Top

blog

Stories

 

Marijuana Enforcement Division Hearing: Pot Edibles Debate, Indoor v. Outdoor Plant Counts

Categories: Marijuana

marijuana.enforcement.division.sign.565x300.jpg
NetNebraska.org
It's no surprise that the commenters at yesterday's Marijuana Enforcement Division (MED) public hearing for proposed rule changes to marijuana legislation brought up an array of associated social issues. And yes, they included representatives from Smart Colorado, including attorney Rachel O'Bryan, who noted that although increased regulation of marijuana edibles available for retail sale is a step in the right direction, the anti-pot organization's position is that cannabis is dangerous because the effects are "impossible to predict or control."

See also: Photos: Twenty Favorites from the Marijuana Memes Facebook Page

A proposed rule would limit retail edibles to 10 milligrams of active THC per serving and no more than 100 milligrams total in each edible product unit. Serving sizes would be clearly demarcated (a Hershey's candy bar was brought up as an example), and any test batches with units including more than 100 milligrams of active THC would fail the testing process.

rachel.obryan.jpg
Rachel O'Bryan, as seen in a photo from her Facebook page.
O'Bryan's testimony, however, argued that the 10 milligram dose of active THC should be applied to a standard food serving size and that the 100 milligram total-unit limitation doesn't do enough to protect children from accidentally ingesting large doses of marijuana via candy.

Other experts retorted that there is no lethal dose of marijuana -- and through the additional packaging requirements, they believe consumers will have the tools they need to self-dose.

As for consumer Greg Duran, he testified about what he sees as an environmental problem with the proposed packaging changes for marijuana edible. He compared the unnecessary waste that would result from single-serving unit sizes, as mentioned by O'Bryan, to packaging a bottle of Malibu in 64 individual servings, saying he believes the state is creating packaging requirements to solve a problem when the underlying issue is educating children and ensuring that no child has access to marijuana edibles.

"This whole thing about candy and sweets just appealing to kids is ridiculous," he added, stating that he enjoys candy and chocolate as an adult. And he wasn't the only commenter to be offended by the insinuation that edibles manufacturers are targeting children; more than one parent working in the marijuana industry noted that they didn't want their kids abusing drugs and had informed conversations with them about marijuana consumption. Amid debate about whether to require dosing information to be placed on each individual 10-milligram-THC serving size, Duran mentioned the lack of sustainability due to the extraneous (but necessary) packaging that such requirements would necessitate, comparing the concept to packaging a bottle of Midori into 64 individual serving sizes.

mike.elliott.marijuana.industry.jpg
Marijuana Industry Group's Mike Elliott.
Surprisingly, a reference to Atlas Shrugged didn't come up during this portion of the meeting. That had taken place earlier in the session, when the MED agenda circled around to a proposed rule involving the maximum number of plants allowed in an indoor retail cultivation facility versus an outdoor cultivation facility or greenhouse. The difference in plant counts (3,600 for indoor versus 1,800 versus outdoor) was a hot topic among commenters, as was the grouping of greenhouses with outdoor facilities and the need to impose plant caps according to facility at all. Some of the problems cited with these plant restrictions included the variance inherent in using a plant as a unit of measurement, the amount of yield typical for an indoor versus an outdoor marijuana plant, and the sustainability implications of allowing more plants in indoor cultivation facilities than outdoor.

Mike Elliott, executive director of the Marijuana Industry Group, noted that the metric used for production caps aimed toward adjusting the supply flow of marijuana is inherently flawed, as plants vary in their yield, and suggested that measuring product by the pound might make more sense. However, he claimed that the 1,800 versus 3,600 metric seemed like a fair compromise for the moment. Other commenters noted that the electricity needed to power an indoor grow facility is replaced by the sun in an outdoor facility or greenhouse, arguing that the increased sustainability of outdoor facilities and greenhouse grows should be taken into account when considering production caps.

The state will continue accepting written comments to the proposed rule changes through September 8. You can read the proposed changes here.


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
40 comments
DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

EVERY Commercial Indoor Marijuana Warehouse should be SHUT DOWN until an Environmental Impact Study is performed on their Resource Raping Operations!


Energy up in Smoke: The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production


http://evan-mills.com/energy-associates/Indoor.html


SUMMARY (updated April 18, 2012)


What kind of facility has lighting as intense as that found in an operating room (500-times more than needed for reading), 6-times the air-change rate of a biotech laboratory and 60-times that of a home, and the electric power intensity of a datacenter?

The emergent industry of indoor Cannabis production results in prodigious energy use, costs, and greenhouse-gas pollution. Large-scale industrialized and highly energy-intensive indoor cultivation of Cannabis is driven by criminalization, pursuit of security, and the desire for greater process control and yields. The practice occurs across the United States and in many other countries.

The analysis performed in this study finds that indoor Cannabis production results in energy expenditures of $6 billion each year -- 6-times that of the entire U.S. pharmaceutical industry -- with electricity use equivalent to that of 2 million average U.S. homes. This corresponds to 1% of national electricity consumption or 2% of that in households. The yearly greenhouse-gas pollution (carbon dioxide, CO) from the electricity plus associated transportation fuels equals that of 3 million cars. Energy costs constitute a quarter of wholesale value.

In California, the top-producing state—and one of 17 states to allow cultivation for medical purposes—the practice is responsible for about 3% of all electricity use or 9% of household use. Due to higher electricity prices and cleaner fuels used to make electricity, California incurs 70% of national energy costs but only 20% of national CO2 emissions.

From the perspective of individual consumers, a single Cannabis cigarette represents about 10 pounds of CO2 emissions,* an amount equal to running a 100-watt light bulb for 75 hours with average U.S. electricity (or 135 hours on California’s cleaner grid). Each four-by-four-foot production module doubles the electricity use of an average U.S. home and triples that of an average California home. The added electricity use is equivalent to running about 90 refrigerators. Processed Cannabis results in 4,600-times its weight in CO2 emissions.

For off-grid production, it requires 70 gallons of diesel fuel to produce one indoor Cannabis plant, or 140 gallons with smaller, less-efficient gasoline generators.

Minimal information and producer consideration of energy use, coupled with adaptations for security and privacy, lead to particularly inefficient configurations and correspondingly large energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions. 


If improved practices applicable to commercial agricultural greenhouses are any indication, the energy use for indoor Cannabis production can be reduced dramatically. Cost-effective efficiency improvements of more than 75% are conceivable, which would yield energy savings of about $25,000/year for a generic 10-module growing room. Shifting cultivation outdoors eliminates most energy uses.

Monkey
Monkey

All commercial weed should be grown outside, or a greenhouse. If they insist on limitations, limit the acreage, not plant numbers or yield. I say make commercial farms at least 80% outside. You need an acre of outdoor weed before you're allowed to light up a 9000sqft warehouse, or something like that. But logic and efficiency is not a common trait among government agencies, that's why corporations can manipulate and control them so easily.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

With regard to Hack's prohibitionist agent, Rachel O'Bryan, you write that she "noted that although increased regulation of marijuana edibles available for retail sale is a step in the right direction ..." -- wrong!  O'Bryan merely claimed that "increased regulation of marijuana edibles available for retail sale is a step in the right direction" but only ignorant media dupes believe this.  The edibles bill (HB14-1366) accomplished absolutely nothing except to lay bare the industry's abjectly slavish desire to pander to our idiot Legislature!

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

Amber, you distract from the primary issue:  there is no justification for limiting the amount of cannabis grown using natural light versus that grown under electric lights, and the proposal should raise a red flag (especially for ostensible journalists) that collusion between the cartel producers and the MED is taking place.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

How many HUNDREDS of POUNDS have the overproducing MIG Pigs sold illegally out the back door?


It's time for MED to AUDIT their entire production > sales chain, from Seed to Sale ... to Jail



muhutdafuga
muhutdafuga topcommenter

@Monkey Using natural light would save energy, you know, almost like solar.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@Monkey Great -- how about informing the DOR with your point of view, or are you content simply to state it here upon the advent of regulations which would do exactly the opposite?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase


BOYCOTT the Greedy Prohibitionist-Colluding Dispensary Cartels!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase @Monkey



"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all" -- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase



"The DOR's regulations have not resulted in a single arrest; those involved in the trade who have been arrested are alleged to have operated far outside these regulations ..." 

-- Robert Chase



"Amendment 64 will prevent ~10,000 arrests for cannabis annually in Colorado" -- Robert Chase

muhutdafuga
muhutdafuga topcommenter

@RobertChase @muhutdafuga @Monkey Using natural light would save energy......of course sunlight is natural light, says Captain Obvious.  Just to be clear, grow operations use a lot of energy.  Using natural light is a very simple solar application.  Thus, NATURAL LIGHT WOULD SAVE ENERGY AND REDUCE THE CO2 EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE REPUBLICAN GLOBAL BURNING.


GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@RobertChase   If you voted for A64 you asked for these marijuana prohibitionists to regulate you.  Why is that so hard for you to understand and/or admit?


regulate - control or supervise (something, especially a company or business activity) by means of rules and regulations.

muhutdafuga
muhutdafuga topcommenter

@RobertChase @Monkey If some pot head wants to grow a plant in their garden, it should be OK.  I see no point in propping up prices. 

