Claim: Climate Change will make Californian Marijuana more potent

Marijuana loves CO2. Original image Wikimedia, author Chmee2 (attribution license)
Marijuana loves CO2. Original image Wikimedia, author Chmee2 (attribution license)

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Daily Climate reports that global warming is set to make Californian marijuana a lot stronger – if we let it happen.

According to the Daily Climate;

Global warming may give a minor twist to that classic hippie bumper sticker that quips “Acid rain: Too bad it’s not as much fun as it sounds.” Turns out a warming climate could boost the medicinal and psychoactive properties of plants including cannabis.

But that’s not all: Climate change will also open up higher elevations to growing weed clandestinely on public lands, a practice that’s putting increased strain on fragile ecosystems. Some say relaxed marijuana laws exacerbate the problem by bringing in more growers; others argue increased regulation and oversight will eventually lead to more responsible growing practices.

One prominent researcher who specializes in weed migration patterns in the face of climate change said marijuana grown outdoors will likely become stronger and require less water to thrive.

“If you go back to the times plants evolved on land, the average CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels were 1,000 parts per million; today it’s about 400,” said Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service.

Read more:

I mean, can anyone think of an issue more likely to split the environmental movement asunder?

Yes the environmental movement care about CO2. But many of them also care deeply about ensuring people suffering severe chronic pain receive what may be a very effective treatment for their condition. Perhaps we can look forward to a change in outlook, a compromise, in which the environmental movement reluctantly embraces the possibility of a little more CO2 in the atmosphere, because of the humanitarian medical benefits it will provide.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Leon Brozyna
May 14, 2015 12:04 pm

A humanitarian environmentalist? Talk about a contradiction in terms!!

Reply to  Leon Brozyna
May 14, 2015 12:44 pm

If humanitarian : humans :: vegetarian : vegetables then I’d say a humanitarian environmentalist is quite in line with the environmentalist way of thinking.

Reply to  Leon Brozyna
May 14, 2015 3:37 pm

We’ll log the other planets later.

Paul Mackey
Reply to  Leon Brozyna
May 15, 2015 1:29 am

They are oxy morons?

Reply to  Paul Mackey
May 15, 2015 10:15 am

Carbon dioxymorons.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

May 14, 2015 12:13 pm

I tell you, the only thing that hasn’t been changed so far by CO2 increases in the atmosphere is Ingrowing Toenails, and it wouldn’t surprise me if a paper on that appears quite soon.

Reply to  Oldseadog
May 14, 2015 12:46 pm

Have you searched the “scientific” literature? Are you sure, absolutely sure, that no such claim exists?

Reply to  TomB
May 14, 2015 1:03 pm

How can anyone miss the obvious? Global warming will lead to more people wearing open toed shoes or even (heaven forbid) going barefoot. Thus more bumped toes against obstacles leading to more damaged toenails… I need to get my paper out fast before I get pipped at the post… /sarc

Bryan A
Reply to  TomB
May 14, 2015 8:55 pm

Let’s not forget, a warm dry environment is detrimental to fungi so global warming could spell the end for toenail fungus

May 14, 2015 12:14 pm

Wait. Note the bland identification of a critically important fact that the ice-worshippers would like to ignore:
“If you go back to the times plants evolved on land, the average CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels were 1,000 parts per million; today it’s about 400,” said Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service.”
In other words: the environmentalists want to continue starving plants worldwide.

Reply to  Phil
May 14, 2015 11:10 pm

You have to wonder when they want to starve plants, object to dams, delete coal-fired electricity and reject nuclear power. Do I discern an agenda?

Jaime Jessop
May 14, 2015 12:24 pm

Finally it’s revealed: the IPCC are corporate conspirators in the pay of Big Pharma commercial drug pushers with an agenda to deprive us all of the opportunity of getting our hands on more powerful pot to cure all ills.

May 14, 2015 12:26 pm

Obviously a transparent ploy to get more Republicans to sign onto the AGW bandwagon.

Reply to  Severian
May 14, 2015 6:40 pm

If it is true, I would think that liberals would love climate change.

george e. smith
May 14, 2015 12:26 pm

Governor Moonbeam says California home owners should let their lawns go brown, and die; then the State will assist them in replacing their high water lawns with low water sand and gravel and rocks; to solve the drought crisis.
I suggest that they also let their pot farms go brown and die, then when they collect The Guv’s sand and rocks, it will be a piece of cake to get stoned !

Reply to  george e. smith
May 15, 2015 2:16 pm

Right arm!

