Bummer: Marijuana Farms Contributing To Climate Apocalypse

I wonder what this will do to the Democrats push to legalize marijuana all across the country: which push is more important to them, climate crisis (scam) or getting stoned?

Marijuana farms contributing to climate change, research shows

Growing cannabis indoors is racking up energy production, resulting in large amounts of damaging gases that warm Earth.

With cannabis farming surging on the back of deregulation efforts, researchers at Colorado State University looked at how much electricity and natural gas it takes to grow marijuana — and its carbon footprint is sky high.

According to researchers’ calculations, for every one kilogram of dried cannabis, or about 1,000 joints, indoor growing operations produce the equivalent of 2 to 5 tons of carbon dioxide.

To put this figure in perspective, a typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, based on 22-mile per gallon fuel economy and a yearly driving range around 11,500 miles.

While farming cannabis indoors burns through electricity, shifting crops outdoors would help shrink the carbon footprint by 96%, researchers found. Using a greenhouse would cut emissions nearly in half.

So, to repeat, enough pot to make 1,000 joints is like a Warmist driving their fossil fueled vehicle all year long, especially if they’re driving something that gets crummy gas mileage. Realistically, more people are driving vehicles that get vastly better fuel economy. But, that’s a separate subject.

In Jacksonville, the need for dehumidifiers and air conditioning adds about 1,500 kilograms of emissions to every kilogram of product.

That would be Jacksonville, Florida, where medical marijuana is legal, but not recreational

As it turns out, Southern California’s moderate climate and renewable power makes it a prime location for the lowest emissions.

Would that be the renewable power that has caused planned brownouts and blackouts? Regardless, it still causes emissions, so, do we keep it or kill it off to save the Earth from turning into a hothouse like Venus? Anyhow, most states would be less than prime locations with their weather. New Jersey, which is pushing hard, has some pretty hot, humid summers and very dry, cold winters. Most states would have issues, and they aren’t going to grow it outside.

Also, wouldn’t making recreational use cause people to have the munchies, and eating all that food is Bad for climate apocalypse, right?

BTW, and once again, I really do not care if people use pot. I did long ago, it just started to bore me. No longer fun. But, I have no problem with others smoking, as long as it is away from me. Let’s make tax money off it.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “Bummer: Marijuana Farms Contributing To Climate Apocalypse”

  1. Est1950 says:

    AGW is the most dangerous threat we as a planet are facing in the history of this world or at least since the last asteroid annihilated the planet.

    I was watching live feeds of speeches given on AGW and over and over again it was about pollution and rising sea levels.

    Pollution can easily be halted if CHINA, INDIA and third world nations stop flooding their rivers with waste. Coal fired power plants can sequester C02 and use the CO2 to frack for more cleaner natural gases and oil.

    Yet, long before the sea levels have a chance to rise the planet will be frozen again, because with a scientific certainty melting ice causes the north Atlantic conveyor belt to slow and then stop causing the northern hemisphere to freeze.

    We are facing a certainty. Energy runs this planet. Windmills and solar panels are not capable of running this planet. Batteries do not last more than about 10-13 years before they need to be replaced. STORING green energy for use at night will see the need for a trillion batteries a year, something the planet is incapable of producing. The amount of materials required to build a world infrastructure of batteries and renewables will strip mine this planet to the core. Literally.

    This is why no scientist can be on board the AGW train with their brain. They have been bullied, intimidated and threatened with HASHTAG CANCEL if they don’t AGREE that we need to end fossil fuels.

    The AGW movement is a terrorist organization, whose leaders should be rounded up by RED CHINA and put in the camps with their Uighur Muslim brothers…..oh wait…Its RED CHINA who is funding them. Sorry my bad.

    • Est1950 says:

      Just some basic facts agreed to by all Scientists.