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@muhutdafuga @RobertChase @Monkey No one has disputed that; I did suggest (based on my limited knowledge of growing cannabis) that there is a place for some use of artificial light.  Some seem to have lost sight of the context of this discussion -- we are commenting on an article about the DOR presenting proposed rules which would prevent increased reliance on sunlight;  purposeful responses would bear on how to prevent these rules from being instituted, as opposed to, say, taking a strong stand against all use of electric lights (as Donkey did).  Political competence consists of realizing that there is a process by which such rules are instituted and becoming involved in it to defeat them and substitute others that make some sense; political incompetence is strongly implicated by the various statements here of personal opinions which lack any indication that those holding them have any intention of realizing what they believe is right.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase @DonkeyHotay @Monkey


Abstract ?? ... ROTFLMAO!! ... your political and legal myopia is incomprehensible.


"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all

-- Robert Chase

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@GuestWho @RobertChase How incredibly stupid it is to pretend that everything that has happened with regard to cannabis since November 6, 2012 was somehow predetermined by the Amendment.  Keep on pretending; to most, you appear to be engaging in absolutely pointless mental masturbation -- with no possibility of a happy ending!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@GuestWho @RobertChase


Robert is a Closet Prohibitionist -- he prefers to receive The Fist of Government Regulation in private.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase



"I oppose the recreational use of cannabis by minors" -- Robert Chase


"it would be the most delicious irony were he to be sentenced to life in federal prison for being a 'super drug kingpin' ... and maybe you too" -- Robert Chase

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@muhutdafuga @RobertChase @Monkey You seem to have entirely missed my point; at issue is how to prevent the cartel and the prohibitionists from propping up prices (and worse), not whether propping up prices is justifiable -- there should not be (and in this forum, there has not been) any contention among those who support our right to use cannabis over the wrongness of propping up prices.  If and when more people who use cannabis acquire political awareness and competence, we will be able to make progress; so long as we remain as abjectly clueless as we (in aggregate) now seem to be, we will be easy meat for the manipulations of prohibitionists and their agents.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase "I did suggest (based on my limited knowledge of growing cannabis ..."



"I am the best-informed activist against Prohibition in Colorado." -- Robert Chase


"I am not even a registered patient" 

-- Robert Chase


Why do you continually pimp for the Environment Raping Greedy Big $$ Dispensary Cartels?

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @RobertChase @Monkey "Abstract" -- it's not that big a word; you probably understand it and can use it (meaningfully) in a sentence.  Let's see; bolding, italicization, underlining -- all there; only the semantic content is missing!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase @GuestWho


"I do not believe that there will be any fallout for medical cannabis" 

-- Robert Chase, in response to NUMEROUS warnings to the contrary from far wiser political and legal analysts



DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase "at issue is how to prevent the cartel and the prohibitionists from propping up prices "


Says the ignorant fucktard who supported the Pro-Cartel A64, which surrendered TOTAL CONTROL of marijuana over to the Prohibitionist Politicians, the Insatiable Dept. of Revenue and the Greedy Big $$ Dispensary Cartels ... all for a pathetic ounce of pot for *some* adults.


You voted for it, moron, now SUCK ON IT!

muhutdafuga
muhutdafuga topcommenter

@RobertChase @muhutdafuga @Monkey I understood your point.  I made my own point.  I'm an American freedom loving Liberal, I think the lighting system a grower uses isn't really anyone's business EXCEPT there is an inherent advantage to conserving natural resources and sending less money to big republican oil.

Your efforts to raise political awareness among the uninformed is appreciated.  Uninformed people are the ones that bring us republican tyrants.

You seem to have missed my point, especially the one about if a pothead wants to grow their plants in their garden, they should be allowed.
 

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @RobertChase You are as daft as the commenter here years ago who said of Laura (for all of her misdirection since the proposal of Amendment 64, an activist of broad experience and knowledge), "her knowledge of the different strains is appalling"; growing cannabis is great, but the knowledge and skills required have nothing to do with law and politics.  You sow confusion among those who use cannabis, which serves the cause of Prohibition; you get the most exercised when I make the case against felonies for cannabis.  Many of your posts insinuate that you use cannabis, or support our right to do so, but denigrating the effort to end felonies for cannabis marks you as at least a de facto prohibitionist.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @RobertChase @GuestWho Unlike you, I do not enjoy endless repetition, but it is certainly true that Amendment 64 has had no effect whatsoever on patients' rights to use medicinal cannabis.  Your conceit that I fail to understand something or have been proved wrong -- in any regard -- is complete BS!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase ... couldn't do it without the nearly unlimited source idiocy that flows from your unhinged mind.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@muhutdafuga No, I fully agree, but the remark reminded me of many others from our side which express opinions widely shared, but not acted upon.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase ""her knowledge of the different strains is appalling"


Why do you lie?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase "it is certainly true that Amendment 64 has had no effect whatsoever on patients' rights to use medicinal cannabis"


Another entry for your Archive of Shame.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...