Quote of the week – the carbon munchies

Yes, but they didn’t inhale the electricity…

From globalwarming.org

Pot growers inhale 1% of U.S. electricity, exhale GHGs of 3Million cars — study

Colin Sullivan, E&E reporter
Indoor marijuana cultivation consumes enough electricity to power 2 million average-sized U.S. homes, which corresponds to about 1 percent of national power consumption, according to a study by a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Researcher Evan Mills’ study notes that cannabis production has largely shifted indoors, especially in California, where medical marijuana growers use high-intensity lights usually reserved for operating rooms that are 500 times more powerful that a standard reading lamp.

Click here to read Mills’ study:

ENERGY UP IN SMOKE
THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF INDOOR CANNABIS PRODUCTION

In California, the top-producing state, indoor cultivation is responsible for about 3% of all electricity use or 8% of household use, somewhat higher than estimates previously made for British Columbia. This corresponds to the electricity use of 1 million average California homes, greenhouse-gas emissions equal to those from 1 million average cars, and energy expenditures of $3 billion per year. Due to higher electricity prices and cleaner fuels used to make electricity, California incurs 70% of national energy costs but contributes only 20% of national CO2 emissions from indoor Cannabis cultivation.

But today, Moonbeam Governor Brown plans to sign a renewable energy mandate sure to bring on supply reliability problems.

Maybe when the potheads start complaining they can’t produce enough “medical marijuana” to satisfying the needs of the “afflicted” in California, “Moonbeam” might realize what terrible damage he’s done to the state’s number one cash crop.

Medical marijuana neon sign at a dispensary on...

Image via Wikipedia

With unreliable electricity for growlights, looks like the pot rescue of California’s economy is up in smoke.

Time to leave California, it’s just gotten too freaking weird here.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Carbon footprint and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

69 Responses to Quote of the week – the carbon munchies

  1. kwik says:

    But it is still a very green industry……

  2. pat says:

    Someone was paid for this study. That is a shame.

  3. Robert M says:

    California has Gov. Moonbeam, Barbie Boxer and Nancy Pelosi.

    I don’t think it can get any worse…

  4. kim says:

    Sunshine shirks duty
    At Gaia’s Caesarian.
    Operating Room.
    ==========

  5. RockyRoad says:

    I left California back in 1973. I enjoyed my time there, but it was getting weird even then. My memories are fond, most people I associated with were exceptional, but it has gone downhill ever since.

  6. jorgekafkazar says:

    ♪”Let it be-eee, let it beee….”♫

  7. Scott Covert says:

    Legalize Pot, guard dogs and shotguns are way cheaper than those lights. You’d think Hippies would prefer solar powered dope anyway.

  8. John W. says:

    Well. This will really harsh some mellow.

    8^)

  9. Old Grump says:

    Those of us in the other 49 US states should encourage California to take this to the limit. They should take this to the ultimate for all of the no fossil fuels/nuclear ideas. We NEED a test case for all of the renewable/sustainable energy ideas. It would be difficult for the citizens, but I say it’s better to sacrifice one state than all of them. I think that when the personal electronics started to not work for lack of power the whole scheme will fall apart.
    Sarcasm? Even I am not sure.

  10. James Sexton says:

    I don’t know what the problem is. I just showed the study to my boss, he thinks its a good marketing strategy, except he’s concerned about the consumers compliance in payments.

  11. Dave Springer says:

    Yeah, yeah, yeah…

    On the other hand potheads tend to stay at home more and thus aren’t wasting fuel driving around for their entertainment. And when they do drive it’s a well known fact that they drive slower and less aggressively which also conserves fuel.

    How come people like the author never think these things through all the way? Always in a hurry I guess. Maybe he needs to smoke a bowl and chill. :-)

  12. DJ says:

    According to numbers I ran, derived from numbers I got off the internet (irrefutable, no doubt), the energy use of these operations in question represents over 102Million Kwh of electricity DAILY…and that doesn’t include independent electrical generators not on the grid.

    I’m finding that really hard to believe.

  13. Dave Springer says:

    I’m a libertarian and greatly dislike Draconian laws against victimless crimes. Now I have one more reason to hate marijuana prohibition. The list was already long enough. It’s legal to make your own wine and beer for personal consumption. Pot should be the same way. I hate hypocrisy too. Alcohol and tobacco use both have far more ill effects on individuals and society both than pot ever did.