May 14, 2015 12:28 pm

+1000 🙂

May 14, 2015 12:32 pm

Wow! Mann

Reply to  fossilsage
May 14, 2015 12:35 pm


May 14, 2015 12:33 pm

Pot never healed any of my pains, then again my pains healed fast on their own when in my late teens/early twenties.
Haven’t touched it since, nor do I want to.
It is not some miracle elixir, just a lot of people trying to get it legalized, by any method.
My only question is, does it impair your driving abilities ?

Reply to  u.k.(us)
May 14, 2015 2:20 pm

“My only question is, does it impair your driving abilities ?”
Drunk drivers run stop signs-stoned drivers wait for them to turn green…
Does that answer your question?

Reply to  gamegetterII
May 14, 2015 5:08 pm

Yes it does.

Reply to  gamegetterII
May 14, 2015 6:03 pm

From experience, ya gotta be careful mixing alcohol and pot.
Then came alcohol and high horsepower cars.
Then came alcohol and cocaine with high powered snowmobiles.
I got lucky, only lost my front teeth by being a bad “fighter”.
Could have been a lot worse.
I bought a BMW that will do 155 mph, had it up to 140 mph, once.
I don’t press my luck anymore, getting too old.

george e. smith
Reply to  u.k.(us)
May 14, 2015 5:09 pm

In California, at least half of all drivers are already driving impaired even without medication.
So thanks; we don’t need any more impaired drivers.
And about half of those drive BMWs. No they don’t own them; they are leased in the name of their fly by night c

Reply to  u.k.(us)
May 14, 2015 6:42 pm


May 14, 2015 12:36 pm

But does it need more or less water?

Reply to  Resourceguy
May 15, 2015 7:03 am


May 14, 2015 12:44 pm

Probably the silliest post I have read here.
The Internet is full of “how to grow marijuana for better yield of THC”
Yes, use a “greenhouse” and yes increase CO2, etc. etc. etc.
Just go on campus in Denver.

May 14, 2015 12:47 pm

“If you go back to the times plants evolved on land, the average CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels were 1,000 parts per million; today it’s about 400,” said Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service.

This is wrong, by about an order of magnitude. Land plants evolved with an ambient CO2 much closer to 10,000 ppm than 1,000. This level has then more-or-less steadily declined, largely because of plant growth and usage (and seabed sequestration of CO2) so that plants are starved of this vital nutrient. Events create spikes and variations, but the trend is downward. And this is harmful.
Photosynthesis shuts down at levels generally between 150 and 180 ppm. We have evidently gotten close to those low levels during glaciations in the past million years or so.
We are currently, famously, at about 400 ppm of carbon dioxide. Looked at another way, plants must contend with a level of this life-sustaining gas about 1/500th of what animals have with oxygen. (Technically, plants breathe oxygen too, but we focus on their excess production of it from CO2.)
But we call atmospheric carbon dioxide a “pollutant” now. Can you imagine any other pollutant that, were its presence in the environment to decline by two-thirds, would cause nearly all life on the planet to end?
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

Gentle Tramp
Reply to  Keith DeHavelle
May 14, 2015 3:33 pm

A very well written summary of an important fact!
It’s totally insane that the especially the Greens don’t see this simple truth…
Come on now everybody – let’s start the carbon liberation revolution !!!

Gentle Tramp
Reply to  Gentle Tramp
May 14, 2015 3:41 pm

When trying to start a revolution, typos are obviously inevitable… 😉
But to be clear enough, here is the (hopefully) correct version:
A very well written summary of an important fact!
It’s totally insane that especially the Greens don’t see this simple truth…
Come on now everybody – let’s start the carbon liberation revolution !!!

Frank Magill
May 14, 2015 12:48 pm

What struck me was the assertion that “when plants evolved on land” (which sort of doesn’t make sense, since not even the most committed Darwinist claims evolution has stopped), CO2 was 1,000 PPM, vs. only about 400 now. So…how is it that 400 PPM is a problem, again?

Tom J
May 14, 2015 12:53 pm

I suspect AGW will also substantially increase consumption of soft drinks and munchies.

Reply to  Tom J
May 14, 2015 1:22 pm


Reply to  Tom J
May 14, 2015 2:46 pm

Peyton Manning (QB for Denver Broncos) owns a slew of Pappa John’s pizza places around metropolitan regions of Colorado. With legal weed, he says his shops are booming and gives a whole new name to tailgate parties at da football games.

