Science

Not So Green: Marijuana Growers Consume 1% of National Electricity Consumption

Originally posted on Gizmodo by Casey Chan.

Marijuana Is Bad for the Environment, Compared to Other Drugs

Marijuana, hue notwithstanding, is not exactly new school green. In fact, it’s the worst drug for the environment. Marijuana growers use $5 billion worth of electricity to power lightbulbs, fans, dehumidifiers and whatever else it takes to grow weed. That’s 1% of the national electricity consumption.

Not only that, smoking a joint is worth two pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. Who knew getting high could have such environmental consequences! We’ll ignore the fact that if it was legal, growers could grow out in the open and not damage the environment with energy consumption. Thanks lawmakers. As for the other drugs: Cocaine powers the deforestation of rain forests, as farmers chop down trees to grow the coca. Also, according to National Geographic:

Farmers also use a number of harmful insecticides, fungicides, and fertilizers to grow the [coca] plants. Petroleum products are also a key ingredient in the process of turning coca into cocaine. To extract the drug from the plant, farmers mash coca leaves and soak the paste in petroleum products such as gasoline or kerosene. According to the U.S. State Department, as many as 85 quarts (80 liters) of kerosene are used to manufacture every kilogram of cocaine that makes its way to the street market.

Making meth uses energy, along with toxic ingredients like drain cleaner, lye, camping stove fuel and more. According to the EPA, the production of a pound of methamphetamine creates five or six pounds of toxic waste. Extracting heroin requires toxic substances like ammonia, acetone, hydrochloric acid, etc. that often ruins the environment the process takes place in.

Basically, any illegal drug takes a toll on Mother Earth too.

Comments (133)

1 2 3 4
  • CyberJocky
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:58am

    Not only that, smoking a joint is worth two pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. What a crock! In order for that to happen a Joint which weights like maybe a gram or two (the total source of Carbon, which makes up a fraction of it’s total mass) would have to somehow in the process of burning expand to now produce 2 pounds of Carbon Dioxide. Prove it! I want to see the experiment.

    This is propaganda folks and stupid propaganda to boot. You don’t get more mass than what you started out with unless you add something.

    Report Post » CyberJocky  
    • fertlmind
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:36am

      @CyberJocky
      I believe it is the volume of combined exhalations when one blows his hit and chokes for 15 minutes that results in the two pounds of carbon dioxide emissions resulting from smoking a single joint.

      That and the fact that the subjects who partake can no longer remember the value of pi since they started smoking pot,…

      Unless you are calculating emissions using the constant in Boston Creme or Cherry Jubilee

      Report Post » fertlmind  
    • Quagmir
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:47am

      Cyberjockey. I Believe they are taking into account everything that it took to product the said joint.

      They could as easy say it is 4 pounds of Co2 to create my toenail clippers even though they themselves produce no Co2.

      So in this statement, they did infact add something to create more Co2.

      Report Post » Quagmir  
    • MrObvious
      Posted on September 9, 2011 at 5:17am

      As if CO2 has any measurable effect on the environment anyway, short of making plants grow better.

      Report Post »  
  • drhomestead
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:45am

    Does anyone consider the propaganda machine of NatGeo reliable anymore? I sure don’t.

    Let’s balance this ridiculous article against another that summarizes the research done on the positive uses of Marijuana: http://boards.cannabis.com/medicinal-cannabis-health/161539-granny-storm-crows-list.html

    Report Post » drhomestead  
    • Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:55am

      Of course, your right. But, the fake conservatives–who purport to be freedom-lovers–want to control what people can do with their own bodies. Neo-cons are statists as bad as socialists just attacking freedom from a different “moralistic” angle!

      Rick Perry, are you pseudo-cons out of your fffing minds?

      Report Post » Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:16am

      Not ALL conservatives are fake.

      MANY of us lean libertarian… I know I do!

      I have to balance that with a bit of pragmatism, though.