      There have been at least five major ice ages in the Earth’s history (the Huronian, Cryogenian, Andean-Saharan, late Paleozoic, and the latest Quaternary Ice Age ). Outside these ages, the Earth seems to have been ice free even in high latitudes; such periods are known as greenhouse periods.

      Greenhouse periods.

      Another fact commonly understood is that in times past the most explosive growth of life on the planet has come during these Greenhouse periods, not during times when the planet was frozen solid.

      AS one of my primary responsibilities is to analyze things on the internet one of the comical posts I find truly interesting is this one:::

      A new global study of ice core samples and underwater sediment suggests that rising atmospheric CO2 preceded the ending of the last Ice Age – not the other way around.

      VERB
      preceded (past tense) · preceded (past participle)
      come before (something) in time.

      So a rise in co2 ended the ice age. I think everyone would recognize this would be probable, given that the only way to melt the ice barring some catastrophic event would be a WARMER PLANET.

      Yet:

      One of the favourite rhetorical devices of the climate change denier is to invert cause-and-effect – in other words, the carbon rise around the end of the last Ice Age happened as a result of the warming, not the other way around.

      So warming does not cause Co2 build up according to this nitwit. Mental gymnastics.

      However if you look at the first sentence he says the samples suggest that rising co2 ended the last ice age….okay even if this is true, the numbers used in the science article and here I quote the article………..Over a period of 7,000 years, the scientists say, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 rose from 180 parts per million to 260 ppm.

      His claim is that 260 ppm of co2 is enough over 7000 years to end the ice age. Yet in the same article he glosses over the fact the earths rotational wobble changed during the time we left the last ice age. I quote the article: While the initial cause of the end of the Ice Age was a change in the “wobble” of Earth’s axis, end quote….. the researchers believe the process was then accelerated by the CO2, possibly released from the warmer oceans.

      THIS IS THE TITLE OF HIS ARTICLE::::Increase in CO2 May Have Caused The Ice Age
      by EDITOR

      BUT…….LOL his next sentence is this one:

      In a study published in Nature Journal, scientists believe that rising carbon dioxide levels preceded the start of the ice age. They believe that rising CO2 levels occurred over a period of 7,000 years.

      Here he clearly states the article says rise in co2 may have CAUSED the ICE AGE and then uses the text of the article to say it DID NOT CAUSE THE ICE AGE because of a whopping 80 PPM of CO2 as enough to destroy 150 trillion, trillion tons of ice.

      This is the kind of mental gymnastics scientists use to double talk the world into believing there is a crisis so great that no one but them can grasp.

      Who is the author? He doesn’t say, but the authors of the study were from CHINA, FRANCE and the university of OREGON.

      So the preponderance of evidence suggests that if 280 PPM of co2 is enough to end the ice age then with nearly 500 ppm of co2 by the end of the century we are in for planet toast. The planet will be so hot that Alaska will have sand dunes.

      Every report I read including this one says that in Antarctica shows a rise in c02 prior to the next onset of ice age. This is clear from samples in the ice. However scientists such as this article exercise mental gymnastics to show that ice ages end due to 80 PPM of co2 build up over 7000 years as a horrific example of why the planet is doomed.

      Conclusion. Would scientists STOP accepting money from CHINA TO DESTROY THE WEST and please conduct research to discover the facts. The facts are certain. Co2 will cause the planet to warm but which is it? Does Co2 preceed and follow an Ice age. The answer clearly is BOTH!!!! BECAUSE CO2 is a natural part of our weather!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. Hairy says:

    Teach
    A typical “high” electric cost of growing 1kg of pot over 5 monthsis about 185$
    You never want to fact check check anything you eant to believe
    How could growing a kilo of pot use the same amount of carbon pollution as burning 500 gal of gasoline

  3. Hairy says:

    Coal fueled power plants currently give us about 20% of our electricity with a steadky decline of about 1%
    per year by 2050 they will be extinct
    The entire energy needs of the USA could be solar generated in an area about 10 miles by 10 miles
    East 1950 must believe that thetecwill be zero improvement in either solar cells or batteries

    • Est1950 says:

      Hairy must have joined the Chinese water army and gets paid by the stupid posts that make about zero sense.