    That said, potheads tend to be stay-at-home introverts and thus don’t drive as much. And when they do drive it’s well known they drive slower and less aggressively which also conserves fuel. So even with the electricity for indoor lights to grow it I’m sure that is more than offset by the consumers of the product using less transporation fuel.

  14. Traciatim says:

    Wouldn’t this be a good time to invest in companies that make LED grow lamps? Think of the lighting and air conditioning savings!

  15. MangoChutney says:

    another study gone to pot

    /Mango

    I don’t deny climate change, I know climate changes

  16. Sparks says:

    Shut down hospitals and the rest of the pharmaceutical industry they are energy intensive too /src

  17. John Dodds says:

    Did he do an environmental impact study?
    Let’s see tripling the cost of electricity to the public means no impact. It might raise the profits of the green investors though.

  18. pk says:

    hey dave:

    it isn’t a victimless crime when a pot head backs a forklift into a woman and crushes her against a crane column in a machine shop.

    it isn’t a victimless crime when a pothead pulls a 450ton set of freight locomotives out onto a mainline track infront of a passenger train doing 125 mph.

    it isn’t a victimless crime when a pot head decides to back the gasoline tanker up on the freeway because he missed his off ramp and it burned for three days.

    victimless crimes my a$$.

    C

  19. Ed Mertin says:

    How about a nice place at 2200ft in the Ozark Mtns. with no floods, bird slicers or draconian laws? Lots of sparkling clean swimming holes and beautiful scenery.

  20. Jit says:

    Marijuana growers clearly haven’t heard of the “greenhouse” effect. Free heating and lighting as standard.

    PK: But you are conflating two issues. It is one thing to smoke dope. It is another to smoke dope and then driver a petrol tanker. Just as is the case when drinking alcohol.

  21. DAV says:

    “they didn’t inhale the electricity…”

    Then what’s making the giant sucking sound?

  22. LarryOldtimer says:

    PK, please cite specific instances of when and where those incidents you write of actually occurred. I would have to guess that you can’t do so, but police files are replete with these sorts of things happening with consumption of alcohol.

  23. Wijnand says:

    @pk 11:00am
    Sorry pk but what a load of crap!
    You are saying growing and using pot is a crime because some stupid people used it while opetating heavy machinery???
    Ok, lets illegalize sleep-aids, hay fever medicine and alcohol too then!

  24. Duncan says:

    I am shocked!
    Why would people use all that high-priced California electricity, when they could run their operations on cheap Washington State hydroelectricity?

    Makes no sense. Makes me suspicious of the numbers cited.

  25. Rational Debate says:

    re post by: jorgekafkazar says: April 12, 2011 at 9:46 am

    Ok, Jorge, I’ve gotta know – how did you put the musical symbols into your post??

    As to the article’s implicit derogation of people with the all too prevalent quotes around “medical marijuana” and “afflicted” and so on…. I’m quite certain that they are right and there are abuses, e.g., people who don’t have medical problems getting on the system – but consider that over 25% of the american population at any one time has problems with chronic pain – and that is from many many different studies. Consider also that many of these people go under or untreated – and that is also from many different studies, and is further compounded by the stigma of ‘abuse’ causing the legal system to make proscribing sufficient pain medications extremely difficult and risky for doctors. Then further consider that there are people who simply don’t respond well to typical pain medications – either because of nasty side effects or because of a lack of sufficient pain control. That is also well documented. Lastly consider that people who are prone to substance abuse tend to find ways regardless of laws, and are a far smaller percentage of the population than those with significant pain problems. And if you are going to try to claim that abuse harms not just the abuser but their family friends, and anyone around them – well, that is true – but what is also true is that chronic pain also utterly destroys lives, and not just the person suffering with it, but also their family, friends, etc. Now, I don’t know how much marijuana helps, but I think it is pretty clear that there are a large number of people with legitimate problems that it does help, as much or more than typical pain meds or in conjunction with them when they are insufficient – cancer patients are a prime example, and it’s my understanding that roughly 25% of us will all wind up with cancer at some point in our lives.

    re pk says: April 12, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Pk, much of it is a victimless crime. As to your examples, they are of people who are publicly intoxicated. It doesn’t much matter if it is from alcohol, marijuana or some other substance. It is the abusers who need to be held accountable, not everyone. Criminalize dangerous behavior – e.g., operating cars or equipment while intoxicated – not use of substances in a responsible manner, e.g., at home or in ways that don’t risk others. I would bet almost anything that criminalizing marijuana use causes more deaths and harm because of the black market, higher prices, attempts to elude or evade police, etc. Not to mention cost to society for all of the people who wind up clogging up our courts and jails when they were involved in what would be, without the criminalization, victimless activities.

    So make it illegal to drive or work while intoxicated, just as it is with alcohol or any other drug – and then seriously enforce those laws and seriously punish those who transgress. Don’t make use of a drug with less side effects than alcohol illegal to use at home or where others aren’t put at risk. At the very least, allow the flipping researchers to research it so perhaps they can determine what gives the beneficial aspects and that can be synthesized while avoiding the aspects that give a ‘high,’ if that is possible. Right now it is still extremely difficult to even research it (or the potential medical benefits of other illegal drugs). And while we’re at it, make it less problematic for doctors to provide sufficient pain control, and then come down hard on any doctors who are found to be actually proscribing fraudulently to abusers or dealers – but leave those alone who are just trying to sufficiently treat their patient’s pain.

  26. R. Shearer says:

    Frito Lay announced that their sales of snack foods in CA has exceeded all forecasts. Am also told that hemp makes good ropes.

  27. 1DandyTroll says:

    @DJ

    “According to numbers I ran, derived from numbers I got off the internet (irrefutable, no doubt), the energy use of these operations in question represents over 102Million Kwh of electricity DAILY…and that doesn’t include independent electrical generators not on the grid.

    I’m finding that really hard to believe.”

    Why would it be hard to believe?

    It is no different then from growing tomatoes that you want to harvest every month and for that you need to run different types of high powered lamps 24/7, plus you need to run different types of fans and irrigation pumps, et cetera, for 24/7. During summer you spend extra on cooling, during winter on heating. To start an early bloom, that’ll actually give a high yield, you need lots and lots of lumens for 24/7 in a controlled environment, which is so easy these days that even junior high school dropout a plenty can do it in their own closets en masse. Apparently, it is so easy that people can start smoking their own home grown in a month, which is probably why my country is considered to be self sufficient these days and that happened in the last ten years (which means it is more common than home wine making and stronger stuff .)

  28. genomega1 says:

    Spain went down this road and in the process destroyed their economy. We just don’t have the technology yet.
    Windmills and electric cars were thrown on the trash heap ninety years ago in this country for a reason.
    Then there is this problem they have swept under the rug:
    Rare earth metals are key to global efforts to switch to cleaner energy — from batteries in hybrid cars to magnets in wind turbines. Mining and processing the metals causes environmental damage that China, the biggest producer, is no longer willing to bear.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-05/china-rare-earths-leave-toxic-trail-to-toyota-prius-vestas-wind-turbines.html

  29. Martin Brumby says:

    So, if this study is right, smoking dope kills more Poley Bears than driving a SUV?!?

    I hear the sound of Hippy heads exploding……..

  30. Physics Major says:

    Let them use CFL’s.

  31. DirkH says:

    Wijnand says:
    April 12, 2011 at 11:43 am
    “@pk 11:00am
    Sorry pk but what a load of crap!
    You are saying growing and using pot is a crime because some stupid people used it while opetating heavy machinery???
    Ok, lets illegalize sleep-aids, hay fever medicine and alcohol too then!”

    Wihnand; Marijuana is known to cause flashbacks. They can surprise you days after consumption, out of the blue, and suddenly your 3D perception is gone; the world is flat and you’re in your car doing whatever speed on a highway.

    Been there, done that; long time ago; didn’t harm anyone; stopped doing Marijuana.

  32. Rick says:

    “It’s Dave, open the gd door, man”.
    “Dave who man”.
    Dave from the old Cheech and Chong skit couldn’t get his pal to open the door but when Dave here says “So even with the electricity for indoor lights to grow it I’m sure that is more than offset by the consumers of the product using less transporation fuel”; he has opened a door to the logical workings of his mind where prudence might better have kept that particular door locked up tight.

  33. DirkH says:

    DirkH says:
    April 12, 2011 at 12:17 pm
    “the world is flat and you’re in your car doing whatever speed on a highway.”

    Thinking about it, this could explain why so many left-leaning people propose more public transportation; they’re just scared by the idea of what would happen if they drove a car themselves.

  34. pk says:

    larry:

    the incident with the woeman and the forklift happened right in front of me at my job (which slick willie managed to shut down). it was one of those deals where another half inch would hava crushed her hips.

    the railroad incident was at GUNPOW on the conrail railroad (i believe that you can look it up in google.) it pushed the DOT into placing regulatons where by traincrews and dispatchers have to pass urine tests after accidents and on an irregular basis.

    the incident with the tanker occoured many years ago at the intersection of the 405 and 5 freeways south of los angeles and should be in the california highway patrol records. i believe that there were people killed in that incident.

    C

  35. Laurie Bowen says:

    I have an endless dissertation on this subject, but it always concludes with the same conclusion . . . . and that is . . . . “and that is why Congress and the Founding Fathers decided that Prohibitions should be Prohibited” . . .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

    “The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-first_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

    It should and could be grown outdoors . . . .

    http://azhemp.org/Archive/Package/Uses/uses.html

  36. rbateman says:

    I have seen firsthand the freakish lighting used in pot growing. The night sky had a Frankenstein Castle look to it as 10,000 watts of power made a beacon every one in the city could see. You see, they initially put visquine over the structure, intending to let the sun in during the daytime. Oops.
    Needless to say, the resulting display was truly jaw-dropping.

  37. pk says:

    one of the things that the potheads don’t know or realize (aside from the fact that they all KNOW that they can kick the habit any time they want) is that when they are on the weed they are stupid.

    they don’t realize it but every body else in civilization knows it including cops, bosses, straights, judges, coworkers…….

    you guys that use, don’t realize just how stupid you come off in industrial situations. the problem is that when you do something dumb you can get the guy beside you killed.

    potheads should herd sheep. at least then the dogs can keep things going.

    C

  38. rbateman says:

    Duncan says:
    April 12, 2011 at 11:46 am

    At a price/ounce exceeding that of gold, the electric bill is the furthest thing from thier minds. The Compassionate Use Law in Calif. is what opened the door for the Uncrupulous to move in, and they did just that. Like locusts, when they are done, they leave the mess and move on.

  39. DirkH says:

    pk says:
    April 12, 2011 at 12:43 pm
    “one of the things that the potheads don’t know or realize (aside from the fact that they all KNOW that they can kick the habit any time they want) is that when they are on the weed they are stupid. ”

    pk, kicking the dope habit *IS* easy. No physical or psychological withdrawal symptoms at all. You just stop it. Completely different to nicotine. Can’t compare to hard drugs as i’ve used none.

  40. Dr. Dave says:

    One of the reasons they grow pot indoors is that they can control growing conditions and prevent pollination of the female plants.

    Marijuana is an intoxicant just like alcohol and other drugs. Nothing that alters one’s perception of reality is good for you. The crying shame is that it would appear that we learned nothing from the failed experiment known as Prohibition. It is pretty well established that a significant proportion of the population smokes pot despite it being illegal. The same was true of alcohol consumption during Prohibition. Prohibition results in violence, lawlessness and corruption. Personally I don’t believe many more would use pot if it were legal than use it now…we would simply save billions of dollars…not to mention all that expensive renewable California electricity.

  41. L5Rick says:

    You’re welcome to come to Idaho Anthony. Although our R.I.N.O.s can be just as frustrating as California’s maleducated Greens.

  42. Legalize Pot, guard dogs and shotguns are way cheaper than those lights. You’d think Hippies would prefer solar powered dope anyway.

    Mind you, I’m not admitting to anything here, but optimum growing conditions preclude that nasty habit the Sun has of slipping behind the Earth after 9-15 hours.

    Moreover (and without reading all of the other comments), I can hardly see how the equivalent electricity use of 1% of all households in the US translates to 1% of ALL electricity use. Indeed, according to the very chart shown here earlier this week, residential use is only 4.65/12.08 (38.5%).

    Err, so does pot growing count as industrial, residential, or commercial?

  43. Laurie Bowen says:

    @Dr. Dave

    A long time ago I saw a piece on the tube about evidence that an entire culture that used hemp for so many purposes that just about the entire culture was built upon it . . . and as the violent, lawless and corrupted moved in to take over . . .it was hypothesized . . . they used the destruction crop as the “Achilles heel” to decimate the entire civilization/culture . . . .

    Never forgot it, reminded me of the American Native and the Buffalo . . . .

  44. Carl Chapman says:

    Your temperature and humidity monitor feature, and this article on the same day? Hmmm.

  45. Dr. Dave says:

    @Laurie Bowen

    Good analogy. So as not to veer too far O/T it should be pointed out that cops use residential electricity use to detect indoor marijuana cultivation. About 15 years ago the cops busted an indoor pot farm in my quiet neighborhood. The household was burning through 5 times as much electricity month after month than a typical 1,700 sqft home.

    The real societal problem is drug prohibition. If the US government made tobacco illegal tomorrow what do you think would happen? There would indoor tobacco farms under grow lights popping up all over the place. A huge black market for tobacco would be created along with all the associated crime, smuggling and violence. It would further burden our law enforcement, judicial and corrections resources. Tobacco use is foolish and harmful…but it remains an individual’s choice.

    California has the geographic size, population and economy of a reasonably sized country. I wish Prop 19 had passed as it would have served as an excellent experimental case. We could see what would really happen if marijuana were legalized. We could objectively measure the impact. Until this is done, everything argument on both sides of the issue is pure conjecture.

  46. Wayne Richards says:

    Growing marijuana indoors means that the growers can not only control its mating habits (take THAT, Bolivia!) but also give it 1300 ppm of carbon dioxide. Pot LOVES CO2!
    As do all plants, of course.

  47. Pompous Git says:

    Rational Debate said @ April 12, 2011 at 11:58 am

    “Now, I don’t know how much marijuana helps, but I think it is pretty clear that there are a large number of people with legitimate problems that it does help, as much or more than typical pain meds or in conjunction with them when they are insufficient…”

    As it happens, I suffer from chronic pain (osteoarthritis) and find that marijuana is far more beneficial than opiates, synthetic or otherwise. When used for such, as distinct from smoking to get as stoned as possible, it’s far less impairing of my judgment than, for example, oxycodone, or tramadol. It doesn’t constipate, or impair appetite and it’s far less addictive.

    That said, most of what’s grown these days is skank, a potent hybrid with a far higher THC content than the old open-pollinated varieties. While THC is said to be “the active ingredient”, skank is far less effective for pain control and you are far more likely to imbibe an impairing dose.

    “All marijuana’s the same, ain’t they?

    That’s the mistake
    Most people make!

    No stems, no seeds that you don’t need
    Acapulco Gold is bad ass weed.”

  48. Mike Borgelt says:

    DirkH says:
    April 12, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    DirkH says:
    April 12, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    Thinking about it, this could explain why so many left-leaning people propose more public transportation; they’re just scared by the idea of what would happen if they drove a car themselves.

    —————-

    Dirk,

    It’s why they don’t like guns either.

  49. coldfinger says:

    You people are so last week, Nitrogen is the new Carbon!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13025304

  50. Wade says:

    Dave Springer says:
    April 12, 2011 at 10:29 am

    I hate hypocrisy too. Alcohol and tobacco use both have far more ill effects on individuals and society both than pot ever did.

    Incorrect. Alcohol in moderate amounts is very healthy. Over consumption of alcohol is bad for you, not consumption. But the same is true of almost everything. Too much caffeine is bad for you, but a little is good for you. Too much salt is bad for you, but a little is good for you. Too much water is bad for you, but a little is good for you. Beer and wine have many health benefits. My grandmother drinks a beer every day to help her kidneys. Wine helps lower cholesterol. And I could go on.

  51. Tom says:

    Dude…. If you switch to shrooms, you wouldn’t have such a high power bill. Shrooms are like, environmentally friendly and stuff. Besides, we get most of our weed from Mexico. They grow their grass right out in the open so the only big overhead, is for the drug mules. No way we can compete with that.

  52. Gordon Melville Ford says:

    Good news for agriculture here in BC (British Columbia, Canada)

  53. jorgekafkazar says:

    Rational Debate says: “Ok, Jorge, I’ve gotta know – how did you put the musical symbols into your post??”

    [ALT][NUMPAD13] = ♪
    [ALT][NUMPAD14] = ♫

    If you have an Apple, you’re on your own. Some laptops also don’t have an accessible num pad. The numbers across the top of the keyboard won’t work. If you can access the character map under windows accessories, you can copy from there. You could also block and copy the symbols above for use at home. In a responsible way, of course. ☺☻

  54. r.murphy says:

    Wade, bad news for the beneficial alcohol theory. Don`t have a link but saw a report on a large British study that showed conclusive link between alcohol consumption and cancer, even small amounts used regularly. Ironically, I recall reading a keynote address at a psychiatric convention in Canada that stated the greatest harm in marijuana use was the criminalization of it. Figure

  55. F. Ross says:

    Robert M says:
    April 12, 2011 at 9:38 am

    California has Gov. Moonbeam, Barbie Boxer and Nancy Pelosi.

    I don’t think it can get any worse…

    …er,
    you forgot that pillar of leadership, Lois Capps.
    /sarc off

  56. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Read the paper of Evan Mills of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. This guy would be right at home as a “Climate scientist”, Educated way beyond his Intelligence.
    Not much time wasted on real research on the subject. Just data to back up an agenda. pg

  57. Eric Anderson says:

    Wade wrote: “Alcohol in moderate amounts is very healthy.”

    Lessee, what necessary metabolic function does alcohol help with? Any constituent properties of alcohol that can possibly be beneficial can be more effectively provided by non-alcoholic foodstuffs, without all the calories and other nasty effects. The body does just fine without alcohol, and you have to really grasp to come up with any alleged benefits. The analogy to water and salt is silly — both of those are absolutely critical for metabolic function.

  58. Peter Wilson says:

    DirkH says:
    April 12, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    Wihnand; Marijuana is known to cause flashbacks. They can surprise you days after consumption, out of the blue, and suddenly your 3D perception is gone; the world is flat and you’re in your car doing whatever speed on a highway.

    Really? In over 30 years of “close association” with this subject, I have never heard this one before. Are you sure you’re not confusing pot with LSD?

    Closer to the topic, I can confirm that the production process is very energy intensive, due to the need for both intense light and heat control in a small area. The most advanced systems use enhanced CO2 levels – usually around 2000ppm- to increase yields about 30% – another reason I have always had trouble seeing CO2 as a pollutant

  59. Peter Wilson says:

    Dr. Dave says:
    April 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    About 15 years ago the cops busted an indoor pot farm in my quiet neighborhood. The household was burning through 5 times as much electricity month after month than a typical 1,700 sqft home.

    I would imagine they’re getting ready to raid Al Gores place, then :)

  60. Pompous Git says:

    Eric Anderson said @ April 12, 2011 at 11:22 pm

    “Lessee, what necessary metabolic function does alcohol help with? Any constituent properties of alcohol that can possibly be beneficial can be more effectively provided by non-alcoholic foodstuffs, without all the calories and other nasty effects. The body does just fine without alcohol, and you have to really grasp to come up with any alleged benefits. The analogy to water and salt is silly — both of those are absolutely critical for metabolic function.”

    I’m not an epidemiologist, but:

    “Moderate drinkers tend to have better health and live longer than those who are either abstainers or heavy drinkers. In addition to having fewer heart attacks and strokes, moderate consumers of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine and distilled spirits or liquor) are generally less likely to suffer strokes, diabetes, arthritis, enlarged prostate, dementia (including Alzheimer’s disease), and several major cancers.”

    From: http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/AlcoholAndHealth.html

    Sounds good to me. Time for a glass of Marlborough sauvignon blanc methinks :-)

  61. P. Solar says:

    At a price/ounce exceeding that of gold, the electric bill is the furthest thing from thier minds. The Compassionate Use Law in Calif. is what opened the door for the Uncrupulous to move in, and they did just that. Like locusts, when they are done, they leave the mess and move on.

    So the obvious solution is to legalise growing the stuff. There would then be vast amounts of it grown on costless, renewable solar energy (as opposed to expensive PV solar energy) . The price would drop to that comparable with most other vegetable production and there would be no desire for anyone to waste valuable natural resources on growing what is basically a weed. (At least no more than growing lettuce and tomatoes all year round).

    Perhaps the same authors could now do a study on the all year production of tomatoes. My guess is that it would be way more than the weed study showed.

