24 Mind-Blowing Facts About Marijuana Production in America

[lotus503]

Speaking of CO2, its a must have for any good weed

http://www.hightimes.com/read/insiders-grow-co2-and-o2-cannabis-production

 

[SparkyJJO]

so humans contribute to global warming, right?

Apparently sarcasm is totally lost on you.

 

[lotus503]

Pot is grown indoors largely because of it's illegality.

And how much of the water consumed was rainfall?

Its grown indoors for a lot of reasons, lack of natural sunlight, controlled environment etc etc.

The security requirements in Washington state make it very difficult to grow outdoors. Its like any other plant and crop though it requires resources to grow.

The fact its illegal means its not regulated and the true impact of regulated growth isn't known because its illegal.

rather than setting the standards in a regulated environment we have a hodge podge of whomever doing whatever they think yields the best results in potency and yield.

 

[zinfamous]

Apparently sarcasm is totally lost on you.

There really can be no sarcasm/irony/bitter tears from the dissemenator of such a story if they hold no trust or acceptance in the means of that sarcasm.

Either the OP accepts the truth of that article--pot growers seem to be destroying the planet by pumping CO2 and N2, and is therefore humorous and worthy of irony, or he doesn't--in which case he's just waving a limp dick at nothing, because he really wouldn't put any stock in the article otherwise.

Human activities such as irrigation, Nitrogen dumping, and CO2 pumping don't contribute to global warming, though, right? So the article is just stupid and wrong...so no real humor anyway.

It's simple.

Many have already posted, though, that the issues of illegality are what force indoor growth in the first place.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I still find it amusing that the OP is trumpeting this evidence of anthropogenic global warming, and has pretty much accepted it as true in order to take this jab against dem ebil hippie dopers.

He's going to have to turn around and accept one of these "great lies" in order for anyone to take him seriously with this thread.

I wait with popcorn.

Careful with that popcorn, don't want someone to shoot you.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

40gal. of pesticides found at grow sites? And these are from Mexican cartel outdoor grows. You're right , marijuana should be grown legally under the law-but Republicans won't vote for that so it remains illegal and a huge black market exists to supply the need.
That 9% of household energy use sounds way too high, also. I think this comes from a Rand corp. study-in other words, crap.

Approximately 30 million pounds of fumigant pesticides are used each year on soil that yields valuable California crops — strawberries, tomatoes, peppers and the like — in an attempt to control pests. Responsibility for the safety of pesticides must be evaluated and approved by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation in a process known as registration.
Righties are worried about pesticides ? Really. That's why the sprayed paraquat on the pot grown in Mexico in the 70's.

Excuse me but CA voters (most of whom vote lock step Democrat) were the ones who decided not to legalize Marijuana our state dominated by the Democrat party. Additionally it was also the few lucky CA "Medical Pot" vendors/operators in the state who also helped to organize the coalition to prevent legalization of marijuana in the state during that vote. Why? Because they don't want to go out of business due to additional competition if the market is opened up and freed so that more businesses can compete against them in selling pot in CA. Thus they love having the ability to set the price for "Legal Medical" pot as a small cartel of business owners who are allowed operate with very few others able to enter the business due to the barriers of entry by pot being illegal in CA for those without a "Medical" marijuana perscription.

Of course they argued and stated there actions were to "protect" consumers, patients etc because only they knew how to best control the industry in a "Progressive manner" which is nothing more then nonsense considering how they are raking in hundreds of millions of dollars as the only few businesses allowed in the state to sell "medical" marijuana. In the end legalization would pretty much cut into their own profits and state backed sellers of "Medical Pot" to "patients".

 

[momeNt]

So the same side that discounts the harmful effects of greenhouse gases and carbon footprints, tries to use the very same to re-ban marijuana?

So stupid.

 

[boomerang]

And the OP's choice of articles is more appreciation of irony (given the massive overlap in potheads and warmers) than embracing CAGW. That should be clear to everyone.

Exactly. But it is interesting watching the pseudo-intellectuals over-thinking the post and coming to conclusions that are based in their perceptions of what the post "really means".

Here is the sum total of my commentary in the OP: "Oh, oh. Marijuana growing is bad for the environment and in a whole slew of different ways. If you read nothing else, read Josh Harkinson's story linked below."

But there is a deeper meaning in those words and saying those words means I must accept assumptions about various things as well as come to realizations and acceptances. And blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. At the heart of their involvement in the thread is that they really, really, like smoking this shit but damn, it might not be good from an environmental perspective and the resultant HAL moment "blows their minds".

Which I knew it would. With every puff, they'll be thinking that what they're doing might clash with the environmental agenda they cherish almost as much. Hypocrisy. My work is done.

 

[norseamd]

bias and partisanship on topic from the op

 

[schmuckley]

Wait..Wouldn't a green leafy plant produce oxygen?
Sum Ting Wong.

 

[ch33zw1z]

legalize, tax, regulate production.

 

[ch33zw1z]

So the same side that discounts the harmful effects of greenhouse gases and carbon footprints, tries to use the very same to re-ban marijuana?

So stupid.

they just eat it up though, nom nom nom nom

 

[boomerang]

So the same side that discounts the harmful effects of greenhouse gases and carbon footprints, tries to use the very same to re-ban marijuana?

So stupid.

From what, did you draw that conclusion?

 

[norseamd]

From what, did you draw that conclusion?

so you believe that pollution can be bad for the environment?

 

[Jhhnn]

Pot is grown indoors largely because of it's illegality.

Same reason it's grown in remote areas using the north american version of slash & burn farming. Money. Markup is incredible. Because it's illegal.

Which is all that's really wrong with pot & pot farming, anyway. Prohibition has been a sordid tale of fear mongering, racism & power seeking from its inception. The price of that in human terms dwarfs all the other issues surrounding it.

Legalization solves one of the most divisive issues of my lifetime, rectifies enormous stupidity and injustice. I believe that the Colorado experience will show the world that legalization is sound policy, far superior to what we've had since 1937.

It's still screwy, sad to say, because a variety of interests want to keep the price up. None of the commercial interests get to grow outside, and that's yet to be determined for personal growers, gardeners. It all has to be hidden, except a person can toke up on the front porch, but not in the park, alley or on the sidewalk. There's a whole set of elaborate & often silly rules, but they're a lot better than the old rules.

 

[xj0hnx]

the only people smoking Mexican pot are dumbass high school kids and younger. Did you care about such things when you were that age?

thought not.

They're the only ones?

Did someone conduct a poll?

Any links to statistics?

Thanks.

You really think drug cartels are pumping metric tons of brick to supply "dumbass high school kids"? Riiiiiight I hate to break it to you, but that shit comes across and then heads out across the country.

 

[xj0hnx]

legalize, tax, regulate production.

Kind of hard to regulate production of a weed.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Kind of hard to regulate production of a weed.

And? Kind of hard to regulate production of alcohol, but they've been ok with people brewing their own...

Since when do we not do something because it's "kinda hard". It's the right thing to do, as more and more states do medical, and more will probably do retail, regulating the product to ensure quality product at minimum environmental impact sounds like a good thing to me.

 

[manimal]

legalize, tax, regulate production.

in before SOCIALISM


in all seriousness your absolutely right. Why leave something in the dark when we can bring it into the light?

 

[Vic]

Kind of hard to regulate production of a weed.

Even harder to outlaw it.

 

[TreVader]

I worked at a Cannabis Club for 2 years back in the mid 2000s and the vast majority of what we sold was grown indoors, like 90%. Most of the outdoor stuff is illegal grows.


I don't know why any of this would be surprising. Do you have any idea how much pesticide it takes to grow an acre of tomatoes? Plants need food.

 

[TreVader]

Kind of hard to regulate production of a weed.

This is actually a big problem because the people who have the power to regulate it aren't interested. A lot of these medical operations fail just because they get tangled up with law enforcement and get no support from the community they're in. That's why the majority of successful ones are in more liberal areas. Surprisingly it's the Clubs that are farthest out into suburbia that make the most money.


Conservatives don't smoke less weed, they just lie more about it. They lie like baptists at the liquor store.

 

[norseamd]

I don't know why any of this would be surprising. Do you have any idea how much pesticide it takes to grow an acre of tomatoes? Plants need food.

they grow in state parks?

are they even able to get in there every day? they might make some sort of tent camps right? why not just grow some tolerant weed variety and sell as lower grade?

 

[MongGrel]

You again ?

You have too much time on your hands teabagger.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

You again ?

You have too much time on your hands teabagger.

You would too if you were a paid shill.