May 14, 2015 12:54 pm

Usually when people talk about marijuana potency, it’s a prohibitionist who’s trying to convince everyone that’s a very dangerous thing. But that’s like claiming that extra-strength aspirin should be banned because children’s aspirin contains lower levels of the drug.
In fact, there is no lethal dose of natural marijuana, so if it’s more potent, that just means that people will use less of it.
So the fact that higher CO2 levels produce a more potent crop is a boon to that industry, just like it is to all other agricultural crops.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 1:32 pm

It will be a few weeks before toxicology reports will be returned, but Goodman’s family and friends suspect that edible marijuana was a factor in the self-inflicted gunshot death. His mother, Kim Goodman, blames her son’s death on “a complete reaction to the drugs.”

Well that’s a novel departure from the usual response of blaming “easy access to guns”.

Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 1:50 pm

We call that lead poisoning.

Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 11:22 pm

People with pre-existing psychological disorders notwithstanding…
The lethal does of a drug, LD-50, is a medical term that refers to an amount that would lead to death. The DEA tried like hell to find a plausible lethal does of natural marijuana decades ago, but what they discovered was that a person would have to consume tens of thousands of marijuana cigarettes to induce death. That is, you would have to smoke 1,500 pounds of the plant in 15 minutes, which is physically impossible. In fact, the smoke (lack of oxygen) would kill you if you tried to ingest enough THC from the plant to kill you.

Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 11:46 pm

By the way, there is a lethal dose associated with the *legal* pharmaceutical THC pills that are manufactured in labs. It’s just the natural (and illegal) plant that won’t kill you.
Thank you, government, right?

Ian Macdonald
Reply to  LarryFine
May 14, 2015 3:09 pm

There are concerns that some of the extremely potent types now available cause paranoia and may damage brain cells. That said, I’d rather my neighbours were smoking cannabis to excess than abusing alcohol. The alkies cause far more public nuisance, and are far more dangerous at the wheel of a car.
The main downside is that it usually involves smoking tobacco along with it. Which is extremely habit-forming, and will definitely ruin your health. That, and if you live where it’s illegal then you are taking a risk buying from dodgy dealers, whose merchandise might have anything from heroin to car body filler in it.

Reply to  Ian Macdonald
May 14, 2015 6:50 pm

You know here at WUWT we don’t usually like claims unsupported by evidence I have not been able to find any evidence at all that supports a scientific bases for the belief that pot is less dangerous than alcohol, so if you have that evidence please provide it. Even if true it sure isn’t a reason to legalize pot. A punch in the face maybe less dangerous than a knife in the heart, but that is not an argument in favor of legalizing punching people in the face.

Reply to  Ian Macdonald
May 14, 2015 7:30 pm

@ Ian,
Whatever the pot was that filtered into my suburb in the 70’s, it certainly caused paranoia and obviously killed many brain cells (why else would you pay for it).
The paranoia was the reason I quit it (I think I’m some kind of sociopath).
That and the threat of “car body filler” caused me to see the light.

Reply to  Ian Macdonald
May 14, 2015 11:27 pm

No drug is harmless, but the harm caused by marijuana consumption is generally due to the fact that is often smoked.
In any case, alcohol is far more harmful than marijuana.

Medical Pot Yes, AGW No
Reply to  Ian Macdonald
May 15, 2015 10:51 am

I have a chronic disease that, among other things, plays havoc with my sleep. Where I live, I am entitled to grow and use pot. I hesitated for a very long time, because of my memories of “paranoia” — a mislabeling of anxiety and depression — I’d experienced when I smoked during high school and college. I’ve only been back to marijuana for about a year.
This effect varies considerably between strains and between broad types. “Sativa” tends to be anxiety-producing for those of us who are susceptible to that problem from marijuana, while “Indica” tends not to produce anxiety. This isn’t true across the board, but it generally works. Also generally true is that “sativa” produces an effect that leaves the user relatively energetic, while “indica” tends to be more soporific.
Prior to very cautiously dipping my toe back in the water, I knew nothing about the differences between strains and types. To me, “marijuana” was an undifferentiated commodity. In practical reality, that’s simply not true. It varies a lot more in effect than alcohol, whose impact is mediated almost entirely by blood alcohol level and secondarily (mostly the nastiness of a hangover) by the varying “congeners” in, say, Scotch malt as opposed to vodka.
There’s a lot of hype within the, ahem, “cannabis community.” For example, the idea that so-called “CBD” pot doesn’t get you high is just wrong. I just had some “high-CBD/low-THC” pot a few days ago. You definitely get high on the stuff. It’s simply a high similar in effect to indica — very soporific.
I can testify here that an “overdose” of pot, while certainly no fun at all, is less harmful than an overdose of alcohol in a similar degree. One night a couple months ago, I used 4-5 times as much as usual. I had mis-estimated the strength of some cookies I made, and ate way too many of them. The result was being stoned for about 15 hours, with another 10 or so hours of the marijuana version of a hangover. Had I overdosed to the same degree on alcohol, I probably would’ve died from alcohol poisoning.
I say all of this not to advertise or otherwise glorify marijuana, but strictly in the interest of being factual. I use this stuff like someone else would use a sleeping pill. It gets me through the night, and I’m glad to have it.

