Cannabis The Carbon Footprint Towards Climate Change

a reply to: HandyDandy

but let me put it in perspective: in 2004, Americans drank 23.974 billion liters of beer, resulting in 1,491,182 mT of CO2 emissions. Global beer consumption in 2004 was 150.392 billion liters, resulting in 9,354,382 mT of CO2 emissions. For a little something more to think about, the US emitted a total of 1,446,777,000 mT of CO2 in 1996.

www.triplepundit.com...

BTW....mT means MEGA tons. 1 mT = 1 million tons.

That's a hell of a lot of CO2 just for your mind altering drug.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

If there was not prohibition...people could just grow it outside. The plant is far less dangerous than alcohol. It has been proven by medical studies. Imagine the contributions to the paper industry by recycling all of the stems and other plant material. Prohibition will end one day. Probably not in our lifetimes though...

a reply to: MarlinGrace

what you are getting at may be right as far as the indoor growing goes...but tell me what you think after you read this article....
www.nemeton.com...
here is a couple of snippets

The potential of hemp for paper production is enormous. According to the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, one acre of hemp can produce 4 times more paper than one acre of trees! All types of paper products can be produced from hemp: newsprint, computer paper, stationary, cardboard, envelopes, toilet paper, even tampons. FACT: THERE IS NO TREE OR PLANT SPECIES ON EARTH CAPABLE OF PRODUCING AS MUCH PAPER PER ACRE AS HEMP! HEMP IS NUMBER ONE!

Hemp can also be substituted for cotton to make textiles. Hemp fiber is 10 times stronger than cotton and can be used to make all types of clothing. Cotton grows only in warm climates and requires enormous amounts of water. Hemp requires little water and grows in all 50 states! There are now many stores in the U.S. that sell hemp-derived products such as clothing, paper, cheese, soap, ice cream, cosmetics, and hemp oil. Demand for these products - not even in existence in 1992 - is growing rapidly. Hemp naturally repels weed growth and hemp has few insect enemies. Few insect enemies and no weed problems means hemp requires NO HERBICIDES and FEW or NO PESTICIDES! Cotton requires enormous pesticide use. 50% of all pesticides used in the U.S. are used on cotton. Substituting hemp for cotton would drastically reduce pesticide usage!

From the op link:

Normal indoor cultivation settings (i.e., greenhouses) - According to a new paper by Larry Kinney, indoor greenhouses spend about $5 per square foot per year on energy (at average US energy prices). At those same prices, indoor Cannabis is 11-times that number at $55/square foot. But, at the prices actually paid in that industry it’s way higher than that (4x higher in California), since tiered tariffs or diesel generators involve much higher energy costs.

What a huge pile of BEEP!
1 Are they claiming all pot grown is grown in Greenhouses?

2 Are they claiming all greenhouses use lights?

Greenhouses have no need for lights, they would use fans in the summer and a heating source in the winter, and a drip irrigation system!! No way it would be $55 per square foot, they must be sampling the product!!!

Yes if its a indoor operation not in a greenhouse I would agree, but I bet these operation don't make up 10% of total production!!

Also notice at the end of the article there are no links to the research but they provide plenty of links to media preaching the same thing?

Propaganda that's oligarchy backed can't scare people anymore about it's use. Now they are taking advantage of using the current focus of "carbon" issues as an excuse. Quite possibly too late for that nonsense as it's going to be seen through.

$55 per square foot x 300 square foot is $16,500

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: MarlinGrace

I enjoyed the irony so much, I made a meme.

LOL Absolutely Perfect.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: HandyDandy

What irony?

That the government has forced us to grow it indoors and thus creating climate change themselves?

Don't grow it at all. See? Easy-peasy.

Or that alcohol production produces CO2 at an even more alarming rate than a plant would as it CONSUMES CO2?

Alcohol is awesome though. That's why God made livers.

Or the fact that you people are putting the cart before the horse? Now THAT is ironic......and funny, along with just plain stupid.

The last person who called me stupid took my crayons.