      While we ideally would de-regulate many such things, we cannot simply do it overnight.
      We need to focus on restoring RESPONSIBILITY among our citizenry. (Which we once HAD.)
      FREEDOM is a great blessing that comes with great RESPONSIBILITY.

      We have too many irresponsible people, but, they enjoy all the blessings of our “freedom” and “liberty” – a lack of responsibility is what fools our “rulers” into believing they need to “control” us.

      When our own children PROVE their responsibility, we give them more privilege and liberty.

      Time for us to GROW UP, America !

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:28am

      Umm, as far as I understand it… anti-drug viewpoints come from deeply conservative values, often paleo-conservative values based on fundamentalist beliefs… The bible for example is filled with verses that discuss not putting anything into the body, that influences one’s mind… For it is a ‘temple of God’, yadda yadda.

      Neoconservatives are liberals that find conservatism…

      Both extremes in liberals and fundamentalists want to mandate control…

      If you support drugs or making drugs more free, its far from being conservative and more towards the liberal side of things.

      Hence many liberterians are more liberal than conservative on many issues.

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:30am

      The reason why Reagen was such a role model for conservatives, and hated by liberals, was he was strict with most fundamentalist religious values…

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:37am

      Its important to point out that during prohibition, it was many conservatives in the churches that wanted to ban alcohol…

      The liberals saw it as a way to add more control… So essentially both liberals and conservatives were in bed on the same issue…

      Before prohibition there really wasn‘t any such thing as a ’neocon’, during the 1930s-40′s neocons were liberals that switched over to conservative. But I think the term really invented during the 1970s?

      Report Post »  
    • Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:49am

      Real simple… Either you own yourself, or the state does. The government has no right to tell you what you can do with or to your own body.

      Report Post » Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:40pm

      That is where you’d be a classic liberal (libertarian) as opposed to classic conservativeism (not the same thing as neoconservatism).

      Classic liberal (liberterianism) is very different than classic conservatism. They were often at odds. More of a federalists vs anti-federalists issue…

      Report Post »  
    • Silversmith
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:50pm

      Can’t tell you how little I care about this info. If it’s a plant, you should be able to grow it and use it as you see fit. That’s what freedom is about. If you want to regulate the sale of it regarding age and tax – so be it, but plants should not be inherently illegal. I’m also a little tired of the “hurting mother earth” complaint being applied to most agendas. It’s a pretty easy to find a way for everything to be “bad for the planet” the way science is abridged, edited, fudged and downright falsified these days.

      Silversmith

      Report Post » Silversmith  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:52pm

      It’s interesting note in history, that prior to the 1920s several states also practiced prohibition on a state level government, several in the Northern States back in the 1850s. Obviously there were supporters of those laws, and others who felt the states were abusing their powers, and taking away freedoms…

      Many of those states suffered from black markets, smuggling and bootlegging just as much as national level prohibition caused.

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:28pm

      Another thing about prohibition, the conservative right loved it (and wanted it for a since even befoe the 1850′s even) because they believed it would bring Judeo-Christian morals and virtues back to the United States.

      The progressive movement (1890-20th century) liberal left loved it because they knew they could make a profit from the black market and crime syndicates that were bound to develop.

      It was a alliance made in hell, and the progressives used the Christian right…

      Report Post »  
    • Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 2:54pm

      SacredHonor: Your assessment is right, but both Conservatives and Neo-Cons are on the same side of this issue and many others, Conservatives tend to want the State to tell you what to do on “moral” grounds, while Neo-Cons want more force on trumped up “security” issues. Neither, support the de-criminalization of pot. Both, believe they can pass laws over your own body.

      Report Post » Libertarian B 4 Libertarians Were Cool  
    • MadeintheUSA2
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:32pm

      If marijuana is sooo bad and the government has the gall to say it has no medicinal value then why in the hell do they own the patent MMJ through the department of health and human services? I am so sick of our elected officials telling me/US what is right and what is wrong. Let me decide! I will take being around a pot smoker ANY day over a slobbering drinker! At least the oils and extracts from cannabis can actually help people who are sick with MANY illnesses and can not tolerate the poisons from big pharm!