  62. Tom in Florida says:

    Eric Anderson says: (April 12, 2011 at 11:22 pm)
    “Lessee, what necessary metabolic function does alcohol help with? Any constituent properties of alcohol that can possibly be beneficial can be more effectively provided by non-alcoholic foodstuffs, without all the calories and other nasty effects. The body does just fine without alcohol, and you have to really grasp to come up with any alleged benefits.”

    Yeah but the girls look prettier when you’re having some beer.

  63. Laurie Bowen says:

    Eric Anderson says: (April 12, 2011 at 11:22 pm)
    “Lessee, what necessary metabolic function does alcohol help with?

    @ Tom in Florida

    I do believe it helps to emulsify fats (oils) . . .

    “Emulsion – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Common examples include emulsifying wax, cetearyl alcohol, … The anisolic compounds, which are soluble in ethanol, now form nano-size droplets and … Homogenized milk – milk fat in water and milk proteins … Emulsions are also used in making many hair and skin products, such as various types of oils and waxes. …”
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulsion – Cached – Similar

    Gotta love that Ctrl V . . .

  64. Erik says:

    “Total energy consumption, including timer and power supplies, for vegging and flowering is 82,3 KWH, 1.13 grams for each KWH”

  65. TonyG says:

    pk says:
    the incident with the woeman and the forklift happened right in front of me at my job (which slick willie managed to shut down). it was one of those deals where another half inch would hava crushed her hips.

    Would it have been better if the forklift operator had been drunk?

    In college, my best friend was killed by a drunk driver. I never held the substance (alcohol) responsible – it was the driver who abused it who was responsible.

  66. Erik says:

    “1.13 grams for each Kwh”
    A typical joint contains between 0.5 and 0.75 grams
    Carbon footprint “per high”: If three people can get high on a 0.5 gram joint then the carbon footprint per high is 0,15 Kwh

    Not a very big problem me think

  67. pk says:

    tony g:

    california police used to use the standard: if the person acts drunk but there is no smell of alchohol about them then it is drugs.

    in the case of the woemen and the forklift the upperlevel management had committed to “ACCOMODATION” of the employee (as a class of miscreants)in the attempt to overcome his/her substance abuse in the future.

    in actuality from a disciplinary/termination point of view alchohol, pot, gambling, ….. were all treated the same. i.e. no joy from the discipline point of view.

    the forklift driver kept his job and i was enjoined by upperlevel management from prosecuting him for that specific act.

    i did downtick him for being an unsafe employee on his personell evaluations.

    C

  68. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    From TonyG on April 13, 2011 at 10:22 am:

    In college, my best friend was killed by a drunk driver. I never held the substance (alcohol) responsible – it was the driver who abused it who was responsible.

    Which brings up an interesting conundrum. A person may get out of contracts they entered into while intoxicated due to having diminished mental capacity. A person under the influence of alcohol or drugs cannot give consent for sex (mentioned here, in example it is Missouri state law, however it’s worded here that it’s “intoxicated” by Idaho state law).

    Therefore it’s recognized under the law that alcohol and/or drugs cause diminished mental capacity. Thus it should be recognized that someone who has been imbibing might not be able to properly evaluate whether they are able to drive nor be fully aware of the consequences.

    Yet society wishes to place extra blame on drunk drivers, as seen in the US with differences in vehicular homicide laws. And you are blaming the user of alcohol for abusing it.

    So which was the abuse? Drinking until intoxicated thus until having diminished mental capacity, or deciding to drive while suffering from diminished mental capacity?

    Note: I am in no way advocating that drunk drivers be let off easy, especially not ones that kill. I accept the paradox for societal reasons, I’m presenting an academic argument.

  69. TonyG says:

    So which was the abuse? Drinking until intoxicated thus until having diminished mental capacity, or deciding to drive while suffering from diminished mental capacity?

    Specific to your point, I would say that choosing to drink in circumstances that would make driving afterward a likely occurrence would be the abuse. (In he case I mentioned, the driver was working, being employed as a driver, and clearly chose to intoxicate himself knowing he would be driving while intoxicated.

    However, the main point I was making was that it is hypocritical to want to prohibit marijuana because people are hurt by others under its influence while not taking the same position with regard to alcohol.

    And since we have now gone WAY off-topic for WUWT, I’m going to leave it at that.

Comments are closed.