And they tasted terrible to! Specially the red ones.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: MarlinGrace

I enjoyed the irony so much, I made a meme.

that is so wrong ...cannabis if grown instead of cotton and that is 1 of many examples would drastically reduce pollution....seriously i just started a thread on it have a read through and tell me you still believe that garbage you just posted

a reply to: HandyDandy

It appears you are on a rant, and thus ignored the study and didn't read anything other than Beezers hilarious post. BTW the crayon post is priceless and he should write for SNL, maybe it would be funny again.

So let me help you, this is from the study:

"Um...., what about alcohol? Yeah, why don’t you pick on alcohol?!
Great question. The energy use required to produce one marijuana cigarette is equivalent to that of about 18 pints of beer. Much more effort has been placed on improving efficiency in alcohol-production facilities than in Cannabis-production facilities."

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: MarlinGrace

If there was not prohibition...people could just grow it outside. The plant is far less dangerous than alcohol. It has been proven by medical studies. Imagine the contributions to the paper industry by recycling all of the stems and other plant material. Prohibition will end one day. Probably not in our lifetimes though...

Of course but isn't that the additional part of the irony? In order to get it legalized it is touted as a medicinal product and good for what ails the public. Now that it's made as a medicinal product with a very high THC content it's energy consumption is off the hook. So far off the hook the government will seize the opportunity to regulate the industry as they have everything else being manufactured in this country to the point pot smokers will be screaming to high heaven at the additional cost of regulation to the price of their smoke.

Part of that regulation is going to be part of the whole climate change argument. Energy Consumption is "6-times that of the entire U.S. pharmaceutical industry". Where is Al Gore? Where are the GW/CC supporters in this discussion? Why is this propaganda, and GW/CC isn't even a question by the same folks? It's a lie, total BS, bla bla bla. The truth is, now that the legal high has been instituted, they are worried someone is going to take it away. The government isn't going to change anything, other than what it cost you through sheer regulation.

The ultimate irony will be when the government makes a new batch of conservatives over regulation of Marijuana.

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: MarlinGrace

If there was not prohibition...people could just grow it outside. The plant is far less dangerous than alcohol. It has been proven by medical studies. Imagine the contributions to the paper industry by recycling all of the stems and other plant material. Prohibition will end one day. Probably not in our lifetimes though...

Just so no one will jump to conclusions, the discussion is about energy consumption, not the dangers of consumption by comparison. And when compared to several industries completely out of whack.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

This is the problem my friend you sight an article written on the website "Nemeton : The Shamen and 1990s UK Cyberculture" where he discusses among other things the energy value of HEMP, not medicinal marijuana grown in a controlled environment. I don't think anyone can consider Sean Clark a digital artist "The Shamen and 1990s UK Cyberculture" the ideal scientist to do research on energy consumption for medicinal marijuana.

Not only are you comparing apples and oranges your comparison comes from someone that isn't even a expert in the field of energy.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Maybe if you tried the link from the OP, titled "FROM THE STUDY" you will find the PHD who wrote it and a link to the original brief. I hope this helps you to understand the energy consumption of growing this indoors for medicinal purposes.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

This is the problem my friend you sight an article written on the website "Nemeton : The Shamen and 1990s UK Cyberculture" where he discusses among other things the energy value of HEMP

then please have a look at these...
www.hort.purdue.edu...
www.equalrights4all.org...
www1.american.edu...
www.hemphasis.net...
www.hemphasis.net...

and there is no reason that medical MJ cannot be grown outdoors...it just takes longer and of course we live in a profit driven society so i am not surprised that it is grown indoors...

originally posted by: dreamingawake
Propaganda that's oligarchy backed can't scare people anymore about it's use. Now they are taking advantage of using the current focus of "carbon" issues as an excuse. Quite possibly too late for that nonsense as it's going to be seen through.

Thats quite a limited view concerning the carbon footprint produced by an expert in the field of energy consumption and its related effects on Climate Change. Strange how this is propaganda and GW/CC is gospel in today's world. I don't think anyone will get their high taken away it's really a matter of government regulation, then pot smokers can join the ranks of over regulation like everyone else.