george e. smith
Reply to  LarryFine
May 14, 2015 5:21 pm

When mixed with gasoline in suitable proportions it can become quite lethal. So if you don’t mind, I think I will stay of that Colorado campus.
A story in a local silicon valley daily paper (today) describes the trial of a woman charged with killing a husband and wife on a pedestrian crossing; by running them down, drunk as a skunk in her automobile (not a BMW). Elderly couple from Asia.
The driver is defending herself; to demonstrate the accuracy of the assertion that “he who represents himself in court, has a fool for a client.”
Quoth the woman on the stand, in her own defence. “I knew it was safe to drive drunk, because I have done it before.”
Alcohol; pot; not a jot of difference; everybody who does it, just knows it is safe for them to do.

Reply to  george e. smith
May 14, 2015 5:50 pm

Yes. “I have done it before”.
Great post.

May 14, 2015 12:58 pm

This is how to get the under-25 crowd onto the skeptical band wagon. Bring on the heat, bring on the CO2 – bring on the good stuff…

Reply to  Tom G(ologist)
May 14, 2015 1:26 pm

Sure, get this crowd.
Remember the crowd of Occupy Wall Street?
Remember how they left the space? Do you think it was green?
Forget it.
The absolute most stupid post here and by Eric Worrall.

May 14, 2015 1:22 pm

“putting increased strain on fragile ecosystems.”
What about on regular ecosystems?
I betcha ecosystems can’t feel strain.

Reply to  Gamecock
May 14, 2015 11:35 pm

The idea that marijuana plants “strain” an ecosystem is absurd. Growers tend the plants by adding nutrients and additional water, and they generally avoid hazardous pesticides because they mean to ingest the plants.
What greenies are probably wringing their hands over is the fact that the growers would clear a patch of ground before planting their seeds. Of course, as soon as they abandon the plot of land, the ecosystem would almost instantly revert back to its previous natural state.
As George Carlin famously stated, environmentalism is the most arrogant BS around.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
May 14, 2015 1:27 pm

So do we count increased Marijuana potency as a cost of climate change, or a benefit?

Yes the environmental movement care about CO2. But many of them also care deeply about ensuring people suffering severe chronic pain receive what may be a very effective treatment for their condition.

.. and some of them just think strong weed will make chicks hornier. As I said, it’s a tough call.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
May 14, 2015 1:38 pm

And where does Eric Worrall gets that “many of them also care deeply about ensuring people suffering from severe chronic pain receive what may be a very effective treatment for their condition”
Anywhere? He did a survey?
But I now for sure, just like you do, that it does make chicks……Yes tough call.

May 14, 2015 1:28 pm

So the difference between the greenhouse CO2 and atmospheric CO2 is slightly reduced. I guess that’s good for one publication on a vita and another notch toward promotion.

May 14, 2015 1:59 pm

Even Iguanas can benefit!

Retired Engineer Jim
May 14, 2015 2:00 pm

A recent study reported on the raio hear stated that pot had been being bred for its psyhcoactive feature, and, consequently its medicinal value had been declining sharply over the last couple years. So, if CO2 makes it “stronger”, will that improve its medicinal value?

Reply to  Retired Engineer Jim
May 14, 2015 2:07 pm

Just like for the last 18 years CO2 has made the temperature stronger, it will make the medicinal value stronger. Perfect correlation between the two.

Reply to  Retired Engineer Jim
May 14, 2015 6:53 pm

Well, I doubt it will hurt your spelling.

