This article is from the Hemp / Cannabis / Marijuana FAQ, by Brian S. Julin verdant@twain.ucs.umass.edu with numerous contributions by others.
Biomass fuels are clean and virtually free from metals
and sulfur, so they do not cause nearly as much air
pollution as fossil fuels. Even more importantly, burning
biomass fuels does not increase the total amount of carbon
dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere. When petroleum products
are burned, carbon that has been stored underground for
millions of years is added to the air; this may contribute
to global warming through the `Greenhouse Effect', (a
popular theory which says that certain gases will act like a
wool blanket over the entire Earth, preventing heat from
escaping into space.) In order to make biomass fuels, this
carbon dioxide has to be taken out of the air to begin with
-- when they are burned it is just being put back where it
started.
Another advantage over fossil fuels is that biomass fuels
can be made right here in the United States, instead of
buying them from other countries. Instead of paying oil
drillers, super-tanker captains, and soldiers to get our
fuel to us, we could pay local farmers and delivery drivers
instead. Of course, it is possible to chop down trees and
use them as biomass. This would not be as beneficial to the
environment as using hemp, especially since trees that are
cut down for burning are `whole tree harvested.' This means
the entire tree is ripped up and burned, not just the wood.
Since most of the minerals which trees use are in the
leaves, this practice could ruin the soil where the trees
are grown. In several places in the United States, power
companies are starting to do this -- burning the trees in
order to produce electricity, because that is cheaper than
using coal. They should be using hemp, like researchers in
Australia started doing a few years ago. (Besides, hemp
provides a higher quality and quantity of biomass than trees
do.)
``Towards a Green Economy'' by Lynn Osburn (pamphlet)
 
Continue to: