{"id":10852,"date":"2015-04-15T20:57:24","date_gmt":"2015-04-15T20:57:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/?p=10852"},"modified":"2017-09-21T12:12:59","modified_gmt":"2017-09-21T12:12:59","slug":"one-surprising-downside-of-marijuana-legalization-major-energy-use","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/2015\/04\/one-surprising-downside-of-marijuana-legalization-major-energy-use\/","title":{"rendered":"One surprising downside of marijuana legalization: major energy use"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

DENVER, CO \u2013 MARCH, 4: Lights hang above cannabis plants in a \u201cflower room\u201d inside a medical cannabis cultivation facility in Denver, Colorado, U.S., on Monday, March 4, 2013. (Photo by Matthew Staver\/For The Washington Post)<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

Across the country, there\u2019s a growing trend toward the legalization of marijuana.\u00a0Four states<\/a>\u2014 Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Alaska \u2014have voted to allow people to possess limited amounts of marijuana for personal use and also to let producers apply for licenses to produce and sell it. D.C. also\u00a0just voted<\/a>\u00a0to allow personal possession. All of this is on top of the\u00a023 states<\/a>\u00a0that allow it for medical reasons.<\/span><\/p>\n

In some states, where businesses are also now legally cultivating and producing marijuana, a mainstream industry is emerging. Marijuana sales totalled\u00a0$700 million<\/a><\/span>\u00a0in Colorado last year, for instance. But there\u2019s a surprising catch. It turns out that indoor marijuana growth in particular \u2014 a cultivation method often favoured in the industry for many reasons \u2014 uses a surprising amount of energy.<\/span><\/p>\n

Indeed, the level of power use appears to be so significant that one scholar is now suggesting that as the industry grows, states and localities should take advantage of marijuana licensing procedures to also regulate the industry\u2019s energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cGiven that this is a new \u2018industry\u2019 that is going to be pretty highly regulated, I felt like the state and local policymakers have a unique opportunity to incorporate energy usage and climate assessments into their state marijuana licensing fees,\u201d says\u00a0Gina Warren<\/span><\/a>, a professor at the Texas A&M University School of Law whose\u00a0paper<\/span><\/a>, titled \u201cRegulating Pot to Save the Polar Bear: Energy and Climate Impacts of the Marijuana Industry,\u201dwill soon appear in the Columbia Journal of Environmental Law.<\/span><\/p>\n

The published statistics on energy use from indoor marijuana production will blow your mind (whether or not you use the stuff). In a\u00a02012 study<\/a><\/span>\u00a0of the \u201ccarbon footprint of indoor cannabis production\u201d published in the journal Energy Policy, researcher Evan Mills noted that \u201con occasion, previously unrecognized spheres of energy use come to light,\u201d and marijuana is a textbook example.<\/span><\/p>\n

The study estimated that indoor cannabis (both illegal and legal) uses $6 billion worth of electricity every year, amounting to 1 percent ofoverall U.S. electricity. And in some production-intensive states like California, it was much higher \u2014 3 percent, Mills found.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cOne average kilogram of final product is associated with 4,600 kg of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere, or that of 3 million average U.S. cars when aggregated across all national production,\u201d wrote Mills.<\/span><\/p>\n

The reason is simply the technology required. \u201cSpecific energy uses include high-intensity lighting, dehumidification to remove water vapour and avoid mould formation, space heating or cooling during non-illuminated periods and drying, pre-heating of irrigation water, generation of carbon dioxide by burning fossil fuel, and ventilation and air-conditioning to remove waste heat,\u201d writes Mills.<\/span><\/p>\n

Outdoor production also has environmental consequences \u2014it has been charged with deforestation and high levels of water and pesticide use.But as pot becomes more legal and mainstream, notes Warren, outdoor producers will have to abide by pre-existing environmental laws, just like everyone else.<\/span><\/p>\n

In effect, that makes indoor production the chief climate change and energy concern. According to Warren\u2019s article, while underground indoor marijuana production already consumed plenty of energy, legalization will increase energy use even farther. \u201cAs theindustry grows, so will its negative externalities,\u201d she writes.<\/span><\/p>\n

Which is why she\u2019s proposing that states that legalize marijuana use should also require the growing industry to power itself cleanly. And it\u2019s not without precedent: Starting in October of this year, Boulder County in Colorado\u00a0will require<\/a><\/span>\u00a0many marijuana facilities to \u201cdirectly offset 100% of electricity, propane, and natural [gas] consumption\u201d through renewables or other means.<\/span><\/p>\n

Warren says she\u2019s not \u201cpicking on the marijuana industry\u201d with her proposals \u2014 it\u2019s just that, well, we don\u2019t often have new industries appear that use a lot of energy and are likely to be highly regulated as they become legal.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI think it could actually be a marketing tool for the industry,\u201d says Warren, \u201cbecause if you have people who are purchasing the product who are the type of individual who cares about the environment, then they would gravitate towards the green marijuana production.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Source:http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Across the country, there\u2019s a growing trend toward the legalization of marijuana.\u00a0Four states\u2014 Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Alaska \u2014have voted to allow people to possess limited amounts of marijuana for personal use and also to let producers apply for licenses to produce and sell it. D.C. also\u00a0just voted\u00a0to allow personal possession. All of this is on […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,89,90,60,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10852","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-drug-specifics","category-environment-drug-politics","category-global-drug-legalisation-efforts","category-marijuana-and-medicine","category-usa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10852","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10852"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10852\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10852"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10852"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/drugprevent.org.uk\/ppp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10852"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}