Reply to  Tom Trevor
May 14, 2015 7:06 pm

…maybe your typping more than yor speling,

Medical Pot Yes, AGW No
Reply to  Retired Engineer Jim
May 15, 2015 11:05 am

I suffer from a chronic disease that, among other things, plays havoc with my sleep. Where I live, this entitles me to grow marijuana. I use a small amount every night to fall asleep and stay that way. As a result, I have become increasingly familiar with the “how to” of all this.
The medicinal value of marijuana, for me (and for a lot of others) is mainly in a few areas: Better sleep, and relief of pain, the latter either directly or by inducing sleep, which helps people deal with their pain. From what I’ve observed, today’s marijuana is much more potent than what I used a long time ago. Part of this is because, when I was younger, dealers sold not just the flowers (“bud”) but the ordinary leaves (“shake”), the latter being far less potent.
As for the psychoactive part, I actually think the trend might be in the other direction. In the old days, most pot was cannabis sativa, a variety that tends to induce a combination of racing thoughts, anxiety, and depression that goes by the rather inaccurate term, “paranoia.” Today’s pot is rarely pure sativa, and is much more often partly or entirely cannabis indica, which tends to produce a soporific effect. So called “high-CBD” pot is quite soporific in my experience.
Bottom line: Be careful about what you believe. Just because someone says it on a radio broadcast doesn’t mean they know what they’re talking about.

Retired Engineer Jim
May 14, 2015 2:01 pm

Sorry, “radio” not “raio”.

May 14, 2015 2:05 pm

If you go right down there to the end he says,

If scientists such as Duke and Ziska are correct, global warming will increase the potency of weed grown outdoors. Coupled with Bearman’s vision, pot farmers such as Bill may be able to keep their operations modest and environmentally responsible while effectively serving both the medicinal and recreational pot markets.

Sounds like he’s advocating more responsible watering practices from the Mexican nationals trespassing in national forests.
Either that or he’s moving to Colorado. Didn’t want to come right out and say it.

Reply to  papiertigre
May 14, 2015 2:34 pm

Well, if you want to read to the end, he also said:
“Marijuana doesn’t produce psychotropic compounds such as THC just so people can smoke it, Ziska explained. It’s a pest repellant. “Plants aren’t mobile, they can’t get up and move around, so they have to produce these chemicals to fight off pests and disease.”
So, go ahead and smoke a pesticide!

Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 7:29 pm

Sounds like it has a practical use after all! Perhaps it might be added to pyrethrins to make them more effective, or DNA extracted to make GM beans and corn that resist beetles, worms and borers. I had never heard that about cannabinoids and was under the impression (from my visits to Jamaica) that it has to be cured properly and then incinerated or heated to have any psycho-active effect. Otherwise consuming it is non-effective and only gives you a bellyache. That is what Peter Tosh’s cousin told me (if he is anything of an expert).

Pete Wilson
Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 10:28 pm

THC isn’t a pesticide, or a repellant. It protects plants by the property of being extremely sticky, making its leaves and flowers into a kind of fly paper.

May 14, 2015 2:05 pm

Reblogged this on Starvin Larry and commented:
“Turns out a warming climate could boost the medicinal and psychoactive properties of plants including cannabis.”
This means that all the leftover hippies in Northern Commiefornia should be happy about a “global warming” and higher CO2 levels booting the potency of the weed they’re growing all over N. Commifornia-they should be ecstatic about this news and stop protesting about everything,and just relax and smoke their higher potency weed.

Jon Lonergan
May 14, 2015 2:32 pm

Oh No! As if what they’re already smoking isn’t already too strong!

Reply to  Jon Lonergan
May 14, 2015 2:36 pm

Just look at the post above.
It is not too strong, it is a pesticide!

george e. smith
Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 5:27 pm

They don’t call it “dope” for no reason.
So it’s a pesticide is it ?
So it is being properly used then.
But as I have often said of cigarettes; they should make them much more potent, and sell them to kids; before they get to breeding age.

Mike Jonas(@egrey1)
May 14, 2015 2:41 pm

The logic is absurd. What’s good for all plants is of course also good for “bad” plants. Does that mean it’s bad?

Reply to  Mike Jonas
May 14, 2015 6:57 pm


Mr Green Genes
May 14, 2015 2:53 pm

I knew CAGW couldn’t be all bad!!!

May 14, 2015 2:54 pm

Yes the environmental movement care about CO2. But many of them also care deeply about ensuring people suffering severe chronic pain receive what may be a very effective treatment for their condition.
Ya…the ‘chronic pain’ of reality.

James Ard
May 14, 2015 3:00 pm

Stronger pot means less smoking to get high. This should be a good thing to people who really care about public health.

May 14, 2015 3:02 pm

Yet another good reason to be in favor of letting global warming happen. If only it were true.

May 14, 2015 3:32 pm

Outdoors one can grow one crop per year, with little control over deer, elk, people, FEDs, heat, frost, fungus, insects, wind, fire, hail, and so on. Plus CO2 is so very limited.
Indoors one can grow six crops per year, with nearly total control over the environment, including boosting CO2 levels by four times!
The only plus that outdoor growing has it that magnificent sun. You just can’t beat it.