      BTW–I am a conservative freedom lover!!

      http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

      Report Post »  
    • dhb1ibo
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 4:41pm

      It’s funny how you pot heads are all environmentalist & supporters of human rights when it comes to capitalism, but when it comes to drugs & abortion it’s all a personal attack on your bodies. Sounds more like a bunch of anti-capitalist communists to me. The nice thing about living in a free country is if you don’t like it your all free to get the hell out of it please.

      Report Post » dhb1ibo  
    • Master_and_Commander
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:07pm

      You all like to whine about how its not fair for others to tell people what to do with their bodies, but your ignoring the extremely harmful side effects it would have if it were legalized. Our children already have easy access to alcohol since they are exposed to it all the time. Imagine the devastating consequences of doing the same with marijuana. You let kids have easier access to it, you ruin thousands of more lives, all in the name of getting your selfish desires. You would really put your ”right” to marijuana over the protection of our kids? They already have to put up with all this other B.S. caused by people like you wanting to have their ”rights”.

      I’m not saying we need a nanny state telling us what to do, but really, some moderation is not outrageous. Its not sacrificing liberty, its common sense.

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:21pm

      Neocons are more or less progressive liberals that switched over to be more classically conservative.

      Conservatives have always been a more ‘security minded’ (think about it one of the reasons Lincoln wouldn‘t let the southern’s secede was related to that reason). During the Vietnam War neocons were the first ones who origianlly switched from the leftist democrats to join the conservatives to support the war for the same reasons as the conservatives (that’s when the term neocon was coined as far as I know?). Though the term has kinda been retroactively applied back to previous progressives that switched over to more classic conservative positions back in the 1940s or so.

      Come to think of it, IIRC, there was always a kind of hand and hand movement between the conservative alcohol abstinence/prohibition and the abolition movements in the northernstates. Many of the same church groups. However thankfully slavery was abolished even if it took the federal government to do it.

      Even Obama is proving himself to be a neocon, as he definitely a leftist liberal that has moved closer to the conservative positions as far as war issues are conscerned, opening up more war fronts, and taking more republican stances on war. But he’s not to be trusted, and definitely still liberal on most issues…

      Report Post »  
    • Ruler4You
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:21pm

      I wish I could tell you i trusted any ‘study’ done by the state any more. But the truth of the matter is that the state has corrupted its self with malice toward the citizens that fund it on so many vectors of “scientific veracity” historically that it precludes the assumption of reliability just because a summation has been published. When you combine the two, big business AND government, you exponentially increase the corruption factor. Can you say waste of (more) tax payer dollars?

      Report Post » Ruler4You  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:16am

    …and 99% of Dorito consumption.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • DimmuBorgir
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:24am

      well played sir

      Report Post » DimmuBorgir  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:24am

      If growing was legal the need for electricity would drop. We have this thing called the SUN that will do the same thing grow lights do and do it for free. So Marijuana isn‘t the worst thing for the enviroment GOVERNMENT TAKING AWAY PEOPLE’S FREEDOMS IS.

      Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:18am

      LOL
      good one!

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • outsidethebox
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:42pm

      Funyuns are good too!!!

      Report Post » outsidethebox  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:12am

    .
    They just need to legalize the Weed.

    It‘s the only way we’re gonna get thru the Obama admin……..

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:55pm

      Love to see Obama have a Weed Summit with Boehner, Cantor et al.!

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
  • Tizzodd70
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:58am

    This report suggests that only environmentalists and liberals smoke. It also lumps marijuana in with cocaine and meth, a connection only an inexperienced and short sighted person would make. It’s like hearing a child tell you how life is. You can’t learn everything by reading book or watching TV. There are or some things you have to experience firsthand. It may not change your position but at least you can speak with experience, or in this case speak less.

