowhere close to a battery. Supercaps make sense for things where you actually need really massive charge and/or discharge spikes, over very short times.

That is the definition of power density. You're thinking energy density. The fact that you would get the two confused casts aspersions on your knowledge in the field.

Interesting conclusion. Care to pick apart the rest of his post point by point, or do you naturally simply assume that if someone slips up with one word they are entirely ignorant in their field? I have on occasion confused kW and kWh, that hasn't stopped me from designing HV substations successfully, just like energy density vs power density has nothing to do with the rest of his post about the benefits of wet-cell vs agm.

Re:suitable for home use?

[geoskd]

Care to pick apart the rest of his post point by point,

I took serious exception with the entire post, although I had only limited time to respond. In complete: Lead Acid is entirely the wrong technology for home solar installation, in spite of it being the relatively cheapest. The root reason is total energy density. Even though a home system does not have the space or weight limitations that a mobile system requires, lead acid has such a low energy density compared to virtually all modern option that it is not really suitable for any application except car starter batteries (where power density is paramount). The guy is clearly an "early adopter" who is trying to sound like he knows more than he does, and giving bad advice to boot. When he claims that ultra caps are unavailable at any price: he is dead wrong. And there is no battery system in the world for a solar installation that will function as well as ultra caps, even at current prices because of the virtually limitless charge discharge cycles of ultracaps vs chemical batteries. The best advice I can give to anyone, is if you are really dead set on getting solar right now, spring for the ultracap storage, because it will be significantly cheaper in the long run. A better bet still would be to wait 5-10 years and let the researchers do their stuff, as both chemical battery, and more importantly ultra cap storage is still improving at double digit rates in all metrics.

In summary, the guys confusion of power vs energy density, along with other shortcomings in his post told me that he had no engineering knowledge whatsoever, and at best was a "power user" / early adopter who was just regurgitating the same crap he read on some blog somewhere. The most dangerous misinformation is the crap that contains half truths, or lies by omission like this one. To people who don't know the difference, this guy sounds like an expert, and those people will repeat anything they hear unless there is an immediate and clear voice to call out the BS.

Re:suitable for home use?

[thegarbz]

I agree lead acid is not idea but guess what, if you go out right now and say you want a battery storage system for solar to run your house you WILL get a lead acid battery installation and there are many people who have already done so despite your assertion that it's "wrong". You said it yourself, a home system does not have space or weight limitations, so I'm interested why you think it is so wrong? I mean if we can run industrial control systems for 2 days of lead acid batteries why not a house? If others are running their houses off lead acid, why not him too? It's also the technology most used for people who need energy storage on the go like campers.

As for his pricing assertion, he is still dead right, or do you want to look at the cost of that supercap again, I'm sure I can get a high performance li-po solution for less than the cost of supercaps right now. They simply are not viable. One of the key problems is that they act like a capacitor rather than a battery meaning they lose most of their voltage in the first 1/3 of their discharge period, rather than a battery which will lose most of it in it's last 1/20th or even better with lithium based batteries. That will play havoc with your inverter. Speaking of havoc can you even get an inverter capable of running from that voltage profile? Most I know will cut out at 10.6 which will effectively mean your supercaps will be empty about 2 seconds after you fire up the microwave.

Basically my summary is that he confused power and energy density. On every other point he was dead right. You were right about one thing, in 5-10 years things will likely look different, but if you wanted a battery storage facility now the only really viable off the shelf solution that is used in many places around the world requiring similar load demands is to go lead acid, specifically AGM. I fully support people repeating what he said.

By the way a bit of maths:
Putting those supercaps you linked to in series to make up 12V will cost you $200
At a constant 600watt power draw (current base load for my house) they will last about 12sec before they reach 10.8V at which point a typical inverter will kick out. Lets assume I have a super inverter that will run down to about 1V and I get a cool 90sec on power out of them.

Or I could spend the $200 on an 80Ah AGM battery and get about 5760sec (just over one and a half hours) before the battery reaches 10.8V.

Hmmm how will I spend my $200. ... At least the supercaps are small and light right!

Re:suitable for home use?

[cbhacking]

Apologies, you're correct. You'll note that I used "energy density" later on.

Also, it may cast doubt on my knowledge (which is actually fair; that's a easy mistake but also a beginner or casual one) but I don't think it casts aspersions; you should look up what that word means. Anyhow, I'm a computer security engineer, not an EE or an electrician. I've only ever wired one large PV-charged, DC-stored home electrical system, and did it with under my father who *is* an EE. I'm guessing that's still one more than you, though, and the aforementioned system is still going strong some 12.5 years later (though the batteries did need replacing once and the charge controller got upgraded).

Re:suitable for home use?

[cbhacking]

Gel batteries are a form of sealed lead-acid, yes, although not the only such form. Another common one is AGM (Absorbed Glass Mat). I forget exactly why we went with gel instead of AGM cells, but there was some reason (and it wasn't cost; AGM is cheaper). In any case, there's some interesting reading about sealed lead-acid batteries on the mighty Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...

Re:suitable for home use?

[cbhacking]

"Long-term" in this case meaning hours rather than seconds or minutes, which are typical times for a capacitor to discharge to an effectively useless voltage (though I admit to not having tried building a system that could use them). The system my parents use can run off stored capacity for around three days if needed (assuming typical usage but no charge for whatever reason), although the batteries would suffer damage from being drained (typically you don't want a nominally-12V lead-acid-chemistry battery to drop below about 11.5V if you can help it, anything below 11V and you're probably losing significant capacity; empty is around 10.8V).

Re:suitable for home use?

[geoskd]

so I'm interested why you think it is so wrong?

The problem with it is longevity and maintenance. The industry is still using lead acid batteries for the same reason that it took 20 years for automakers to get around to having reasonable built in stereo systems. The manufacturers have a perception that what they have is good enough when it really isn't.

lead acid batteries under normal loading will only last about 8 years or so, with constant loss of performance during the entire period of their use. The solar companies started off using them because they concluded that it was the only technology available at that time that had the power density necessary to handle the household load. They were essentially correct, although NiCD and LiPO could both handle it, they offered no advantages over Lead Acid and cost far more. Ultra Caps have been available for about 5 years (and the costs have been steadily decreasing). The reason they are not widely adopted for Solar panel use is because they use a different charging methodology, and so can never be swapped in for lead acid batteries directly. Ultracaps have the advantage that they will outlast the structure, and are 100% maintenance free. This puts their long term (30+ years) cost far below lead acid even today. The cost of switching later is not trivial because that $1000 battery charging and monitoring equipment will have to be completely replaced when going to ultra caps, so it is purely wasted money. As you also noted, the Inverter is a completely different design between the two storage methods, so you can add the cost of a new inverter to the mix as well. So in the very short term (less than 10 years), lead acid is cheaper, and if the installation is not expected to last longer than that, then go for it. For the longer term, the cost of the batteries become non-trivial compared to the cost of ultra caps, and the cost to replace the control electronics makes it so that lead acid installation is a dead looser no matter when you switch over.

At the end of the day, it is why I strongly recommend waiting a few years while the solar industry catches up with the times and creates / markets the control electronics necessary to work with ultra caps, and for the price of ultra caps to come down further. In the long run, waiting 5 years will likely save you more than the 5 years worth of electricity...

Re:suitable for home use?

[thegarbz]

Right now you're still comparing orders of magnitude difference.

Given it's a system that will essentially save money on electricity cost you're not weighing up the cost of the expense but the size of a saving, and to get the real saving you need a large initial outlay (orders of magnitude again), and a really long service life (not sure if I'm still going to have my house in 10 years let alone 30. In the long run if you do the maths you may find that the current systems pay off earlier than 5 years. You may also find you're stuck in the vicious cycle of waiting just another year until the technology is a bit better.

This is no longer an early adopter problem. These systems easily save several thousand dollars over their useful life in many use cases which is why they are already in service. Heck at least one loony on youtube charges batteries off-peak and then uses the power from them on-peak, and his price differential is lower than that of solar. The only way that spending the money now doesn't make sense is if:
a) you can't afford the capital outlay
b) you don't intend to use the system over it's service life (i.e. moving house in a few years).
c) you're getting an incredible deal for electricity buyback due to some ill-conceived government subsidy (New South Wales for a while paid back 44c/kWh despite electricity only costing 22c/kWh. The state is now nearly broke because of it.

Gives new meaning...

[ilsaloving]

This will give new meaning to the term 'magic smoke'.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... for those that don't know)

Re:Gives new meaning...

[JimSadler]

The pro pot crowd often makes reference to George Washington and other founders raising hemp. The hemp they raised for rope and fabric wasn't any good for getting high either. I suppose if you smoked a huge drum of it you might get a mild buzz but no reasonable amount of exposure would give you a buzz. Tobacco is actually worse in that regard. Picking tobacco leaves can put enough nicotine in your system to make you quite ill and that is without lighting it up.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[Ellis D. Tripp]

Actually, Washington's diaries talk about his hemp crop, and include this passage:

  "Began to separate the Male from the Female hemp ⦠rather too late."

The only reason to separate the male and female plants is to prevent pollination, and thereby increase (psychoactive) resin production. This is still done to this day among pot growers. It seems pretty clear that Washington had at least some interest in the medicinal/psychoactive qualities of his crop.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[Grishnakh]

The pro pot crowd points to Washington and hemp so they can point out how stupid our marijuana laws are, because these laws, in banning marijuana, also ban hemp, even though hemp does suck for getting high. It's a versatile and useful plant (but not for smoking), good for making rope, paper, clothing, etc., but we can't have it because of these stupid pot laws.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[Anonymous Coward]

Too fluffy/sticky. Not a good substrate.

Re: Gives new meaning...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not the only reason, and you pinched that idea from Robert Anton Wilson. The Straight Dope has something to say about it:

But let's not give up too quickly. In his diary for August 7, 1765, Washington writes, "Began to separate the Male from the Female hemp ⦠rather too late." Female marijuana plants are the ones that contain enough THC to be worth smoking. Some take this to mean Washington was cultivating the plant not just for fiber. Of course, two days later Washington says he put the hemp in the river to soak and separate out the fibers, and later in September that he started to harvest the seed. That suggests he divided the plants because the males made stronger fiber while the female plants produced the seed needed for the next year's crop. Jefferson in his Farm Book wrote that a female plant would produce a quart of seed, and a bushel of seed was enough to plant an acre.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes and its capacitance was pretty ... high.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[hubie]

I remember back in college that the people who were the most concerned for, and passionate about, the textile and rope industries were the ones who got profiled as the "pot heads." Although people usually stereotyped them as hippie anti-corporationists, I was always very impressed with their pro-industrial stances like this.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[RyoShin]

I believe the conspiracy theory goes that when marijuana was first banned, a farming industry (cotton? can't remember) lobbied/convinced Congress that hemp was also a massive part of this "drug craze" in order to shut down hemp farmers who were able to produce better quality textile material at a lower cost, thus making it harder for these farmers to sell their own crop.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[MiSaunaSnob]

It is legal to grow "industrial hemp" in 15 states.

Re:Gives new meaning...

[Grishnakh]

That's a recent development. Industrial hemp has been illegal nationwide for decades.

superconducting cannabis plants.

[jaeztheangel]

history has officially jumped the shark.

Not available in US

[Anonymous Coward]

You can grow hemp in Canada to make rope, clothes, etc. Americans will throw you in jail for 5 million years if you try to grow hemp (even in Washington State and Colorado).

Re:Not available in US

[Anonymous Coward]

They legalized it in CO last year. Once MJ is legal, there's no argument for outlawing hemp.

Re:Not available in US

[Anonymous Coward]

You can be forgiven for thinking this, since the law changed very recently. Several states had passed industrial hemp bills that were void until the Federal government acted. They finally acted. Note that some of the industrial hemp states do not allow recreational. I haven't checked to see if they all allow medical. Thus, it's legal to grow industrial hemp in California, but recreational marijuana is still an infraction/$100 fine for less than on oz., criminal for more than an ounce, etc. I don't know what the regs are for joe blow growing industrial hemp. I don't think I'm going to try since it would attract unwanted attention for obvious reasons.

Re:Not available in US

[HornWumpus]

Try and grow hemp anywhere near me and I'll cut it all down.

It would ruin my sensi.

Gives new meaning...

[Stolovaya]

Have you ever made hemp fiber supercapacitors...on weed?

Legal... sort of

[michael_cain]

"The hemp we use is perfectly legal to grow."

Yeah, if you're properly affiliated with a university or state department of agriculture, are doing it for research purposes, and have agreed to all of the terms and conditions that the feds and your local state require. If you or I try to do it commercially, it's a federal felony.

Re:Legal... sort of

[GrahamCox]

Which is nuts, actually. Hemp is a brilliant raw material with hundreds of practical uses which *should*, if people had any sense of balance, far outweigh the small issue of the cannabinoids. It could probably even be selectively bred to eliminate that aspect, but no, concern about a few potheads sends legislators into a tailspin. This is why we can't have nice things.

Re:Legal... sort of

[rahvin112]

Yea but it looks like pot and if you allow any Joe, Dick and Jane to grow it the feds would have to genetically test every plant in the crop and that's just unworkable so it should be banned to save the government effort in proving that you are growing illegal plants.

[/sarcasm]

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Hemp is overrated

Clever stoners have built this huge mythology around the industrial value of hemp. It is a good fiber but it isn't the miracle material you've been trained to think it is. We've had no problem discovering suitable and better alternatives for every conceivable use of hemp and if industrial hemp is ever available in bulk I doubt more than a few of these will actually be displaced. A few maybe, but if it competes with other crops for cultivated land it won't be cheap, so it won't be the first choice.

It would be great if hemp were able to produce excellent supercapacitors beyond the lab. We could begin replacing our fleet of gas cars with electrics and build feasible energy storage for renewables. Unfortunately the same mentality that takes all the hemp hype as gospel also believes that we don't have these things because Big Oil and Big Coal — so I guess hemp supercapactors aren't going to help anyhow. Right?

AC because poking at the millennial world view is bad for karma.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Clever stoners have built this huge mythology around the industrial value of hemp. It is a good fiber but it isn't the miracle material you've been trained to think it is. We've had no problem discovering suitable and better alternatives for every conceivable use of hemp and if industrial hemp is ever available in bulk I doubt more than a few of these will actually be displaced.

Yes, and we have to use materials like oil to make your materials.

Or we could use sunshine and rain and a lot less oil.

Re:Legal... sort of

[TapeCutter]

It could probably even be selectively bred to eliminate that aspect

That's been available for a very long time, it's what they used in this experiment and is grown commercially to make hemp clothing. Getting permission to grow those species is unreasonably difficult in many countries for no other reason than it looks like the smokeable stuff. Historically hemp is as important as cotton, George Washington once decreed every land holder set aside a portion of land for growing hemp to supply the colonial navy with rope. It's said that the invention of nylon spurred the original US government propaganda and the prohibition drive, hemp was a direct competitor in many markets and the nylon makers had powerful friends in congress. The propaganda avoided the word "hemp" and used the Mexican name "Marijuana" in a cynical attempt to appeal to the racist dogma of the day that branded Mexicans as lazy and untrustworthy.

Re:Legal... sort of

[dbIII]

It's one of the reasons France gave the USA the finger and you guys decided to hate the nation that used to be admired - France still has a large and legal hemp industry for fibre production. They refused to shut it down as part of the "war on drugs". India grows a vast amount of the stuff for fibre. There's a few other places that didn't decide to wipe out an industry as collatoral damage in the "war on drugs" distraction.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

No. There is no replacement yet for hemp cloth that is as good or better in hot weather. Flax comes close but isn't as durable. The ridiculous state of the law makes flax cheaper than hemp which would otherwise outperform it in all aspects including price. Synthetic fibers are trash for clothing if you have to do anything beyond sitting in an air-condition room.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

That's goddam straight. Fuck around in the tropics for a couple of years in polyester or rayon, you'll love it.

Re:Legal... sort of

[killkillkill]

If you start producing hemp on a scale large enough to replace his materials, I bet you're still going to end up using quite a bit of petroleum derived fertilizers to replenish the depleted soil.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Grishnakh]

Wrong and stupid. Hemp can be used for paper, which is more environmentally-friendly than normal paper because hemp (a "weed") grows far faster than trees.

Re: Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it'll never be a success. Which is why we have fields full of them here

http://mensenmakendestad.almere.nl/typo3temp/pics/81bb02fb09.jpg

Re:Legal... sort of

[Neil Boekend]

Of course you have to comply with state and federal regulations. They probably include random sampling by feds to test THC levels in your crop.
If you genetically modify corn to have THC the corn farmers will face the same thing. That's not wrong.

What is wrong is that THC is illegal in the US. But that is a different discussion.
Info: I live in the Netherlands. I know a society can work properly while weed is available to everyone (although it isn't perfect yet).

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean more profitable than trees. There is no environmental problem using trees for paper, if the forest is managed to avoid deforestation. Which is easy enough, you either re-plant, or leave some seed trees standing. Idiots who cuts down all trees over a large area has given forestry a bad name - but it isn't done that way everywhere.

Re:Legal... sort of

[gwjgwj]

And what specific fertilizer is petroleum-derived? Have not heard of any.

Re:Legal... sort of

[drinkypoo]

It could probably even be selectively bred to eliminate that aspect, but no, concern about a few potheads sends legislators into a tailspin. This is why we can't have nice things.

Well congrats, you've just completely mischaracterized the situation. Concern about diminishing of a profit center (Big Pharma) sends legislators into a tailspin. This is why we can't have nice things. Also, they can't admit they've been lying to us through their corrupt fucking faces all this time. The legislators know that weed is harmless, that's what the science has always said.

Re:Legal... sort of

[jtroy92]

Americans don't hate France

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

That's exactly why Dupont helped get it outlawed.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

"the racist dogma of the day that branded Mexicans as lazy and untrustworthy"

LOL. Nice try.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Grishnakh]

Have you forgotten how long it takes a tree to grow to maturity? Hemp plants are extremely fast-growing.

Re:Legal... sort of

[mrchaotica]

We've had no problem discovering suitable and better alternatives for every conceivable use of hemp...

...you say in a thread about how hemp is better than the lab-created "alternative!"

Re:Legal... sort of

[mrchaotica]

Once you've accounted for externalities, "more profitable," "more efficient," and "more environmentally-friendly" become equivalent.

Re:Legal... sort of

[mrchaotica]

There's a reason why marijuana is called "weed," you know: it's because it grows like one (without fertilizer)!

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Synthetic fibers are trash for clothing if you have to do anything beyond sitting in an air-condition room.

Because Under Armor came up with all of that polyester-blend clothing because it's terrible for doing things where you get sweaty and they know professional athletes are stupid and will buy it anyway.

Reality proves you wrong. Sorry.

Re:Legal... sort of

[BronsCon]

Not with proper crop rotation. It's sad that most large commercial farms have forgotten this and, instead, must suck on the petroleum teat to sustain their crops.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

From Wikipedia: All nitrogen fertilizers are made from ammonia (NH3), which is produced by the Haber-Bosch process.[13] In this energy-intensive process, natural gas (CH4) supplies the hydrogen and the nitrogen (N2) is derived from the air.

Re: Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Must be a real expert on the subject then. If it's got nitrogen it probably started as ammonia which probably started as natural gas and nitrogen and a lot of energy. The process is reliant on fossil fuels as an ingredient and in most cases for energy as well.

Re:Legal... sort of

[gwjgwj]

And still no petroleum involved, only natural gas. And it is not even necessary, as hydrogen can be extracted from water.

Re:Legal... sort of

[surd1618]

True it's not miraculous. It's really pretty good stuff though. Cotton production uses something like 5% of agricultural land and huge amounts of pesticides (some of which are not used for edible plants, which I think is telling). Flax (linen) is good too, and can make nicer fabric, but hemp is stronger (because of longer fibers) and higher-yielding. Really, the fiber length of hemp is a great property. I think the main reason hemp would not displace cotton is the inertia of industry, not commerce or environmental considerations.

Re:Legal... sort of

[HornWumpus]

Just Frenchmen and women older then 25.

Re:Legal... sort of

[MiSaunaSnob]

they don't use mature trees for paper, anything over 10 inches in diameter risks having a rotten core and is to hard to deal with, they would rather use smaller pulp wood

Re:Legal... sort of

[Grishnakh]

Still, growing a 10-inch-diameter tree takes a fair amount of time. A hemp plant grows quickly, hence the moniker "weed".

Of course, there's a lot of fiber in a 10-inch tree compared to a hemp plant, and I don't have any numbers handy on the per-acre per-year yield (of usable paper) using each plant.

Re:Legal... sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Weed isn't harmless. It's not that bad for you (certainly better than tobacco is), but it's still not harmless. With prolonged use, it can cause memory problems, and if smoked it still has the same detrimental effects on your lungs that tobacco does.

Re:Legal... sort of

[drinkypoo]

With prolonged use, it can cause memory problems,

Citation needed.

and if smoked it still has the same detrimental effects on your lungs that tobacco does.

UCLA already proved otherwise. It's obvious why you didn't log in. You only have lies to tell.

No overlap with recreational activities?

[kruach aum]

What about basket weavers, you insensitive clod!

Re:No overlap with recreational activities?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about smoking your dead battery "YOU" insensitive clod!

No THC?

[msobkow]

Sorry, but every cannabis sativa plant, whether of the recreational, medicinal, or hemp varieties produces some THC. Granted, hemp is a miniscule fraction of a percentage THC, but it does have THC.

Re:No THC?

[dbIII]

Friend of a friend story but probably true.
A friend of mine, his sister and his sister's stoner boyfriend went to Latvia after the Russians moved out and they could reconnect with family etc. The stoner was astonished with hemp growing all over the place and he collected and dried a lot of it. It turns out that with the variety there and the short growing season he was effectively just smoking rope because whatever process forms THC just didn't get time to happen.

Re:No THC?

[BitZtream]

... They're talking about hemp, not Cannabis Sativa. Theres a difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

There are many strains of Cannabis, some have THC, some don't.

Re:No THC?

[sound vision]

The concept of dirtweed or ditchweed is well-known to US stoners as well - if you find it growing naturally there is a good chance it's a hemp strain, not suitable for smoking. It's not that the these plants don't contain any THC, it's that they don't contain appreciable THC in doses large enough to get high. It's a minor distinction, and probably good not to mention it lest the government try to clamp down on supercapacitor research. But, I would expect the scientist in the article to be more precise.

Re:No THC?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hemp does have THC, just such a small amount (0.3% - 1.5%) that you wouldn't get high from smoking before you got a massive head ache from everything else in the plant and passed out from the CO poisoning. Medical/recreational grade has 10% or more THC content, I've even heard some varieties have upwards of 23%

Re:No THC?

[Anonymous Coward]

And almost every apple and almond has cyanide.

But yeah Mitlin shouldn't have used "at all". I'd cut him some slack if he merely said "No THC", but "No THC in it at all" means something different.

Re:No THC?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but every cannabis sativa plant, whether of the recreational, medicinal, or hemp varieties produces some THC. Granted, hemp is a miniscule fraction of a percentage THC, but it does have THC.

And a 6 feet tall plant of industrial hemp, could, in total, just about get a rat high..

captcha: rested

Re:No THC?

[HornWumpus]

We used to report a field of two of hemp to the cops every year. Kept them out of trouble.

That tears it, Bailing Twine?