Reply to  Max Photon
May 14, 2015 3:56 pm

I move my plants in and out.
Especially for morning sun on hot days.

May 14, 2015 3:38 pm

I Shot the Sheriff
by Eric Clapton

May 14, 2015 3:43 pm

Marihuana already has the most intensive hi tek agricultural methods and R&D of any crop . In CO , almost all commercial crops are grown in high CO2 environments at up to 100f temperatures , controlled humidity and tuned spectrum lighting . So CA is going to have a hard time competing in potency or yield with any outdoor crop .
The idea that more than an absolutely insignificant acreage will ever be “ecologically damaged” by MJ cultivation is absurd .

Reply to  Bob Armstrong
May 14, 2015 5:28 pm

Finally. Somebody that makes sense.

Reply to  Bob Armstrong
May 15, 2015 8:59 am

There is a priceless interview in the Fresh Air archive with a person very, very familiar with the growing process in CO. As you say Bob, growing is done in large industrial buildings under very controlled circumstances.
What really got my attention was his description of going into one of these buildings. You don’t see any plants at all, just long corridors with doors, much like an office building. Behind each door is a roughly shipping container-sized “growing office” in which you find the plants, tended by a generally long haired “manager” in shorts, playing music that they think will enhance the growth of their plants.
One can only imagine the competitive lunch-time conversation among these “growth managers.” Such is the course of human evolution.
Just wait till traditional agriculture gets wind of this radical new methodology. The corn industry will be transformed! Delegations of young corn farmers trooping from NB to CO in tour busses to learn from the masters. The mind reels at the possibilities! The mind reels…

Mushroom George
May 14, 2015 3:46 pm

Not very accurate for a botanist. THC is not an insecticide. It is not widespread throughout the plant but concentrated in external organelles called trichomes. These tiny, mushroom shaped, sticky hairs are mostly located around the future seed parts. Pests get stuck in them if they get too close. They act more like a physical repellent. The trichomes would also redirect potentially harmful UV radiation away from any developing seeds.
Increased CO2 only seems to make crummy weed better. There isn’t much difference in potency for the best strains. However, they all grow much faster on much less water.

Reply to  Mushroom George
May 14, 2015 6:07 pm

As you wrote:
“Increased CO2 only seems to make crummy weed better. There isn’t much difference in potency for the best strains. However, they all grow much faster on much less water.”
Nothing more to add.

Reply to  Mushroom George
May 14, 2015 7:04 pm

Thank you for the explanation.
No nonsense.

May 14, 2015 4:01 pm

This is so cool dude.

May 14, 2015 4:13 pm

Some perspective needed here. Potency refers to two different classes of substances in cannabis: cannabinols and cannabinoids. The cannabinols (only one of which is THC) get the consumer stoned. The cannabinoids OTOH don’t, but they are a very effective anti-inflammatory. The Git squeaks from experience here; he suffers from chronic arthritis.
We make a distinction in The Land of Under between hydro (high cannabinol) and bush tucker (high cannabinoids). Recent new strains of the latter can relieve severe pain without generating a stone. For some medical conditions there is no effective alternative to cannabis.
I strongly suggest that those taking an antagonistic view check out the result of following FDA/medical advice by consuming Vioxx.
A close friend who eschewed MJ in favour of Vioxx suffered five heart attacks in a row. Fortunately he was not one of the more than 60,000 people killed by Vioxx.

Reply to  The Pompous Git
May 14, 2015 6:19 pm

You can use all the perspectives you want.
I have absolutely no objection for anybody to smoke, chew, eat or any other use of MJ.
However, the idea of this post is (was) that “a little more CO2” ………is simply nonsense.

Reply to  rd50
May 14, 2015 9:15 pm

The post is about pot, were you expecting enlightenment ?

Reply to  The Pompous Git
May 14, 2015 7:05 pm

Do you any, I mean any, peer reviewed studies that support your claim that pot has any medical uses whatsoever? Which studies show that it is safe and effective for the treatment of any disease?
Sorry about your friend but a lot of people who have never taken Vioxx have had multiple heart attacks.