    Report Post » Tizzodd70  
    • dthomps6
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:12am

      yeah, why do so called conservatives more often than not take the stand that marijuana is as dangerous as coke or meth? No conservative, in my opinion, would ever be against legal marijuana. It was made illegal by an over zealous and paranoid government and lead by a smear campaign by an all out liberal.

      Report Post » dthomps6  
    • Brad Wesselmann
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:52am

      Don’t forget the lobbies of Monsanto and DuPont in the early to mid 20th century, because nobody would buy a nylon rope if they could buy one made of hemp at less cost. ;-) Oh yes, crony capitalism has been around a very long time!

      Report Post » Brad Wesselmann  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:07am

      As a Constitutional Conservative with libertarian leanings, I agree it would be best to de-regulate many such things.

      I think we need to focus on RESTORING our citizenry to a state of SELF-RELIANCE and INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY and INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY (which I contend we ONCE HAD). With a responsible citizenry, we would be in a much better position to deregulate such things.

      As it stands, we now have a “patchwork” (as obama’s socialist democrat camp calls it) of conflicting laws on regulating a PLANT (marijuana).

      Not to mention, MARIJUANA is LEGAL in several states, but, ephedra is ILLEGAL !!!
      A family member with asthma has found NO prescription medication that alleviates their asthma symptoms as well as ephedra did before BIG PHARMA convinced the FDA to make it a FEDERAL CRIME to sell in the U.S.

      Let’s see:
      Poppies – ILLEGAL PLANTS
      Hemp – ILLEGAL PLANTS
      Ephedra – ILLEGAL PLANTS

      But, you can get oxycontin, and vicodin from your doctor if you complain of chronic pain.

      Yep! That sounds like an UNBIASED, LEGITIMATE food and drug policy!!

      NOT!!
      .
      .
      .

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 11:43am

      Probably because anti-drug and anti-alcohol comes from more conservative fundamentalist belief system…

      It’s more of a true conservative viewpoint than liberterian. Libertarians are classic liberals, as opposed to classic conservatism (not neoconservatism)…

      Report Post »  
    • Chuck Stein
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:24pm

      @ Sacredhonor1776
      A good discourse on neoconservatism, but also watch out for those who use “neo-con” in an anti-semitic fashion (I have seen it on the Blaze — directed at me)

      @ Tomferrari
      Right on as regards personal responsibility. Vis-a-vis U.S. drug policy, a big step would be to stop SUBSIDIZING drug use — if someone who is otherwise entitled to a government check tests positive for drugs, then the check gets sent to a rehab program.

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:35pm

      Chuck, I’ll keep that mind, and try to keep my eyes open… I can’t stand anti-semitism… One day they will come for me, I may not have jewish beliefs, but my ancestors were pushed out during Russian Pogram…, and if they hadn’t left German before WW1, more than likely they would have been killed when Hitler rose ot power… As it is I probably did lose cousisn in the Holocaust…

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 5:22pm

      Chuck Stein,

      “If someone who is otherwise entitled to a government check tests positive for drugs, then the check gets sent to a rehab program.”

      Why stop there? Also drug-test everybody who claims an earned-income tax credit, claims a home mortgage or business deduction, gets military pay or VA benefits, or receives a farm subsidy.

      Where is the end of it?

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Chuck Stein
      Posted on September 9, 2011 at 1:07am

      @ Lloyd Drako

      Why should there be an end to it? My investment portfolio is weighted 80% in drug testing lab stocks. Just kidding.
      I really don’t know what the “practical” limit is for drug testing. I know that when I was in the USN, I occasionally gave a random sample. I suspect that if there had been a positive result, that my “government check” would have stopped pretty soon thereafter. Should welfare recipients‘ drug use be subsidized through sailors’ taxes when sailors themselves are in deep trouble if they use drugs? According to the state of things — apparently so.

      Report Post »  
  • SamIamTwo
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:21am

    Wait if they use that much then they are paying for it, right? I’m confused…I’m not paying their electric bill, that’s for certain. LOL

    And personally I could care less about the bloody ozone layer now that the space shuttle has stopped poking holes in it…now we can get on an air to mud missile to do our space lab thangie and blame the ruuskies…yeah. Silliness.

    Report Post » SamIamTwo  
  • R2
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:04am

    Make them use solar or windmills to power their little grow houses. Then bust them for growing this stuff that is illegal.

    Report Post »  
  • wethepeoplepress
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:03am

    Anything to vilify what they can not control.

    Shame on the Blaze for pumping kaka unless you believe there are more pot growers than street lights too.

    Report Post » wethepeoplepress  
  • zen2nite
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:53am

    This smells like the work of Al Gore.

    Report Post »  
  • ares338
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:46am

    How, do you suppose they came up with that percentage? I’m sure the pot growers willingly participated in a survey to come up with this figure (sarcasm intended).

    Report Post » ares338  
    • rabblechat
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:17am

      They pulled it out of thin air. As you point out, there is no way to accurately gather such information.
      This is just another opportunity for the media to lump in Marijuana with Cocaine, Heroin and Meth.
      Notice how the headline references Marijuana, but the lions share of the article actually talks about hard drugs?

      Report Post » rabblechat  
  • ZABO
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:35am

    as the great chuckie heston once said at the nra convention.they will have to pry it from my cold dead hands. that’s what i will say to the electric co. with my gun and their smart meter. meaning they will never get that device on or inside my home. oh but they will insist right. but i’ll just say those dam kids keep knocking it off sir. or my new favorite one “the buzzing is driving me mad with insanity sir.” say yes to pot(if over 18)and just say NO to the smart meter!!!!

    Report Post »  
  • altar-ego
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:23am

    what a bunch a crap!!! HOW CAN ‘THEY’ (or anyone really) FIGURE ANY CERTAIN PERCENTAGE of power’s being used, in ‘drug-manufacturing’ (or growing a plant indoors,which isnt drug manufacturing @all), if these opperations are ILLEGAL? (I.E. HOW DO THEY DO THE SURVEYING TO ARRIVE@ A GUESSTIMATE?) ‘they’, whomever gathered the ‘facts’ for this story,are just that much smarter than the rest of us i guess? are these the same ppl that tell us when an ounce of marijuana is seized is worth $2,000 (street-level value)? that must be sum AAA+,PUBLIC-SECTOR-UNION-LABOR-GANJA YOU’RE FARMING THERE,DUDE!…DUH U DUMB$@!%, IT TAKES ENERGY TO PRODUCE ANYTHING!!! and why the hell is THIS a concern? if you legalized it,it wouldn’t be such a bad thing if 1% of electricity was being used to cultivate a plant that has FAR-REACHING ADVANTAGES, other than just smoking/eating for a good time.hemp is about as profitable/useful as the soybean BUT ITS MADE ILLEGAL? AND COLD FUSION TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE SAFE,SUSTAINABLE,RENEWABLE,CLEAN–BUT IS BEING SHUNNED BY ANY/ALL MASS MEDIA,CORPORATIONS,INDUSTRY. never thought i lived in bizzaro-world. Next thing you know they‘ll be trying to tell us that we cant grow ’too much’ of our own food-that we’ll need and epa/usda fed inspector to look over food that we donate to our church soup kitchens,or that they killed bin laden but wont offer any proof, or make us buy a product even if we dont want it,or face fines/jail time.THAT,WILL BE CRA

    Report Post » altar-ego  
    • loriann12
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:31am

      If you look at the history, Pot was made illegal because at the time, mostly hispanics and blacks were the ones smoking it. It was another racial thing from the Democrats. now the pharmacutical business wouldn’t allow it to be legalized. And the government will never legalize it unless they could tax the crap out of it. It’s not like tobacco, anyone can grow it and the only processing is drying.

      Report Post »  
    • altar-ego
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:48am

      i know, its bout high time that we change that incorrection now, its been bout 100 yrs…are we EVER gonna amend that whole mistake? i mean there are FAR MORE ppl in this country that smoke or HAVE smoked than ppl who see it as satan’s foot-hold. sum of the best outdoor comes from the mid-west!!! kentucky’s does 2 of my fav things very well, weed n whiskey—i’ll smoke n drink to that!

      Report Post » altar-ego  
    • Brad Wesselmann
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:57am

      Too late, that authority has already been granted through Executive Order 13575…read it and don’t forget it because it is the authorization for the Central Committee and the American Politburo.

      Report Post » Brad Wesselmann  
  • 80mesh
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:22am

    this is the only part of the economy thats actually doing well … pot farmers are buying hose, fertilizer, air pots, potting soil, lights, hiring crews at $20 to trim product etc etc. check california on what their largest cash crop is

    Report Post » 80mesh  
  • Tickdog
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:22am

    and if you know this why arent you busting their a$$?

    Report Post » Tickdog  
    • On The Bayou
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:26am

      They`re not being busted because they are potential Democratic Voters.

      Report Post » On The Bayou  
    • dthomps6
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 9:14am

      @on the bayou

      You are absolutely wrong on that one. Just as many conservatives smoke pot. Liberals are just more blatent about it.

      Report Post » dthomps6  
  • maryjanesuncle
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:20am

    Stories like this cheapen everyone involved with the Blaze, bad numbers, bad writing…you sound like Dems.

    Report Post » maryjanesuncle  
    • d0z3y
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 10:00am

      smokin mary jane is not as healty as you think, but bashing other people about stating there opinions is very childish on your behalf

      Report Post » d0z3y  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 12:53pm

      Why so? This is not a question that neatly divides right from left, hence it’s likely to provoke lively discussion. All to the good.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
  • maumau
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:13am

    haha let them grow outside photosynthesis costs nothing and that helps the environment not to mention the added benifits of hemp paper clothes rope lotion you can make hemp milk they want you to think they are all the same but they are not. but its funny they tried anyway….

    Report Post » maumau  
  • NewLife56
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:07am

    All the Marijuana stuff tickles me, of course all of us smokers are evil and they are even banning public smoking now in places, and spreading, but Marijuana? They are even starting public Marijuana smoking area’s. Our nation is Bass Ackwards

    Report Post » NewLife56  
    • UlyssesP
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 8:29am

      You’re not evil, just paying more than half the price of that pack of smokes in taxes to fund inner-city abortion clinics. Enjoy that next cigarette…
      That‘s finally what brought me to the place where I haven’t touched a cig in over a year. Thank you Obama for helping make me aware of being over taxed (over 60% of a pack is taxes in FL) and helping me quit. Seeing pictures of Obama with a cigarette dangling from his mouth like the fool he is helped.

      Report Post » UlyssesP  
  • Rayblue
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:57am

    They may consume 1% of electricity, but they consume 99% of potato chips.
    The police should monitor Lays.
    Also RC Cherry Cola.

    Report Post » Rayblue  
  • wildbill_b
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:55am

    I am sorry, but the absurdity of this claim is so easy to disprove.

    Growers use Halides and low pressure sodium bulbs to grow their pot. That is the EXACT same bulbs used in security lights and STREET LIGHTS.

    Now who actually believes that the growers have MORE street lights running than say Los Angeles by itself? Sch utter BS pushed by the government. They believe you are retarded and can’t think for yourself. Are you?

    Report Post »  
    • Inbred Jed
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:10am

      @wildbill_b

      It is nice to see someone have facts. There is no way that marijuana growers constitute 1% of the national energy use.

      Report Post » Inbred Jed  
  • 100 Million Patriots Standing
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:52am

    Remember the coming Smart Meter – the new intelligent electric meter attached to your home to monitor electric usage..transmits a signal to the electric company….can monitor electricity usage inside your home – soon to be cconnected to Smart Appliances so the administrators at the other end (including the feds) can see what exactly you are up to with each electric device. So much for privacy…..and don;t think that the cops won’t know which house to raid…simply based on electric consumption……at this rate our loss of complete freedom – is soon.

    Report Post » 100 Million Patriots Standing  
    • jcizarter
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:00am

      that smart meter is adding about 20. dollars to my bill since they put it in.
      Encor is charging me for LIFE for the privelege of a meter that they no longer have to get out of their cars and read. WHAT?

      Report Post » jcizarter  
    • Fina Biscotti
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 7:11am

      Obama’s Asst. Secretary to Dept of Energy – CATHY ZOI – owns stock in the company that manufactures SMART METERS.

      Kickbacks – anyone?

      Report Post »  
  • Chet Hempstead
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:51am

    To whoever wrote the headline:

    Not So Green: Marijuana Growers Consume 1% of National Electricity Consumption

    Consuming consumption is redundant. Until you go to English class and they teach you about redundancy, you should let your mommy or daddy check your headlines before you post them.

    Report Post »  
  • On The Bayou
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:49am

    To live in this country you need to be high.

    Report Post » On The Bayou  
  • biohazard23
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:40am

    Wow. Can’t you just hear it: “But cigarettes and alcohol are sooooooo much worse because… because…. uh….” Now, how many hybrid-driving Ed Begleys out there will stop doing drugs to save Mother Earth?

    Report Post » biohazard23  
  • jcizarter
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:38am

    What a bunch of nut balls…“according to the EPA” Really? The EPA who has shut down coal plants here in my area, REALLY? Third World Country status, here we come!
    They want to distract you while they close the USA down.

    Now they say we can’t drill for oil because of a lizard, REALLY?
    http://patriotupdate.com/videos/reptile-blocking-oil-in-texas
    Bring that lizard to my house and I will keep it safe, OK?

    Report Post » jcizarter  
    • jcizarter
      Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:55am

      The Lame Article says “Basically, any illegal drug takes a toll on Mother Earth too.”

      Earth is a planet made by YHWH, she is not my mother, even religious people use this saying…very sickening. I do not worship the creation, I worship the creator.
      How about an illegal President? Has he taken a toll on this planet?
      I am talking about all the voter discrepancies that occured in 2008, like Disney Characters that voted, like fraud at the Houston Dem Caucus. Like ACORN rounding up street people to vote 100 times and giving them cigarettes and trips across state line to vote over and over. That election was a sham.

      Report Post » jcizarter  
  • tower7femacamp
    Posted on September 8, 2011 at 6:28am

    like Newt
    Little Green Man
    But he isn’t all fight. There’s also the kinder, gentler Newt who, in April 2008, cuddled up with current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on a love seat at the National Mall to make a “We Can Solve It” television commercial (for Al Gore’s $300 million global-warming ad campaign) urging constituents to pressure their Representatives in Washington to go green. He said that “our country must take action to address climate change.” Yet when he explained his participation at newt.org, he admitted, “I don’t think that we have conclusive proof of global warming [or] that humans are at the center of it.” This is ludicrous. If Gingrich intends to take a side in the debate, he is de facto conceding that climate change is real and humans are the cause. He is yielding to a false premise, and any “compromise” solution based on it will be disastrous.

    Gingrich’s blog explains further, “There is a big difference between left-wing environmentalism … and a Green Conservatism that wants to use science, technology, innovation, entrepreneurs and prizes to find a way to creatively invent the kind of environmental future we all want.” (Emphasis added.) He fails to acknowledge that the Constitution prohibits federal involvement in those areas, but the really troubling word is “prizes.” This has cap and trade written all over it. Gingrich already sanctioned cap and trade on sulfur dioxide emissions in the 1990 Clean Air Act. He claims to

    Report Post » tower7femacamp  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love