The government has a wonderful track record of taxation and regulation that I am sure soon you will be able to buy all you want but can't grow it in your backyard. Just ask any farmer about the battle with monsanto and the help of government regulation.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: MarlinGrace

This is the problem my friend you sight an article written on the website "Nemeton : The Shamen and 1990s UK Cyberculture" where he discusses among other things the energy value of HEMP

then please have a look at these...
www.hort.purdue.edu...
www.equalrights4all.org...
www1.american.edu...
www.hemphasis.net...
www.hemphasis.net...

and there is no reason that medical MJ cannot be grown outdoors...it just takes longer and of course we live in a profit driven society so i am not surprised that it is grown indoors...

Ok for the last time comparing Hemp to Medicinal Marijuana is like comparing horse sh*t rolled in tea leaves to a fine cigar.

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: whyamIhere
You cannot grow Medicinal Quality Outdoors.

So, the lights it is...

Of course you can. Any plant you can grow indoors you can grow outdoors you just have to control the environment such as having it grow in a greenhouse.

Greenhouse Cannabis does not cut it in the Collectives around here.

You can't have a single bug or egg or excrement when looking under the Electro- Microscope.

In some places I'm sure Greenhouse grown is just fine. In So. Cal its bottom shelf.

Argue with me if you want. But, I worked at a Collective last year.

You are 100% correct, and I agree with you about the bolded statement above.

For true collectives and dispensaries who are looking to help the sick, it is not only about the tryc count.

Here's the thing... I've personally seen plants grown outdoors that yielded 8-10 times the amount of flower of indoor plants, and there are certain tricks to the trade so to speak, in order to help the cannabis plant grow that large. Keeping insects away is one of them, and so is creating strong support structures so that the Pacific winds don't destroy them.

Good farmers, of every kind, have learned these tricks. I know for 100% fact that there are a LOT of outdoor strains that are top shelf in most dispensaries. No bugs, no eggs, no grey mold or rot. They are there because they are grown by skilled farmers who rarely share their secrets, for obvious reasons, but if you are privy to learn, they aren't so much secrets as they are tools that most people don't want to bother learning how to use, since it's much easier to grow indoors.

You can fight insects, with others insects.

For example... the caterpillars that normally destroy outdoor farmers are easily fixed by a very small wasp called a trichogramma wasp, which feast on the eggs of the caterpillars so they never hatch. Try buying them and you'll see how fast they sell out at the end of the season.

Special bug zappers kept at a certain distance around the perimeter also kills the moths before they lay the eggs.

Feeding any plant a proper amount of magnesium creates a layer of protection on most plants that a majority of insects can't penetrate as easily.

Ladybugs eat aphids, which eat all kinds of plants, but especially love cannabis.

A mix of garlic and peppermint oil sprayed regularly around the area repels most insects.

Like I said... it's more important to understand how microrrhiza work, how to culture soil so that it produces a perfect pH, how to balance N-P-K properly, when to recognize phosphorous or nitrogen deficiency, all of which I've seen indoor growers fail miserably at several times before they get it right, if ever.

The cannabis plant is a weed, it will grow even under extreme conditions. You'll get the trichomes you're expecting, but that doesn't mean the plant was healthy, or that there are any other beneficial co-factors. It will produce THC simply because that's how it defends itself against the sun (or any light) and insects, and prepares for pollination, but that doesn't mean that it's even close to the top-shelf you can get from a skilled outdoor farmer with the sun.

The test is always someone saying that they can tell the difference... and I've watched jaw after jaw drop when they find out it is grown outdoors.

~Namaste

originally posted by: MarlinGrace
So let me help you, this is from the study:

"Um...., what about alcohol? Yeah, why don’t you pick on alcohol?!
Great question. The energy use required to produce one marijuana cigarette is equivalent to that of about 18 pints of beer. Much more effort has been placed on improving efficiency in alcohol-production facilities than in Cannabis-production facilities."

Alcohol production has had 80 years to do it.

Marijuana has had 10 months in Colorado and about 6 months in Washington.

Now, go eat some crayon.

originally posted by: MarlinGrace
Of course but isn't that the additional part of the irony? In order to get it legalized it is touted as a medicinal product and good for what ails the public. Now that it's made as a medicinal product with a very high THC content it's energy consumption is off the hook. So far off the hook the government will seize the opportunity to regulate the industry as they have everything else being manufactured in this country to the point pot smokers will be screaming to high heaven at the additional cost of regulation to the price of their smoke.

What part of being able to grow your own are you ignoring?