Should WA and CO ban indoor pot growing?

In My Humble Opinion
1

A friend sent me this recent newspaper article–I was stunned to learn about the massive energy consumption, the huge carbon footprint, from indoor marijuana growing operations.

Since industrial-scale pot growing is now legal [regulated] in WA and CO, why not eliminate this immense unnecessary energy consumption and allow only greenhouse-grown or outdoor sun-grown marijuana?

Apparently the sun does shine predictably in Eastern WA; don’t know about CO.

From:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020969103_potcarbonxml.html
"Marijuana growing is not a green industry.

Done mostly indoors in Washington, pot production often uses hospital-intensity lamps, air conditioning, dehumidifiers, fans and carbon-dioxide generators to stimulate plants and boost their potency.

The power-hungry crops rival data centers or server farms in intense use of electricity, according to a peer-reviewed study last year in the journal Energy Policy. One kilo, or 2.2 pounds, of pot grown indoors, the study says, leaves a carbon footprint equivalent to driving across the country seven times. Producing one joint is equivalent to leaving a light bulb on for 25 hours."
== == == == == == ==
From: http://evan-mills.com/energy-associates/Indoor.html
Original report:
Energy up in Smoke:
The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production

SUMMARY (updated April 18, 2012)
"What kind of facility has lighting as intense as that found in an operating room (500-times more than needed for reading), 6-times the air-change rate of a biotech laboratory and 60-times that of a home, and the electric power intensity of a datacenter?

The emergent industry of indoor Cannabis production results in prodigious energy use, costs, and greenhouse-gas pollution. Large-scale industrialized and highly energy-intensive indoor cultivation of Cannabis is driven by criminalization, pursuit of security, and the desire for greater process control and yields. The practice occurs across the United States and in many other countries.

The analysis performed in this study finds that indoor Cannabis production results in energy expenditures of $6 billion each year–6-times that of the entire U.S. pharmaceutical industry–with electricity use equivalent to that of 2 million average U.S. homes. This corresponds to 1% of national electricity consumption or 2% of that in households. The yearly greenhouse-gas pollution (carbon dioxide, CO2 ) from the electricity plus associated transportation fuels equals that of 3 million cars. Energy costs constitute a quarter of wholesale value."

2

Why single out pot? Lots of people have indoor gardens. Would you ban all indoor growing? And why stop there? There are plenty of other unnecessary energy intensive activities that could be banned for the sake of efficiency as well.

3

I would think the market would take care of this. All that energy and equipment must be rather expensive, and that cost will be passed on to wholesalers and, eventually, consumers. With the need for secrecy gone, cheaper methods can prevail.

4

I hope a decrease in clandestine activity will manifest itself in several positive ways, one being growers don’t feel the need to trespass onto remote sections of our (or anyone else’s) land anymore and carve pot fields down by the river. Kinda scary coming across one of those.

5

When Washington DC passed a medical MJ law, they awarded contracts for grow houses (warehouses actually.) So ALL of the legal growing in DC is done indoors. Yes, it is energy wasteful but that is the technology that has developed over the years because the plant is illegal. Growing indoors protects a very expensive crop from both the law and the outlaws. And there isn’t much farm land in DC either.

Another thing is that with indoor growing, you can grow year round. More and more that is true of a lot of agg products, so why pick on pot? Tomatoes in December? Probably from a hothouse, maybe with some natural light but I’m pretty sure they use lights, heaters, ventilations systems and all kinds of other energy using systems.

6

The cops have used large electric bills to find pot growers in some areas. I believe the courts have ruled that is OK, it’s not an illegal search to use the power bills.

7

Yeah, why stop there? Who needs an aquarium anyway. The carbon footprint of a reef tank is outrageous! The exact same technology and much of the same equipment used in an indoor marijuana grow room is used in these selfish little glass biomes. These things should be banned. Public aquariums only, where we can all share in their beauty.

Don’t get me started about people cooking hamburgers at home on a charcoal grill. Or baking cookies at home when factory made cookies have economy of scale to reduce their energy consumed to cookies produced ratio.

:rolleyes:

8

Let’s clarify: While it may no longer violate state law, it still violates federal law. The feds can arrest you for it.

9

It’s surprising how many above replies miss the point.

No one is suggesting that WA and CO state govmts should ban legal activities–such as growing tomatos or keeping aquariums!

The question is: now that WA and CO state govmts are allowing and regulating a previously illegal product, should they allow only greenhouse or outdoor grows?

The plants will still be grown, users will still get their product, and what would be a massive energy consumption and carbon footprint would be eliminated. This monstrous energy consumption is not necessary for the production of the product.

And reassuringly, most importantly, WA and CO citizens can still eat tomatos and enjoy aquariums. And barbeque burgers and eat cookies. So you needn’t worry about that.

10

Growing outdoors, means that you have to plant in the Spring and harvest in the Fall. It would majorly disrupt the supply if you disallowed indoor growing.

11

NO, that is exactly the point. If it is now legal, then it is legal.

If the point is to save energy, then regulate ALL heavy energy users the same. Data centers don’t run on air and I’m guessing there are quite a few data centers up in that area but no one is trying to regulate them. (They could force them to install enough solar panels to compensate for their energy… in that area, that would amount to large fields of solar panels.)

Regulating those who grow pot smacks of trying to ensure that only large corporations (like current tobacco companies) can afford to jump through all the hoops and keeps the market closed to small producers.

12

If we’ve managed to figure out how to have corn products all year… I’m sure they can manage to figure out pot crop production to support year round availability. So, I don’t think that is really a problem. BUT, differences in growing conditions would affect quality and total amounts produced… so it would make it really hard for small producers to meet contracts reliably.

I predict there will be an “earth friendly” version of pot (grown out doors, all natural conditions, organic practices) that will spring up as a response to the energy intensive crops.

13

Enkel:
“NO, that is exactly the point. If it is now legal, then it is legal.”

Wrong again. It’s legal, but regulated. That means subject to state control, like alcohol.

14

We’ll make a deal. We’ll give up growing pot indoors, and you give up NASCAR. :smiley: I imagine they’re quite comparable in terms are carbon footprints.

15

Import from Mexico?

16

I’m not seeing your point here.

You know what else is regulated? EVERYTHING.

17

I am not at all convinced that pot is any worse than any other consumer product.

18

Sorry OP, I’m still not seeing your point. Why should pot be treated any differently than any other endeavor WRT energy consumption?

19

I think the climates of Eastern Washington and Colorado aren’t that great for pot growing. Temperatures are not consistently above 70 degrees until late June, it’s not crazy to think about snow in Colorado in July, hail at the beginning of the growing season when the plants would be young & vulnerable is pretty common, and the first frost of winter can be expected any time after like the first week of September through the end of October. Apart from the hail I’m not familiar with how Eastern Washington looks but a fair bit of it is desert and the arable bits are already planted with vinyards, orchards and grains. Both states are most likely to remain indoor grow operations. Plus, the feds would still be free to drop napalm on large outdoor projects–probably using predator drones. :slight_smile: Anyways, a single person can grow enough pot in his back yard to keep dozens of moderate users happy all year.

I wonder if production could be allowed in more pot-plant friendly climates and the product shipped to Colorado & Washington–sort of like how Jack Daniels whiskey can’t be consumed where it’s produced, but is shipped everywhere else.

20

The problem with the Jack Daniels compromise is that alcohol is legal on the federal level, while pot isn’t. This is why I jokingly suggested importing from Mexico when it was compared to other agricultural products - we buy a ton of produce in the off-season from warmer-climate countries like Mexico.