Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
CHAPTER 6 INTRODUCTION Although forests currently produce the greatest portion of renewable materials with industrial uses, the productive potential of agricultural cropland cannot be overlooked in this assessment of possible future resources. A few agricultural materials are produced in the United States primarily for industrial use. Of these, cotton fiber is by far the most important. Flax, grown for its linseed oil, is the only other such crop grown in quantity in the United States. Elsewhere in the world, a variety of other vegetable fibers are grown for export to this country, as are a limited number of oilseed crops with primary industrial uses. The second category of agricultural industrial materials consists of those that are grown primarily for food but have important secondary industrial uses. In the United States, wool is often a secondary product to lamb meat and mutton. Similarly, fats and hides are important secondary to meat products in the beef cattle industry. Among agricultural crop products, peanut oil and soybean oil have important secondary uses as industrial materials. Corn starch is also used in substantial amounts in paper, textiles and other industrial purposes. The third category consists of agricultural materials produced in the United States primarily for food, but with residues that are potentially suitable for industrial use. These include wheat and other cereal straws, bagasse, corn stalks, and animal wastes and by-products. We will consider the potential of each of these groups in turn. Since physical capabilities are seldom dominant in the United States today, we emphasize economic projections based upon assessments of future supplies. »We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Leroy Quance and Allen Smith of the Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture; Michael J. Pallansch, R. E. Coleman, Clair E. Terrill, I. A. Wolff, Nelson Getchell, Harold H. Taylor and Joseph Naghski of the Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture; Billy E. Caldwell of North Carolina State University; Arlie L. Bowling of the National Cotton Council - 73 -
of America; and Ralph Aldave and Alvin Gray Folger of the University of Texas at Austin. - 74< -