Reply to  Tom Trevor
May 15, 2015 5:55 pm

@ Pete Wilson
Interesting links. Didn’t know about the Alzheimer’s link. Here in Tasmania there’s been a flurry of interest sparked by parents administering cannabis to their epilepsy afflicted children. These are kids whose seizures are not controlled by the standard medications. Given that the death rate of epileptics is 2–3 times that of the general populace, you’d think that the discovery would have been gratifying and to some it is, particularly the parents of those kids. But the do-gooderesses of this world apparently believe that it’s better to suffer and die than ingest cannabis. Go figure…

Reply to  Tom Trevor
May 15, 2015 7:53 pm

I can tell you that when you talk to your 3rd or 4th person who had cancer and had given up on everything and tried MJ as a last resort, only to be cancer free now, well, it has an effect on you. But when you have heard it from 10 or 11 people, then, it starts to get old.
So, hmmm, how would you do a double blind study on, say, cancer and MJ? People normally only try it as a last resort, after their Dr. told them that the main stream cures didn’t work and they are going to die.
Not sayin’ it works all the time, but it does sometimes.

May 14, 2015 4:38 pm

I forgot what I was going to say.

Reply to  clipe
May 14, 2015 6:06 pm


Reply to  clipe
May 15, 2015 10:28 am

THIS. The reason pot driving is safer than drunk driving is because pot smokers forget where they’re going, never in a hurry to get there.
Drunks will barrel down the freeway because they know exactly where they are going. Their intentions are clear it’s just the motor skill execution that is suspect .

May 14, 2015 4:49 pm

Enter Paraquat and no rain…

Reply to  john
May 15, 2015 8:46 am

…So the mexicans harvested quickly and stuffed it into empty fuel tankers to pass off the odor and taste (mid 80’s – can’t find it just now). They helped our gov’t poison folks.

May 14, 2015 4:53 pm

CO2 is converted to cannabinols and cannabinoids!?
What wonderful news! What better way to store excess CO2? Environmentalists, (aka green loonies), along with many normal people should be thrilled!

May 14, 2015 6:12 pm

“Turns out a warming climate could boost the medicinal and psychoactive properties of plants including cannabis.
But that’s not all: Climate change will also open up higher elevations..”
Typical reverse of reality. Just like tea, the superior grades grow at 800-2100 meters altitude. If “climate change” makes them grow faster, that will only reduce the quality:

May 14, 2015 11:02 pm

“a warming climate could boost the medicinal and psychoactive properties of plants including cannabis.”
So don’t we need some warming first?

May 14, 2015 11:44 pm

Some, perhaps, insight into MJ and brain damage (or not). Normally, my occasional posts here are under my given name, but on this occasion I’m going undercover so no one will accuse me of bragging. And in fact, the facts about to be presented are no credit to me, but to my careful choice of parents.
Born in 1945, my younger years were marked by being considered “gifted” even though I didn’t walk until 18mos. and didn’t speak until 2+ years. Parents were concerned about retardation. Read at 4, 1st grade at 5 and straight “A”s thru 8th grade. Physically and socially underdeveloped, however. Read a lot.
Iowa tests in 1959 and 1961 yielded 99% across the charts with one 97%. National Merit Scholar in 1962, one of four in my HS; talked my way into a first tier University, though my HS grades were only “B”s.
Flunked out in 1965 and joined the Army Reserve. Armed Forces Qualifying Test: 100. First week Army IQ tests showed a flat 131 on everything (not sure what that means, exactly, but the Army was impressed).
Returned to the same Uni later that year and did very well away from the College of Engineering. Fixed up the social and physical problems by getting a varsity letter, dating campus queens and becoming president of my fraternity. Life was good! Drank a good deal all along the way after 18, but didn’t start smoking tobacco until boredom in the Army had left it is as the only available entertainment…
Though I’m slightly ashamed of having done so, in Spring 1967 I took the LSAT for a brother (for a lousy $50)and scored 673 on his behalf, good enough to get him into the Law School. Later that year, I was introduced to MJ, loved it and smoked on a daily basis for the next 22 years.
Called to active duty in 1968, I spent a year as an EM at Headquarters Berlin, and returned to finish college in late 1969. Graduating in December, I took the LSAT for myself, scoring a 748 (99.97 percentile), but was talked out of attending law school by my employer’s “offer I couldn’t refuse,” as he put it.
Smoked MJ throughout the next ten years of a very successful career in a field best described as a cross between engineering and architecture, eventually leaving with an associate to form an identical business that was equally successful for the next twenty years. In 1980, Omni magazine published what they billed as the “world’s hardest intelligence test.” It had no time limits, no restrictions on research or consultation. My business partner tackled it with me, though he eventually dropped out. I finished it, stoned most of the time, and submitted. Score: 159, missing 4 Sigma by one point.
Smoked the devil weed for another twenty years then quit because I could no longer tell the difference between being straight and stoned; never returned to regular smoking although I’ll rarely still indulge if friends show up with some. Don’t miss it. But have also continued to drink (sometimes too much).
In 2001, living in Hawaii and working a failed business that I had thought would make us rich, I noticed an ad that sought potential teachers who didn’t have education degrees. I took the test and finished it with two hours left. Eventually, Hawaii responded with a teaching offer, but by then we had moved to our current location.
As far as I can tell habitual marijuana use has had absolutely no impact on my cognitive abilities and I would use it tomorrow if offered, but won’t bother looking for it. BTW, although I probably richly deserved a DUI or two, along the way, it never happened. I got pulled over once smoking a joint, but the cop ignored it and gave me a simple speeding ticket (also my only ticket, ever). Experience taught me that driving drunk is just plain dangerous, driving a bit stoned, not at all. I’d guess most cops would agree.
OTOH, it’s fair to say that all, without exception, of the most regrettable and shameful incidents of my 70 year lifespan to date have taken place while intoxicated. You be the judge between the two.