[bobbied]

Dang it folks, I left the farm to be an electrical engineer and it keeps following me! I ran away from the farm for a reason, and bailing twine was wrapped all around it.

Now we are going to be making capacitors from bailing twine? NOOOOOO!! I won't do this again!

I have to retire before they start sending me out to pickup packages of dried grass and haul them to the barn again.

Re:That tears it, Bailing Twine?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dang it folks, I left the farm to be an electrical engineer and it keeps following me! I ran away from the farm for a reason, and bailing twine was wrapped all around it.

Now we are going to be making capacitors from bailing twine? NOOOOOO!! I won't do this again!

I have to retire before they start sending me out to pickup packages of dried grass and haul them to the barn again.

Don't bail on your education so quickly, partner! From one former hayseed to another, it's spelled "baling" because they're bales of hay.

Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

Waiting for the NORML press release that cites this discovery as a reason why all states must legalize weed for recreational use immediately. Doesn't matter that it has nothing to do with getting high, facts are irrelevant to them.

It's hilarious how drug advocates find everything about science to be wrong when scientists discover new dangers about marijuana use, but love science when it finds uses for hemp or marijuana, even if the use has NOTHING to do with getting high in the slightest. Talk about cherry picking.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[PPH]

but love science when it finds uses for hemp

Because with large scale hemp agriculture, you can always sneak in a few rows of 'the good stuff'.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[alvinrod]

You wouldn't want to though. Your marijuana plants would end up getting cross-pollinated and the quality would go to hell. No one would want to buy the crap. That and cultivating the plants indoors in a more controlled environment is going to provide a much better yield.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Opportunist]

Care to share pointers to the dangers of MJ use? If possible some where it's anyone's business but the person's who consumes it. Note: It's NONE of your business if someone wants to off himself in any way he likes.

Re: Potheads assemble!

[jd2112]

So they are just like... everybody else?

Re:Potheads assemble!

[BlackHawk-666]

Marijuana doesn't have the same dramatic effects as meth, and there are people who are long-term users who suffer very few side effects from this drug. There is however a small chance that it can lead to temporary or even permanent psychosis. There is still some debate over this issue, but I can assure you it's quite real.

http://www.sane.org/informatio...
http://medicalmarijuana.procon...

A while ago I spent some time in a mental facility and one of the patients there was that unlucky 1 in 700,000 who was vulnerable to the psychotic effects that marijuana could cause. He was a good student who was just starting university. Intelligent, articulate, and with excellent grades - he had good prospects for a long and happy life.

His mother worked as a nurse at that hospital so she could spend time with her son, and I received this information directly from her. At uni he tried marijuana, just a few times. I get the impression he was just a typical uni kid enjoying his new freedom and he started to smoke it because his new social circle were smoking it. Pretty typical stuff. He had an adverse reaction (I think over a short time period of maybe week or so) and had to be hospitalised due to psychosis.

By the time I met him, he had been in hospital for 12 years. He had no teeth left, since he couldn't look after them they had to all be removed. He was heavily medicated but was still liable to fits of anger and hitting other patients for something simple like sitting in his chair. He was barely able to speak and never managed more than a couple of mumbled, often unintelligible words. There was a rec room where we could watch a TV which was behind a plexiglass panel we needed to lift up to change channels. He had a tic that meant every 1-2 minutes he needed to get up, walk to the TV, life the plexiglass, run his hand over the top of the TV, then sit down again. He might do this 100+ times in a day.

While it's easy to think there's no dangers using marijuana, and admittedly, they are few and low - it's not totally without cost or risk. This man will spend the rest of his short life in that mental institution, unable to read, play games, go outside, speak to others, share friendships or talk about the good old days. He will never experience any of the myriad of things that you and countless others can - and that is directly attributed to a fairly small quantity of weed he smoked - he wasn't trying any other drugs at the time.

Certainly, he had a disposition towards this happening, but it was marijuana that pushed it over the limit and completely fucked his entire life.

We have a decent welfare system and free hospitalisation in Australia, so he is getting the care he needs. You could argue that as taxpayers who are shouldering that cost we do get a say in whether people consume the drug or not...but, I'm not going to bother with that argument, it's not the important one.

Enjoy the smoke if you can amd avoid it if that's that you prefer. Just bear in mind, however small, there is a chance of psychosis that may in same rare cases be permanent - and weed is a known contributor to this condition.

Role your dice, move your mice.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[qpqp]

Certainly, he had a disposition towards this happening, but it was marijuana that pushed it over the limit and completely fucked his entire life.

That would have happened in any case. Stop scaring the kids! Just remember, it's all in your head.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

1/700,000 has an adverse reaction to marajuana
how many people in the US can die from eating a peanut? almost no non-essential substance is innocuous to everyone.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[careysub]

but love science when it finds uses for hemp

Because with large scale hemp agriculture, you can always sneak in a few rows of 'the good stuff'.

No, you can't - although the belief that you can is apparently what has kept the hemp business shut down in the U.S. for 80 years (and led to Governor Arnold to veto a hemp cultivation measure in California.

The cultivation patterns are completely different. The hemp crop is grown in dense plantings that lead to tall stalks and few leaves, and then the crop is either harvested before it flowers (if an all-fiber farm) or is allowed to go to seed (if hemp seed is also harvested).

Either way there is no way that a successful drug crop, however small, can be snuck in there. (Not so drug cannabis and, say, field corn though - hiding pot among corn is an old trick).

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Your 'evidence' is anecdotal and completely laughable. What evidence do you have that he DIDN'T use any other drugs? Did you monitor him from birth, to see every event that happened to him as a child?
Laughable. There are no dangers to using marijuana, and even if there are, we are all ADULTS, and if we wish to put ourselves in danger, that's up to us.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[drinkypoo]

There is however a small chance that it can lead to temporary or even permanent psychosis.

Nonsense.

Certainly, he had a disposition towards this happening, but it was marijuana that pushed it over the limit

In fact, there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. The available evidence equally supports the assertion that marijuana prevented it from happening earlier.

Just bear in mind, however small,

Ironically, it's the small minds that conclude that they know what's best for everyone else.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

I see a distinct lack of "evidence" in your post. I'm also rather surprised you are so confident considering you don't know the person, his situation, or anything else. I trust you don't use this attitude in your own science, should you do any.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Vitriol Angst]

But if this is 1/700,000 -- you are below the danger level of side effects to Aspirin.
Peanuts are legal and they can potentially kill more people.

Now we might put a warning label so people can look for the side effects, but this doesn't seem like a threat above "slipping on rubber ducky". Other than paranoia, this is about the third time I've heard of a person almost destroyed by MJ. There are many legal things that are far more dangerous.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Vitriol Angst]

I remember seeing a news story about a train conductor who "took marijuana and caused a deadly crash." They also mentioned, almost as a footnote near the end of the story that there were nearly 24 empty Miller Lite beer cans.

So I think we can't rule out something else that could have caused the malady.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[drinkypoo]

I see a distinct lack of "evidence" in your post.

Great. It's in no way distinguished from the post which I was addressing, then. Providing a link doesn't mean one has provided meaningful evidence.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[alexo]

A while ago I spent some time in a mental facility and one of the patients there was that unlucky 1 in 700,000 who was vulnerable to the psychotic effects that marijuana could cause.

As compared to:

As many as 600,000 Canadians (1 - 2% of the overall population) are thought to be at risk of anaphylaxis stemming from food and insect allergy.
-- http://www.aaia.ca/en/anaphyla...

So what's you point exactly? That marijuana is approximately 10,000 times safer than food?

Re:Potheads assemble!

[dave420]

It sounds more like it was directly attributable to his existing medical condition which could have been triggered any number of ways, such as sleep deprivation, poor diet, or drinking too much...

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

Or it could have just been mental illness: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/schizophrenia/basics/symptoms/con-20021077

Re:Potheads assemble!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank-you for your anecdote, but please refrain from assuring anyone that your simplistic conjecture is a "quite real" fact. You have a single anecdote, about a college kid (which happens to be the age range when schizophrenia often sets in), who smoked marijuana, thus causing a never ending psychosis? That's the evidence that marijuana was the cause of his psychosis? How is it not far more likely that he would have developed a never ending psychosis even without ever smoking marijuana? Did you read the links that you pasted within your comment, which clearly spell out several different times that the scientific evidence does not support such a hypothesis? Here's one of many quotes from a link of yours, "The results of this study indicate that the incidence and prevalence of diagnoses of schizophrenia and psychoses in general practice did not increase between 1996 and 2005." Is that perhaps why you decided the odds were an "unlucky 1 in 700,000", so that it would appear that the increase in incidences is still hidden in the data because odds of being unlucky are so low? Gimme a break!

Re:Potheads assemble!

[strikethree]

So I decided to fact check:

http://www.peanut-institute.or...
"The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) has reported that approximately one in 90 people in the United States, or 1.1%, have a tree nut and/or peanut allergy and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (FAAN) has stated that it is about 0.6% each."

and

http://health.howstuffworks.co...

"Somewhere around 150 to 200 people die in the U.S. each year because of food allergies. It's estimated that around 50 percent to 62 percent of those fatal cases of anaphylaxis were caused by peanut allergies."

So lower bound is roughly 75 people each year actually die, not just have a permanent psychosis, to peanuts.

Compared to 1/700,000 having an adverse reaction to marijuana.

Re:Potheads assemble!

[LienRag]

He had no teeth left, since he couldn't look after them they had to all be removed. He was heavily medicated but was still liable to fits of anger and hitting other patients for something simple like sitting in his chair. He was barely able to speak and never managed more than a couple of mumbled, often unintelligible words. There was a rec room where we could watch a TV which was behind a plexiglass panel we needed to lift up to change channels. He had a tic that meant every 1-2 minutes he needed to get up, walk to the TV, life the plexiglass, run his hand over the top of the TV, then sit down again. He might do this 100+ times in a day.

You understand that the very heavy effects that you describe are most likely the results of the heavy medication he's on, much more than of his psychotic trouble or marijuana?
Read Roger Gentis, it's a bit old now but still relevant...

Marijuana...

[geekd]

Marijuana. Is there anything it CAN'T do?

Re:Marijuana...

[sconeu]

Marijuana. Is there anything it CAN'T do?

Make donuts?

Re:Marijuana...

[fyngyrz]

Make donuts?

Clearly, you are unfamiliar with Marijuana. :)

Re:Marijuana...

[Anonymous Coward]

Might find hemp in donut making equipment.

Re:Marijuana...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no CAN'T in CANNABIS.

Bong

[penguinoid]

But, can it be converted into a bong?

Re:Bong

[BitZtream]

No, but it can be used to jump start your vaporizer

not superconducting

[penguinoid]

A supercapacitor is not superconducting; it just stores a lot of charge.

Re:not superconducting

[jaeztheangel]

apologies; thank you for the correction.

Re:not superconducting

[Bing Tsher E]

If it was superconducting, it'd be a rather horrible capacitor, actually.

Re:not superconducting

[Dr_Barnowl]

It's the dielectric that needs to be an insulator ; these are electrode materials, which you want to be good conductors.

Whoa, dude, that gave me a great idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

... ... ...wait, what was I saying?

Man, I'm hungry....

(Yes, I can read I know it's THC free. That's a joke, I say, that's a joke, son.)

/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[UnknownSoldier]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

The hypocrisy of the government is retarded.

--
"It is the government proselytizing it is propaganda. When it is people promoting it, it is outlawed."

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[roc97007]

I don't have a reference handy, (would have to ask a certain member of my family who would know all about this) but I seem to remember that the banning of hemp had nothing to do with THC. That was only an excuse. The real reason was that hemp was competing too well with some other part of the textile industry.

That's going to bug me. I'll have to do research tonight and get more details.

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[Anonymous Coward]

The hypocrisy of the government is retarded.

Did it occur to you that the government isn't one person and that this video was produced at a time before the drug wars? Different people made different policies and that is not hypocritical.

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[DNS-and-BIND]

It never fails to amaze me how small minds cannot make the distinction between industrial hemp fiber and marijuana that is smoked for recreational purposes. They're two different things, but thanks for trotting out that old hoary video for the ten millionth time.

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[ganjadude]

It was a 2 fold attack from du pont, who nust created the synthetic fibre, and william henrey hurst with his timber operation, they didnt want the competition with the hemp fibre, so they started a campaign to smear it. They were blaming marijuana for black men raping white women and chinese being lazy, the convinced the government that they were both evil

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[Bob the Super Hamste]

I thought opium was blamed for the Chinese being lazy, and marijuana was blamed for the Mexicans being lazy.

Re:/Oblg. Hemp for Victory !

[Anonymous Coward]

what can I blame for my american laziness? there must be something. it can't be that people everywhere are lazy.

Oh, come now

[fyngyrz]

The hemp we use... has no THC in it at all - so there's no overlap with any recreational activities," Mitlin says.

Well, every technology has bugs and birthing pains. Keep working at it, and perhaps you can graduate to a better class of hemp, Mr. Mitlin.

Re:Oh, come now

[ShanghaiBill]

They could grow their hemp in Colorado or Washington, and be dual use: Sell the leaves and buds to the pot shops, and use the fiber in the stems to make supercapacitors.

Re:Oh, come now

[Ol Olsoc]

They could grow their hemp in Colorado or Washington, and be dual use: Sell the leaves and buds to the pot shops, and use the fiber in the stems to make supercapacitors.

Hemp is not marijuana. And it doesn't act like it either.

Re:Oh, come now

[Anonymous Coward]

Hemp can't replace marijuana, but I'm pretty sure marijuana can replace hemp.

Re:Oh, come now

[Ol Olsoc]

Hemp can't replace marijuana, but I'm pretty sure marijuana can replace hemp.

Well sure - for baking anyhow....

Re:Oh, come now

[Grishnakh]

As I understand it, no. (I'm not a marijuana expert however.) From what I'm told, while the two plants are closely related, marijuana is really good for smoking, but the fibers are not very good for rope-making, whereas hemp has great fibers for rope-making and clothes and such, but sucks for smoking. So basically you can have one or the other, but not both.

It's kinda like trying to use a Prius for hauling plywood and concrete, and a Ford F350 for daily commuting. You could probably get both those combinations to work, but the Prius is not optimized for cargo like the F350 is, and the F350 gets lousy fuel economy compared to the Prius and is much harder to maneuver and park.

Re:Oh, come now

[ganjadude]

You are correct, the hemp plat is the rudalis plant, we smoke the indica and sativa plants. Side note, hops are also related to pot

Re:Oh, come now

[WorBlux]

They are the same species, the main difference with where the plant invests carbon, and what chemical compounds are more highly expressed.

Re:Oh, come now

[Anonymous Coward]

Side note, hops are also related to pot

As are pine trees, sharks, monkeys and potatoes. But not humans, we were made by a wizard separately.

Re:Oh, come now

[mrchaotica]

Eh, some GMO-ing will fix that up in a jiffy...

Re:Oh, come now

[cyberchondriac]

Considering your username, I have no doubt that you are an authority on the matter. :-)

BTW, I never heard of the indica suffix. How different is that from sativa? (I did know about hops though)

Re:Oh, come now

[dale.furno]

I'm surprised that someone named ganjadude would not know that Ruderalis is not used for hemp production.

Re:Oh, come now

[bkcallahan]

Indica has chemicals that are antagonists to THC and help counteract it; Indica gives the "body buzz: or "Couch lock" feeling. CBD also helps with pain. Sativa has very little CBD and gives the "Dude, have you ever looked at your hands" type high.
Hemp and marijuana are the same thing; the difference is which traits are emphasized. Ruderalis is a small plant with little production; it is also auto-flowering (Doesn't need a change in light cycle to flower)

If you haven't guessed, I have my card.

Here's WIkipedia's version:
A total of 46 varieties of hemp with low levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are certified by the European Union (EU).[56] They have, unlike other types, a very high fiber content of 30-40%. In contrast to cannabis for medical use, varieties grown for fiber and seed have less than 0.2% THC and they are unsuitable for producing hashish and marijuana.[57] The most important cannabinoid in industrial hemp is cannabidiol (CBD) with a proportion of 1 to 5%.
Image: black and white drawing: C. sativa tall, C. indica middle, C. ruderalis small [The variety of appearances for cannabis. Only C. sativa (left) is suited for industrial hemp, but it also has medicinal varieties.]

The variety of appearances for cannabis. Only C. sativa (left) is suited for industrial hemp, but it also has medicinal varieties.
Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa var. sativa is the variety grown for industrial use, while C. sativa subsp. indica generally has poor fiber quality and is primarily used for recreational and medicinal purposes. The major difference between the two types of plants is the appearance and the amount of 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) secreted in a resinous mixture by epidermal hairs called glandular trichomes, although they can also be distinguished genetically.[58] Oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis approved for industrial hemp production produce only minute amounts of this psychoactive drug, not enough for any physical or psychological effects. Typically, hemp contains below 0.3% THC, while cultivars of Cannabis grown for recreational use can contain anywhere from 2% to over 20%.[59]

Re:Oh, come now

[ganjadude]

i havent done my research on it in a number of years but after a quick look, it is in fact still used in the hemp making process, although it looks like it is not as strong as it was in years past.

Re: Oh, come now

[Anonymous Coward]

The fun begins when the circuits overheat and burn up.

Re: Oh, come now

[Ol Olsoc]

The fun begins when the circuits overheat and burn up.

That's when the mad search for Fritos begins, right?

Re:Oh, come now

[doccus]

Hemp is the common name for a whole species, of which marijuana is a subspecies. So it's a non statement, like saying "dogs are not poodles". Poodles are dogs though, just as pot is also hemp. It's quite a surprise that hemp is so increadibly useful. You would think that it's just because smokers are so supportive that they would find 1001 other uses, but no, in fact, it really is a wonder plant.

So no ...

[CaptainDork]

... capacity for any recreational activities.

Re:So no ...

[riverat1]

Actually when I was in high school electronics class we had great fun charging up big capacitors then tossing them to our classmates yelling "Here, catch!". A few of us were smart enough not to catch.

Re:So no ...

[roc97007]

Actually when I was in high school electronics class we had great fun charging up big capacitors then tossing them to our classmates yelling "Here, catch!". A few of us were smart enough not to catch.

In my high school electronics class the instructor announced on the first day of class that anyone charging up a capacitor and tossing it to someone else as a joke would automatically fail the class. (Apparently this was not his first rodeo.)

Up to that point, we'd never even realized this was possible. That Halloween was fun.

Re:So no ...

[riverat1]

Yea, it only took our instructor a couple of days to tell us to stop too but by that time everyone was wise to it anyway.

Re:So no ...

[Anonymous Coward]

We didn't throw them. We just touched them to the back of the metal chair on the desk. It would make a nice startling pop especially during tests.

Re:So no ...

[TehZorroness]

My high school instructor told us that when he was in high school electronics, the kids would toss a charged capacator at you if they saw you trying to sneak in after the bell rang. Either you try your best to catch it, or you let it drop and the professor turns around from the chalk board and notices you walking in.

Re:So no ...

[cyberchondriac]

My high school instructor told us that when he was in high school electronics, the kids would toss a charged capacator at you if they saw you trying to sneak in after the bell rang. Either you try your best to catch it, or you let it drop and the professor turns around from the chalk board and notices you walking in.

But he didn't hear the snap of the discharge if the late student caught it?

Supercapacitors from used cigarette filters

[dsgrntlxmply]

How about this recently published gem: Preparation of energy storage material derived from a used cigarette filter for a supercapacitor electrode .

Re:Supercapacitors from used cigarette filters

[Anonymous Coward]

Cigars don't have a distinct butt; the whole thing is tobacco wrapped in tobacco leaves. The ones with hemp-like material in them are called something else.

I don't believe you.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm just going to come out and say it. This is a fraud. It'll be revealed some time in the next couple of days. Count on it.

Hey!

[PPH]

Administrator: What are you guys doing in the lab with all those plants?

Undergrad lab assistant: Testing them for use as supercapacitor electrodes. Yeah. That's the ticket.

Administrator walks away satisfied.

Um, I have to wonder...

[roc97007]

Experimenter bias?

Gives new meaning...

[Anonymous Coward]

please..... _do_ let the magic smoke out ;)

Supercapacitors from used cigarette filters

[Anonymous Coward]

I was thinking about the same. So the super-super-capacitors will be made of hemp cigar butts ?

How unfortunate ...

[angel'o'sphere]

The hemp we use is perfectly legal to grow. It has no THC in it at all - so there's no overlap with any recreational activities," Mitlin says.
A shame, isn't it?

Re:How unfortunate ...

[sound vision]

The good part is, instead of throwing the stems out I can now recycle them!

Re:How unfortunate ...

[angel'o'sphere]

He he, but ropes etc. are made from hemp stems since ages, you missed out on that.
Nut frankly making high tech from them is much more exiting!

Re:How unfortunate ...

[captaintightpants]

Me think he doth protest a bit too much

But how long can it maintain the high

[technosaurus]

voltage?

Re:But how long can it maintain the high

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly his variety has no THC, so no high ... voltage.

That said, I'm about to go and squirt some cannabis oil up my ass. That'll give me a rise ... in voltage.

Cotton lobby

[rsilvergun]

there's more to it than just Mary Jane. You don't think the cotton lobby has noticed the wonder material that is hemp?...

Re:Cotton lobby

[rsilvergun]

It depends on where hemp out performs. If hemp doesn't grow as well where cotton does then you cotton growing land becomes much less valuable.

Bamboo may be an even better choice.

[Anonymous Coward]

What we are talking about here is after all is just charred chains of sugars of terrestrial plant origin.

Alternates

[Anonymous Coward]

Have they tried bamboo?

forgetful electronics

[thygate]

oh no, soon our computers will be confused and forgetful ..

Hemp with THC should be legal too

[Anonymous Coward]

Who decides that it should be illegal? Not the people.

Faster than Graphene...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hah!...what's this guy smoking? :D

Cotton lobby

[Anonymous Coward]

The lobby is silly then. If hemp outcompetes cotton, then there is no problem. The farmers can simply switch from cotton to hemp. The biggest investment is the land, which will support either plant.

suitable for home use?

[Anonymous Coward]

Solar panels are becoming attractive and I'd like a storage bank but would like to avoid batteries because of the slow charge, expense, and maintenance. A super capacitor, of course, is attractive. Off the top of my head, I don't know what the power density of this type of capacitor is relative to lead acid deep cycle batteries. Still, I smile though :)

That maybe bullshit, I was watching something, I cant remember what channel but the battery packs are about the size of a small storage freezer, non-toxic, and can hold enough charge to power you house at thru out the night. They require little to no maintenance. This was on a show from back in 2008, so I'm sure the battery pack has improved or they've added circuits, components ect., to make them better. When solar panels first came out you had to get a surplus of submarine batteries in order to store the energy, but that isn't the case since solar has become more mainstream.

Obviously the new tech is something most people will not afford, and it is because of that solar will have a tough time catching on, when it comes to self-reliant energy.

How long does it last?

[EmagGeek]

If I put a supercap made of organic hemp into an oven at 105C for 5000 hours, what's left when I am finished? It is still a supercapacitor or is it a small metal can full of organic goo?

Maybe get monsanto to get involved?

[thieh]

to see if it is possible to get both ends of the world?

Good Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

All the stuff that other countries is finding Hemp is good at. Good thing the US government bans any kind of research, it might solve some of our economic woes.