      Certainly there will be improvements to everything but to suggest that an area of 10 square miles will power the entire USA is beyond stupid.

      About 7.86 billion solar panels would be needed to power the U.S. on solar energy. This is derived from the fact that every year the U. S. consumes around 4000 billion kWh of electricity. This means an astounding consumption of 12,000 kWh per year per capita.

      The size of a solar panel…….42inches X 63 inches for a max solar panel. That is 4 feet by 5 feet….

      So 10 miles is 52800 feet in either direction divided by lets take the 3.5 feet measurement…That is 15,085 solar panels in that direction and 11733 of the same panel in the other direction….this means you could only put about 13,500 solar panels in a 10mile x 10 mile square as the moron Hairy says. This would allow zero ability to maintain these which is why they are put in rows.

      So your only about 7 BILLION, 850 MILLION panels short there HAIRY.

      BEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP…………..Thanks for playing.

      In your hypothetical world a solar panel will have to increase its ability by about 150,000 x’s in the next 10-20-30 years.

      Good luck with that Hairy.

      • Est1950 says:

        So as I have claimed before, the reason why The Terrorist ORGANIZATION of AGW wants to get rid of farms and ranches is to take over their property to install wind and solar.

        So how much land would be required to build 7.86 billion solar panels?

        If we can put 13,500 panels in a 10×10 square mile area we would need an area of 1000×1000 that would give us 13,500×1000 or OH wait that is only 13.5 MILLION panels

        How about 13,500×10000 miles….that is 135,000,000 Panels.

        How about 13,500×100,000 square miles…that is 1.35 billion panels

        How about 13,500×800,000 square miles….Now you are 8 billion and you have arrived.

        AREA of the USA………….3.80 million square miles….

        So say goodbye Wyoming 97, Nebraska 77, Kansas 81, Iowa 56, Utah 82, Idaho 82, Oklahoma 67, Colorado 104 and Just because you need infrastructure to build all this and maintain it we will take Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico to boot.

        There now you have gotten rid of all your farting cows and buffalo and deer and beavers and replaced it with solar panels.

        I vote for Hairy to be in charge of relocating about 75,000,000 citizens to high rises built by AOC and Bernie Sanders.

        So as I have said you are literally taking up about 12 RED states of the midwest and moving the people to the east and west coasts to get your 8 billion solar panels.

        Excellent analysis of our power needs and usages Hairy. Where do you get your information? CCP TODAY?

    • Dana says:

      The Hirsute One wrote:

      The entire energy needs of the USA could be solar generated in an area about 10 miles by 10 miles

      This is the Nesquehonong, Pennsylvania Solar Park. I am familiar with it because I supplied some of the concrete used in its construction before I retired.

      The footprint is roughly 0.1 square miles, and the Solar Park’s website states that “the solar farm will generate enough electricity to power 1,450 homes.”

      10 miles by 10 miles is 100 square miles. If a fairly new solar park will generate enough sparktricity for 1,450 homes — and the homes in Nesquehoning are on the small side, and many have lesser electric service, 100 amps rather than 200 amps — then 100 mi² of solar panels of the same efficiency would provide electricity for 1,450,000 homes. Do you think that 1,450,000 homes would constitute “the entire energy needs of the USA”?

      • Dana says:

        I was afraid of that: the photo is a .png, not a .jpg file. However, if you follow the embedded link, you can see it.

  4. Yoshi says:

    There’s that Venus reference, again. Simply put: The atmospheric pressure on Venus is nearly a hundred times our own. There is no rational comparison to our planet’s climate.

  5. roger scott says:

    time to shine some cleansing sunlight on the connection between nancy pelosi and her son with the pot industry … any investigative types interested?

Bad Behavior has blocked 9964 access attempts in the last 7 days.