Clean energy standards must apply to cannabis

Wes Moore and Del. Dan Cox are polar opposites when it comes to issues crucial to Maryland voters including marijuana legalization and developing clean energy to stop climate change (“Maryland gubernatorial nominees Dan Cox, Wes Moore talk child care, paid leave and budget surplus in virtual forum,” Sept. 14). Moore’s goal to achieve 100% clean energy by 2035 is admirable, yet the Maryland State Archives reveals that only 11% was clean in 2020. Thus, it is clear that conservation must be part of the plan so that such energy sources could realistically cover our needs.

Moore also would like to see the cannabis industry prosper in a manner consistent with social equity, and the legalization of cannabis by voters this November might help accomplish that. But any expansion of this industry would overwhelm energy conservation efforts. The reason has to do with where cannabis is primarily grown — indoors — for reasons of climatic factors, product quality, higher profit and fewer lawsuits related to odor complaints. The energy for high intensity grow-lights plus temperature and humidity control means one kilogram of product generates 4,600 kilograms of carbon dioxide, according to a report issued by Evan Mills in 2012.

This figure falls within the range reported by Haley Summers and colleagues in a study out of Colorado State University in 2021. Even with the mix of efficient LED lighting already embraced by producers, the carbon footprint in Colorado was above that of the coal industry there and equivalent to having a half-million more cars on the road. From Summers’ supplementary data posted on a university webpage, cannabis has a substantially greater carbon impact per serving than other substances imbibed for pleasure, be it beer, wine, liquor, coffee, tea or cigarettes.

If Wes Moore intends to lead on the climate issue, he should be educating Maryland voters about this problem now.