Reply to  Awhiz
May 15, 2015 2:08 am

May 14, 2015 at 11:44 pm
Experience taught me that driving drunk is just plain dangerous…”
Some European studies suggest, these days, driving while using a mobile phone (And I see it every day here in Australia, even drivers drivers of big rigs) is much much more dangerous.

May 15, 2015 12:28 am

1000ppm, surprised the world didn’t come to an end.

May 15, 2015 3:46 am

I have tried “magic mushrooms”, MJ and something called “chat” in Ethiopia. Mushrooms and chat had no effect on me (Or maybe I simply did not eat enough). But when I tried MJ in New Zealand, I did get a buzz! Maybe it was omething to do with the sun and how potent the plants grow there. What I found more interesting was that, even though I am not a smoker, I could properly smoke the NZ MJ without coughing. With regards to any damage, mental or otherwise, I am fine *WIBBLE*!

And while “authorities” worry about MJ, sugar is a bigger problem in terms of poisoning people.

Reply to  Patrick
May 15, 2015 7:58 pm

It’s better known as Khat and must be used when fresh (within 48 hours of harvest). Cathinone, one of the major psychoactive components of khat, degrades to cathine, which does not produce the desired effects. It’s similar to amphetamine in its effects. The Git prefers sauvignon blanc 😉

May 15, 2015 4:17 am

I guess they’ll have to update the “Reefer Madness” film describing this newly discovered ruthless cycle of reefer and climate change.
Reefer causes climate change which causes more reefer usage which causes more climate change which causes more reefer usage which eventually leads to pizza consumption abuse which then leads to a pepperoni shortage tumbling world markets into a tail spin leading to WWIII which then leads to a shortage of reefer and mass depression where everyone dies but the insects survive and evolve into super intelligent beings who populate across the galaxies. Which might not be so bad, in a way, kind of.
Excuse me, that was the last toke, have to visit my local friendly happy-land dispensary.

May 15, 2015 8:37 am

Ah, I love the smell of cognitive dissonance in the morning…
Actually, there is some scientific research on the effects of pot that I remember from a study done in the 60s in Jamaica among field workers. They classified “light” smokers as 1-6 joints per day, medium, 6-12 and heavy, more than 12. The results were clear:
The Jamaican field workers smokers were happier, worked harder and got less done.

Reply to  markopanama
May 15, 2015 10:31 am


Reply to  markopanama
May 15, 2015 6:28 pm

@ markopanama
Dunno what you’ve been smoking, but that study discovered that the smokers were more productive.

Medical Pot Yes, AGW No
May 15, 2015 10:29 am

I suffer from a chronic disease that, among other things, plays havoc with my sleep. Where I live, this entitles me to grow marijuana. I use a small amount every night to fall asleep and stay that way. As a result, I have become increasingly familiar with the “how to” of all this.
You can buy carbon dioxide tanks to aid a crop. My equipment supplier says adding CO2 is only relevant for large-scale indoor growers. It does not increase the potency — that’s mostly a matter of genetics — but rather is said to increase yield. I grow four or five plants at a time, and feel no need to increase their yield.
If someone suggests that more atmospheric CO2 will make pot more potent, to my knowledge they are wrong. It might, in theory, increase the yield of pot grown outdoors.

May 15, 2015 11:47 am

One has to wonder why cannabis breeders worldwide waste their time selecting genetics and phenotypes for potency increases when all that is necessary is a bottle of CO2 cracked open in the corner.

May 17, 2015 2:41 pm

Check your biology books!! Nary a mention of CO2 being the “nutrient” lacking!!

%d bloggers like this: