Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumWoody Harrelson pushes tree-free paper
from NOW Toronto:
Woody Harrelson pushes tree-free paper
Eco-actor now marketing 80% ag waste paper aims for 100.
By Ellie Kirzner
Add a new enthusiasm to effervescent Woody Harrelsons long list of planetary passions.
Now the actor, biodiesal promoter and raw food afficinado is aiming to make no-tree paper, made of 100 percent agricultural waste.
At the end of October, Canadian-based Prairie Pulp and Paper, a company Harrelson has an interest in, got the seal of approval from the carbon measuring group, Offsetters for its modestly-named Step Forward Paper, made of 80% straw and 20% Forest Stewardship Council paper.
And now, Harrelson is revved for the next phase in his 14-year entrepreneurial odyssey to go completely forest-free. ..........(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=189516
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,577 posts)I th ink it's a shrub, called kenaf that can be used to make paper, be harvested a couple times a year and is virtually identical to paper. Hope they check that out also........
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)I'm gonna make paper and cloth, and use the seeds for food.
someday...
NickB79
(19,253 posts)I grind my teeth in frustration.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AGRICULTURAL WASTE!
What you call "waste" is valuable biomass that needs to stay IN THE FIELD to build the soil, hold moisture and store carbon.
It's ridiculous that we've lost a foot of topsoil in this country already, yet still think we can keep pulling every last leaf and stem of biomass off of our fields as though that's somehow "sustainable".
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)IOW, cultivating land to create surplus that fuels population growth, which in turn demands more land cultivation. At some point, the system will collapse (much sooner though when we till and pour fertilizers and pesticides on the fields).
I am dumbfounded that as a species we could choose a leisurely, sustainable existence as argo-forestry farmers (more akin to gatherers), but instead we either choose to dominate nature & work the fields or offices to our deaths. Its all unsustainable and absolutely un-natural.
NickB79
(19,253 posts)For example, this: http://www.badgersett.com/
No tilling, no fertilizing, improving soil structure year after year, along with long-term carbon storage in their wood and roots.
They've already developed hybrid hazels and chestnuts capable of competing with corn and soy, acre-for-acre, that can also withstand drought and flooding that would decimate conventional fields. Plus, since they're in the same state as me (Minnesota), their plants are hardy down to -30F.
I have a few of their neohazels and chestnuts in my yard. I'll be adding more next year.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)I see it as an alternative thread of reality that we cannot reach in our current projectory (unless a large global bottleneck allows people to reset the social & agricultural model). A few brilliant people are doing it (I hope to be one if I can ever afford land).
Everything about agro-forestry contradicts our very social model. It doesn't produce instant return, allowing for instant growth (4-7 years of zero yield). It doesn't require a large amount of debt to start (no machines, little processing of outputs), fueling constant production. It doesn't require a massive amount of inputs or water, and almost zero once its established. It doesn't even require a major time commitment from "farmers" unless you scale up. If every one had a half to quarter acre of a forest garden, it would basically run itself once established.
There is a reason many native American tribes would practice this form of agriculture (and civilization has rejected their way of life).
Unfortunately, while I don't see it as the future, I believe it is one of the only models we can utilize going forward to also heal the planet.
jmondine
(1,649 posts)It is sitting right here in my living room.