The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6/3/2015 - STAFF REPORTS - 3.A. OF 4AlM SA? i ,'L N CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT r . C1I F01tN\' DATE: June 3, 2015 LEGISLATION SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 5.35.110 AND 5.35.120 OF, AND ADDING SUBSECTION C TO SECTION 5.35.340 OF, THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MEDICAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED MEDICAL CANNABIS COOPERATIVES OR COLLECTIVES FROM FOUR (4) TO SIX (6). FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: Douglas Holland, City Attorney SUMMARY The City's existing comprehensive medical cannabis regulatory program limits the number of medical cannabis cooperatives or collectives in the city and only allows cultivation of cannabis within the location of each medical cannabis cooperative, or collective. This Ordinance increases the number of permitted medical cannabis cooperatives or collectives to 6 and allows permitted cooperatives and collectives to engage in cannabis cultivation at locations other than the locations of the collective or cooperative. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Waive text and introduce for first reading an Ordinance of the City Council "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 5.35.110 AND 5.35.120 OF, AND ADDING SUBSECTION C TO SECTION 5.35.340 OF, THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MEDICAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED MEDICAL CANNABIS COOPERATIVES OR COLLECTIVES FROM FOUR (4) TO SIX (6)-" Douglas Holland David H. Ready, Es City Attorney City Manager Attachment: Draft Ordinance REM NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 5.35.110 AND 5.35.120 OF, AND ADDING SUBSECTION C TO SECTION 5.35.340 OF, THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MEDICAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED MEDICAL CANNABIS COOPERATIVES OR COLLECTIVES FROM FOUR (4) TO SIX (6). City Attorney Summary The City's existing comprehensive medical cannabis regulatory program limits the number of medical cannabis cooperatives or collectives in the city and only allows cultivation of cannabis within the location of each medical cannabis cooperative, or collective. This Ordinance increases the number of permitted medical cannabis cooperatives or collectives to 6 and allows permitted cooperatives and collectives to engage in cannabis cultivation at locations other than the locations of the collective or cooperative. The City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, ordains: SECTION 1. Section 5.35.110 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code is amended by adding the following definition of "Medical Cannabis Cultivation Facility" to the Palm Springs Municipal Code: "Medical Cannabis Cultivation Facility" or "MCCF" means a fully enclosed building or portion of a building that is solely used for the purpose of planting, growing, harvesting, drying, processing, or storage of one or more cannabis or marijuana plants or any part thereof. SECTION 2. Section 5.35.120 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code is amended to read: 5.35.120 Maximum Number of Medical Cannabis Cooperatives and Collectives. No more than six (6) permitted MCCCs shall be maintained or operated in the City at any time. This maximum number or permitted MCCCs shall not include any MCCF approved pursuant to Section 5.35.340.0 of this Code. SECTION 3. Subsection C is added to Section 5.35.340 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code to read: C. Medical Cannabis Cultivation Facility. 02 Ordinance No. _ Page 2 1. Each permitted MCCC may operate and maintain one (1) MCCF, subject to the requirements of the City's Zoning Code. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit two or more permitted MCCCs may operate or maintain such MCCF. 2. One hundred percent (100%) of all cannabis or marijuana cultivated at each MCCF shall be distributed solely to a MCCF permitted pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. 3. Each MCCF shall be used exclusively for cultivation and for no other use or purpose. This prohibition includes without limitation distribution or sales to patients. 4. No Person shall cultivate, plant, grow, harvest, dry, process, or store one or more cannabis or marijuana plants or any part thereof in the City unless such activity has been approved or authorized pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same, or the summary thereof, to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law and this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL THIS DAY OF 2015. STEPHEN P. POUGNET, MAYOR ATTEST: JAMES THOMPSON, CITY CLERK 03 Ordinance No. _ Page 3 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ) I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Ordinance No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on the _ day of , 2015, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2015, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JAMES THOMPSON, CITY CLERK City of Palm Springs, California 04 Study- Pot Growers Inhale 1%of U.S. Electricity, Exhale GHGs of 3... http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/04/11/llgeenwire-study-pot-gr... the;\du flork gima i AR a�f UJUING CROWD April 11,2011 Study: Pot Growers Inhale i% of U.S. Electricity, Exhale GHGs of 3M Cars By COLIN SULLIVAN of Indoor marijuana cultivation consumes enough electricity to power 2 million average-sized U.S. homes,which corresponds to about 1 percent of national power consumption, according to a study by a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Researcher Evan Mills' study notes that cannabis production has largely shifted indoors, especially in California,where medical marijuana growers use high-intensity lights usually reserved for operating rooms that are 500 times more powerful that a standard reading lamp. The resulting price tag is about $5 billion in annual electricity costs, said Mills, who conducted and published the research independently from the Berkeley lab. The resulting contribution to greenhouse gas emissions equals about 3 million cars on the road, he said. Narrowing the implications even further reveals some staggering numbers. Mills said a single marijuana cigarette represents 2 pounds of CO2 emissions, an amount equal to running a ioo-watt light bulb for 17 hours. "The added electricity use [to an average home] is equivalent to running about 30 refrigerators," Mills wrote. "Processed cannabis results in 3,000 times its weight in CO2 emissions. For off-grid production, it requires 7o gallons of diesel fuel to produce one indoor cannabis plant, or 140 gallons with smaller,less-efficient gasoline generators." Mills went on to compare an average pot-growing facility to the electric power intensity of a data center. In California, which is the top producing state and one of 17 states to allow medical use of marijuana, cultivation accounts for 3 percent of all electricity use and 8 percent of household use, he said. Mills added that he completed his research with no external sponsorship, insisting that he does not mean to pass judgment on the merits of cannabis cultivation or use. He also suggested that the minimal amount of information available and the almost complete lack of regulation of the industry mean energy consumption could easily be lowered. 61k-A16 254-c17T- 1 of 2 6/3/2015 4:20 PM Study- Pot Growers Inhale 1%of U.S. Electricity, Exhale GHGs of 3... htip://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/04/11/1lgreenwire-study-pot-gr._. "If improved practices applicable to commercial agricultural greenhouses are any indication, the energy use for indoor cannabis production can be reduced dramatically," he said. "Cost- effective efficiency improvements of 75 percent are conceivable,which would yield energy savings of about $25,000/year for a generic io-module growing room." Mills, a member of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, drew his data from open literature and interviews with horticultural equipment retailers. By some estimates, marijuana has long been the largest cash crop in the United States-- ahead of corn, soybeans and hay. The industry has been pegged at about $4o billion in value,with California,Tennessee, Kentucky, Hawaii and Washington the top five production states. Water consumption is also an issue when it comes to environmental impact,with each marijuana plant said to need between 3 and 5 gallons of water per day to grow to fruition. Click here (pdf) to read Mills' study. Sullivan is based in San Francisco. Copyright 2011 E&E Publishing.All Rights Reserved. For more news on energy and the environment, visit www._greenwire.com. Greenwire is published by Environment&Energy Publishing. Read More >> 2 of2 6/3/2015 4:20 PM ENERGY UP IN SMOKE THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF INDOOR CANNABIS PRODUCTION Evan Mills, Ph.D.s April 5, 2011 * The research described in this report was conducted and published independently by the author, a long-time energy analyst and Staff Scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California. Scott Zeramby provided valuable insights into technology characteristics, equipment configurations, and market factors that influence energy utilization. The report can be downloaded from: http://evan-mills.com/energy-associates/Indoor.html On occasion,previously unrecognized spheres of energy use come to light. Important examples include the pervasive air leakage from ductwork in homes,the bourgeoning energy intensity of computer datacenters, and the electricity "leaking" from millions of small power supplies and other equipment. Intensive periods of investigation, technology R&D, and policy development gradually ensue in the wake of these discoveries. The emergent industry of indoor Cannabis production appears to have joined the list. This report presents a model of the modern-day production process—based on public sources and equipment vendor data—and provides national scoping estimates of the energy use, costs, and greenhouse-gas emissions associated with this activity in the United States.] Large-scale industrialized and highly energy-intensive indoor cultivation of Cannabis is a relatively new phenomenon, driven by criminalization, pursuit of security, and the desire for greater process control and yields.''' The practice occurs in every state,4 and the 415,000 indoor plants eradicated in 20095 represent only the tip of the iceberg. Aside from sporadic news reports,0 7 policymakers and consumers possess little information on the energy implications of this practice.' Substantially higher electricity demand growth is observed in areas reputed to have extensive indoor Cannabis cultivation. For example, following the legalization of cultivation for medical purposes in California in 1996, Humboldt County experienced a 50% rise in per-capita residential electricity use compared to other areas°Cultivation is today legal in 17 states, albeit not federally sanctioned. In California,400,000 individuals are authorized to grow Cannabis for personal medical use, or sale to 2,100 dispensaries.10 Official estimates of total U.S. production varied from 10,000 to 24,000 metric tons per year in 2001,4 making it the nation's largest crop by value.'' As of 2006, one third of national indoor production was estimated to occur in California.12 Based on a rising number of consumers (6.6% of U.S. population above the age of 12),13 national production in 2011 is estimated for the purposes of this study at 17,000 metric tons, one-third occurring indoors.14 Driving the large energy requirements of indoor production facilities are lighting levels matching those found in hospital operating rooms (500-times greater than recommended for reading) and 30 hourly air changes (6-times the rate in high-tech laboratories, and 60- times the rate in a modem home). Resulting electricity intensities are 200 watts per square foot, which is on a par with modem datacenters. Indoor carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are often raised to four-times natural levels in order to boost plant growth. Specific energy uses include high-intensity lighting, dehumidification to remove water vapor, space heating during non-illuminated periods and drying, irrigation water pre- heating, generation of CO2 by burning fossil fuel,and ventilation and air-conditioning to remove waste heat. Substantial energy inefficiencies arise from air cleaning, noise and odor suppression, and inefficient electric generators used to avoid conspicuous utility bills. Based on these operational factors, the energy requirements to operate a standard production module—a 4x4x8 foot chamber—are approximately 13,000 kWh/year of electricity and 1.5 x 106 BTU/year of fossil fuel. A single grow house can contain 10 or more such modules. Power use scales to about 20 TWh/year nationally (including off-grid production and power theft), equivalent to that of 2 million average U.S. homes. This corresponds to 1% of national electricity consumption or 2% of that in households--or the output of 7 large electric power plants.15 This energy, plus transportation fuel, is valued at $5 billion annually, with associated emissions of 17 million metric tons of CO2— equivalent to that of 3 million average American cars. (See Figure 1 and Tables 1-5.) 1 Fuel is used for several purposes, in addition to electricity. Carbon dioxide, generated industrially16 or by burning propane or natural gas, contributes about 2%to the carbon footprint. Vehicle use for production and distribution contributes about 15% of total emissions, and represents a yearly expenditure of$l billion. Off-grid diesel-and gasoline- fueled electric generators have emissions burdens that are three- and four-times those of average grid electricity in California. It requires 70 gallons of diesel fuel to produce one indoor Cannabis plant, or 140 gallons with smaller, less-efficient gasoline generators. In California, the top-producing state, indoor cultivation is responsible for about 3% of all electricity use or 8% of household use, somewhat higher than estimates previously made for British Columbia.17 This corresponds to the electricity use of 1 million average California homes, greenhouse-gas emissions equal to those from 1 million average cars, and energy expenditures of$3 billion per year. Due to higher electricity prices and cleaner fuels used to make electricity, California incurs 70%of national energy costs but contributes only 20% of national COz emissions from indoor Cannabis cultivation. From the perspective of individual consumers, a single Cannabis cigarette represents 2 pounds of CO2 emissions, an amount equal to running a 100-watt light bulb for 17 hours assuming average U.S. electricity emissions (or 30 hours on California's cleaner grid). The emissions associated with one kilogram of processed Cannabis are equivalent to those of driving across country 5 times in a 44-mpg car. One single 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 30 refrigerators. Producing one kilogram of processed Cannabis results in 3,000 kilograms of CO2 emissions. The energy embodied in the production of inputs such as fertilizer, water, equipment, and building materials is not estimated here and should be considered in future assessments. Minimal information and consideration of energy use, coupled with adaptations for security and privacy, lead to particularly inefficient configurations and correspondingly elevated energy use and greenhouse-gas emissions. If improved practices applicable to commercial agricultural greenhouses are any indication, such large amounts of energy are not required for indoor Cannabis production."Cost-effective efficiency improvements of 75% are conceivable, which would yield energy savings of about $25,000/year for a generic 10-module operation. Shifting cultivation outdoors virtually eliminates energy use (aside from transport), although, when mismanaged,the practice imposes other environmental impacts.19 Elevated moisture levels associated with indoor cultivation can cause extensive damage to buildings. °Electrical fires are an issue as well?1 For legally sanctioned operations, the application of energy performance standards, efficiency incentives and education, coupled with the enforcement of appropriate construction codes could lay a foundation for public-private partnerships to reduce undesirable impacts.22 Were compliant operations to receive some form of independent certification and product labeling, environmental impacts could be made visible to otherwise unaware consumers. Current indoor Cannabis production and distribution practices result in prodigious energy use, costs, and greenhouse-gas pollution. The hidden growth of electricity demand in this sector confounds energy forecasts and obscures savings from energy efficiency programs and policies. More in-depth analysis and greater transparency in the energy impacts of this practice could improve decision-making by policymakers and consumers alike. 2 FiLyure 1. Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production CO2 1EIe generator High-intensity lamps HeaterVentilated Light fixture � d f, Water purifier generator Submersib Drying `„ Water heater 1% Vehicles 16% _ 77 Water handling Lighting w Pump `` _ � 1 32% z CO2 production w, Ballast Vehicles p 300 2% — Space heat 4 4% .. _ kgCOz/kgno , Indoor ` Cannabis Motorized lamp rails Air- conditioning Air conditioning 18% Ventilation& 5� LfIn-line duct fan, coupled to lights Controllers 3 Oscillating fan Dehumidifier Table 1. Configuration, Environmental Conditions, and Setpoints - Production parameters Growing module 16_square feet(excl. . walking area) .. Number of modules in a room. 10 Area of room 240 square feet Cycle duration 78 days Production continuous throughout the year 4.7 cycles Illumination _. Leafphase' Flowering phase Lamp type ,. Metal halide High-pressure sodium Watts/lamp 600: 1000 Ballast losses (mix of magnetic&digital) - 136/e 13% Lamps per growing module 1 1 Hours/day 181 12 Days/cycle 18 60 Daylighting none: none Ventilation ......... ..._... _. _...,.,. Ducted luminaires with"sealed" lighting CFM/1000W of light compartment 150,(free flow) Room ventilation (supply and exhaust fans) 30 ACH Filtration Charcoal filters on exhaust; HEPA on supply Oscilating fans: per module, while lights on 1 Water Application. 40 gallons/room-day Heating - Electric submersible heaters 75 F _. Space conditioning Indoor setpoint-day 82 F Indoor setpoint- night 68 70 F AC efficiency 10.0 SEER Dehumidification 7x24 hours CO2 production -target concentration (mostly natural gas combustion in space) 1500 ppm Electric space heating when lights off to maintain indoor setpoint Target indoor humidity conditions 40-50% Fraction of lighting system heat production 300/ removed by luminaire ventilation Ballast location Outside conditioned space Drying Space conditioning, oscillating fans, maintaining 7.days 50% RH, 70-80F Electricity supply.... ._.. . ._. grid 85% grid-independent generation (mix of diesel, 15%'. propane, and gasoline) Vehicle use workers during production 2089 vehicle miles/cycle wholesale distribution 750 vm/cycle retail distribution 1 bounce 3520 vm/c cle 4 Table 2. Assumptions & conversion factors Fuels _.S.ervice Levels _.._. .._... _ . .. Propane[b] 91,033BTU/gallon Illuminance* 25-100,OOO lux Diesel [b] 138,690 BTU/gallon Airchange rates* 30 changes per hour Gasoline [b] 124,238 BTU/gallon Operations - Electric Generation Mix* Cycle duration** 78 days _ Grid 85% share Cycles/year** 4.7 continuous production Diesel generators 8% share Production module area* 16 square feet(excl walking area) Propane generators S% share Production module volume** 192 cubic feet Airflow** 96 cubic.feet per minute Gasoline generators 2%.share Modules per room` 10 Emissions Factors Lighting _ Grid electricity -US[c] 0.609 kgCO2/kWh Leafing phase Grid electricity -CA[c] 0.384 kgCO2/kWh Lighting on-time*.. 18 hrs/day Grid electricity -non-CA US [c] 0.648 kgCO2/kWh Duration* 18 days/cycle Diesel generator** 0,9221 kgCO2/kWh Flowering phase Propane generator-- 0.877kgCO2/kWh Lighting on-time* 12hrs/day Gasoline generator** 1.533',kgCO2/kWh Duration" 60 days/cycle Blended generator mix** 0989',kgCO2/kWh Drying ,. Blended on/off-grid generation -CA** 0475.kgCO2/kWh Hours/day- 24 hrs Blended on/off-grid generation -US** 0.666 kgCO2/kWh Duration* 7 days/cycle Propane combustion 63.1 <9CO2/MBTU Equipment Prices Average air-conditioning age 5 years Electricity price -grid (California - PG&E) [d] $0.390',per kWh(Tier 5) Air conditioner efficiency(SEER) 10 Minimum standard as of 1/2006 Electricity price -grid (US, excl..CA) [e] $0.127'.per kWh Electricity price Fraction of lighting system heat production -gff-gnd** $0.390 per kWh removed by luminaire ventilation 30^/0 Electricity price -blended on/off- CA** $0.390 per kWh Diesel generator efficiency* 27% 551<W Electricity price - blended on/off- US** $0.166 per kWh Propane generator efficiency* 2S% 27kW Propane Price[f] $2.20.per gallon Gasoline generator efficiency* 15% 5.5kW Gasoline Price -US average [f] $3 68 per gallon Fraction of total prgd'n with generators* 15% Diesel Price US average[f] $3 981.per gallon -Water use findcorl* I gallons/day plant - Wholesale price of Cannabis [g] $4,000.$/kg Transportation: Production phase(10 modules) 25 miles roundtrip Production Daily service(1 vehicle) 78 trips/cycle.Assume 20% Irve plants per production module* 4.' on site - - Biweekly service(2 vehicles) 11 trips/cycle - - - Net production per production module [h] 0 7'kg/cycle Harvest(2 vehicles) _ _ 10 trips/cycle US production (2011) [i] 16,974;metric tonnes/y Total vehicle miles** 2089.vehicle miles/cycle California production (2011) [i] 5,922 metric tonnes/y Transportation: Distribution Fraction produced indoors[i] 33% Amount transported wholesale. - 5 kg per trip _. . US indoor production modules** 1,727,283 Mileage(roundtrip) 750 vm/cycle Calif indoor production modules** 602,597- Retail(0 25oz x 5 miles roundtrip) 3520 vm/cycle -- - - Total** 4270 vm/cycle Cigarettes per kg** _ 3,000!, _,...,.._,Fuel economy, typical car [a] 22 mpg Other -- _.- Average refrigerator 450';kWh/ ear Annual emissions,typical car [a] 5195 kg CO2 g 9 Y _.__.. -. 0.416 kg CO2/mile 173 kgCO2/year(US Annual emissions,44 mpg car** "` 2598 kg CO2 average) 0.208 kg CO2/mile Electricity use of a typical US home- 2009 [7] 11,646.kWh/year Electricity use of a typical California home- Cross-country US mileage 2790 miles 6,96E kWh/year +* trade and product literature; interviews with equipment vendors ** calculated from other values 5 Table 3, Carbon footprint of indoor Cannabis Production (Average US conditions) kWh/kg kgCO2emissions/kgr Lighting 1,479 985 32.2% Ventilation & Dehumid. 1,197' 797 26.1% Air conditioning 827 551 18.0% _ . Space heat 197 131 ` 4.3% CO2 production 54 r 49 1.6% Water handling 28 19; 0.6% _._ Drying _. 73 48 1.6% Vehicles 479 15.7% Total 3,855 3,059 ' 100.0% Note: "CO2 production" represents combustion fuel to make on-site CO2. Assumes 15% of electricity is produced in off-grid generators. As the fuels used for CO2 contain moisture, additional dehumidification is required (and allocated here to the CO2 energy row). Air- conditioning associated with CO2 production (as well as for lighting, ventilation, and other incidentals) is counted in the air-conditioning category. 6 Table 4. Equivalencies Indoor Cannabis production U of California's total o of California's n of total US o of US 3 la 8 /o household 1 /o electricity, 2 /o household consumes._ electricity, and electricity and electricity million '. tonnes per U.S. Cannabis production &distribution $5 Billion, and results in the 17 '.. year of equal to the 3 averlion age energy cost... emissions of greenhouse emissions of 'gas emissions cars (CO2) U.S. electricity use for Cannabis 2 million average US homes production is equivalent to that of... million tonnes per million California Cannabis production and Billion, and results in the year of equal to the distribution energy cost $3 emissions of 4 greenhouse : emissions of 1 average ':. gas emissions cars (CO2) California electricity use for Cannabis 1 million average California :. production is equivalent to that of... homes A typical 4x4x8-foot production average average module, accomodating four plants at a 1 average U.S. homes, or 2 California or 28 new time, consumes as much electricity as... homes refrigerat ors Every 1 kilogram of Cannabis produced : cross-country trips using national-average grid power 2.8 tonnes of CO2 equivalent to 4.9 in a co mpg car results in the emissions of... Every 1 kilogram of Cannabis produced using a prorated mix of grid and off- 3 1 tonnes of CO2 equivalent to 5,3 cross-country trips grid generators results in the emissions in a 44mpg car of.. Every 1 kilogram of Cannabis produced untry trips using off-grid generators results in the 4.3 tonnes of CO2 equivalent to 7.4 in a cross-country mpg car emissions of.. kilograms . .. . of CO2 Transportation (wholesale+retail) 52 gallons of gasoline per kg or $1 billion dollars 479 per consumes._ annually, and kilogram - of final product pounds of CO2, One Cannabis cigarette is like driving... 15 miles in a 44mpg car emitting 2 which is equivalent 17 hours about to operating a 100 watt light bulb for Of the total wholesale price... 24 is for energy (at average %® U.S. prices) 7 per cycle, per'. per year, per "fable S. Indicators (Average us conditions) production production module. module Energy Use Connected Load 3,039 watts/module Power Density 190 ' watts/ft2 Elect 2,698 12,626 kWh/module Fuel to make CO2 0.3 1.5 MBTU Transportation fuel 37' 172,gallons On-grid results Energy cost 592 2,770]$/module Energy cost . . .. . _. 846 $/kg__. _. Fraction of wholesale price 21% CO2 emissions 1,988 9,302kg . .. _. CO2 emissions 2,840 kg/kg _._ Off-grid results (diesel) - ......... _,._ Energy cost 1,196 5,595 $/module Energy cost 1,708 $/kg Fraction of wholesale price 43% CO2 emissions 3,012 14,094 kg CO2 emissions 4,303 kgCO2/kq Blended on/off grid results Energy cost 682 3,194 $/module Energy cost 975,$/kg .__. Fraction of wholesale price 24% CO2 emissions 2,141 10,021 kg CO2 emissions _ 3,0591kgCO2/kg Of which indoor CO2 production 9 42 kgCO2 Of which, vehicle use Fuel use _ .. During Production 14 gallons/kg Distribution 39 gallons/kg Cost During Production - $50 $/kg Distribution $143 $/kg _. . . . _. Emissions ..... _... .. _. During Production 124 kgCO2/kg Distribution 355 k CO2/k 8 Number of'. 4x4x8-loot'. Input Hours/day.Hours/day: Days/cycle Days/cycle kWh/year per Table 6. Model Energy type Penetration Rating production energy per Units ((leaf (flower (flower kWh/cycle production modules module phase) phase)' (leaf phase). phase) module ___. _ ..._. . . ... ..served:_ Light....... . _. Lamps(HPS) elect _ 100% 1000 1 1000 W 12 60r 720 3,369 Ballasts(losses) - elect .100% 13% 1 130 W 12 60' 94' 438 Lamps(MH) elect 100% 600 1I 600 W 18 18 r 194 910 Ballast(losses) elect 100% 13% 1' 78 W 18. 18 r 25' 118 Motorized rail motion elect 5% i5 P 0.3' W is 12 18 60 0 1 Controllers elect 50% 10 10' 1 W 24 24 18 60 2 9 Ventilation and moisture control . Luminare fans(sealed from conditioned space) elect 100% 454 10". 45 W 18. 12 18 60 47 222 Main room fans-supply Bled 100% 242' 8 1'. 30 W 18 12 18 60 31 145 _ .. :. Main room fans-ezhaust elect 100% 242 B.P. 30. W 18 12 18 60 31 145 Circulating fans(18") elect 100%. 130:. 1 130 W 24. 24 18 60 242 1,134 Dehumidification elect 100% 1,035 4 259. W 24 24 18 60r 464' 2,267 Controllers elect 50% 10. 10'. 1 W 24 24 18 60 2 9 Spai Resistance heat[when lights off] : 90%. 1,850 _ 10: 167 W '. 6 12 18 60 138 645 Carbon Dioxide.... . _. Parasitic electricity elect 50-A 100 10 5 W 18 12 18 60 5 24 AC(see below) elect 100°h' _. _. ... . In-line heater elect 5% 115 301 0.6 W 1B 12 18 60 1 3 Dehumidification(10%adder) elect . . 500A 104: 0.4, 26 W IB 12 18 60r 27 126 Monitor/control elect 50% 50 30__ 3 W 24 24 18 60 5... 22 Water Heating elect 100% 300 101 30 W 18 12 18 60 19 89 Pumping-irrigation elect 100% 55. 10-. 55 W 1 1 18 60 0 2 Drying... ._ Dehumidification elect 75% 1,850 10 139 W 24 ]r 23' 109 Circulating fans elect 1D0% 130 5. 26 W : 24 ]r 4' 20 Heating elect 75% 1,650` IOI 139 W 24 ]r 23; 109 Electricity subtotal elect r 2y19 91918 Air-conditioning 579 2,709 Lighting loads 239 1,117 Loads that can be rem ted elect 100% 1,180 10: 118 W 221 1,034 '. Loads that can'[be remoted elect 100%' 450: 30: 45 W 84 394 _._.. CO2-production heat removal elect . SO%-. 1,118- 16.7- 34 W 18 12 18': 60 35 164 Electric ltv Total elect ♦ 3,039 W - 2,698 12,626 Number of'. QN-SITE FUEL Units Twhnol Rating 4x4x8-foot Input Hours/day Hours/day Days/cyde o gy' (BTU/', production! energy per (leaf (flower Days/cycle. (flower MBTU or; MBTU or Mix hour)'. modules' module phase). phase) (leaf phase). phase) koc02/ryde' koCD2/year served' On-sitnCO2 production Energy use propane 45%,.11,176'. 167'. 671 BTU/ho : Ie. 12 18 60': 0.3 1.5 CO2 production -> emissions kg/CO2 20 93 Externally produced Industrial CO2 5%. 1 0.011 gallonsC 18 12 18 60I 1 3 02/hr :Weighted-average on-site/purchased kgCO2 : 2 10 Weigh ed average on-site/purchased lug CO2 .. 9. . 42 9 Notes for Tables [a]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Emission Facts: Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks." http://www.epa.gov/oms/consumer/fDO013.htm [accessed February 5, 2011] [b]. Energy Conversion Factors, U.S. Department of Energy, http://www.eia.doe.gov/encrgyexplained/index.cfm?page=about_energy_units [Accessed February 5, 2011] [c]. U.S. Department of Energy, "Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program" http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ee-factors.htmi [Accessed February 7, 2011]. CA: Marnay, C., D. Fisher, S. Murtishaw, A. Phadke, L. Price, and J. Sathaye. 2002. "Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions Factors for the California Electric Power Sector." Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report No. 49945. http://industrial- energy.lbl.gov/node/148 [d]. PG&E residential tariff as of I/1/1 I, Tier 5 http://www.pge.com/tariffs/ResE[ecCurrent.xls [Accessed February 5, 2011]. In practice a wide mix of tariffs apply, but the relative shares are not known. [e]. State-level residential prices, weighted by Cannabis production from [Reference 4],with actual tariffs and U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Average Retail Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State," http://www.cia.doe.gov/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html [Accessed February 7, 2011] [f]. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (as of 2/14/2011) - see http://www.eia.gov/oo�,,/info/¢du/gasdiesel.asp Propane prices - http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_prop_a_EPLLPA_PTA_dpgal_m.htm [Accessed April 3, 2011] [g]. Montgomery, M. 2010. "Plummeting Marijuana Prices Create A Panic in Calif." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyld=126806429 [h]. Toonen, M., S. Ribot, and J. Thissen. 2006. "Yield of Illicit Indoor Cannabis Cultivation in the Netherlands."Journal of Forensic Science, 15(5):1050-4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/I 7018080 [i]. See Reference 14 for derivation. [j]. Total U.S. Electricity Sales: U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Retail Sales of Electricity to Ultimate Customers: Total by End-Use Sector" http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5 _I.html [Accessed March 5, 2011] [k]. California Energy Commission. "Energy Almanac." http!//energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/us per capita_electricity.htmI [Accessed February 19, 2011). See also Total California Electricity Sales: California Energy Commission. 2009. California Energy Demand: 2010-2020--Adopted Forecast. Report CEC-200-2009-012-CMF), December 2009 (includes self-generation). 10 References 1. This report presents a model of typical production methodologies and associated transportation energy use. Data sources include equipment manufacturer data, trade media, the open literature, and interviews with horticultural supply vendors. All assumptions used in the analysis are presented in Table 2. The resultant normalized (per-kilogram) energy intensity is driven by the target environmental conditions,production process, and equipment efficiencies. While less energy-intensive processes are possible (either with lower per-unit-area yields or more efficient equipment and controls), much more energy- intensive scenarios are also possible (e.g., rooms using 100% recirculated air with reheat, hydroponics, and loads not counted here such as well-water pumps and water purification systems). The assumptions about vehicle energy use are likely conservative, given the longer-range transportation associated with interstate distribution. Some localities (very cold and very hot climates) will see much larger shares of production indoors, and have higher space-conditioning energy demands than the typical conditions assumed here. Some authors [See Plecas, D. J. Diplock, L. Garis, B. Carlisle, P. Neal, and S. Landry.Journal of Criminal Justice Research, Vol. 1 No 2.,p. 1-12.] suggest that the assumption of 0.75kg yield per production module per cycle is an over-estimate. Were that the case, the energy and emissions values in this report would be even higher, which is hard to conceive. Additional key uncertainties are total production and the indoor fraction of total production (see note 14), and the corresponding scaling up of relatively well-understood intensities of energy use per unit of production to state or national levels by weight of final product. Greenhouse-gas emissions estimates are in turn sensitive to the assumed mix of on-and off-grid power production technologies and fuels, as off-grid production tends to have substantially higher emissions per kilowatt-hour than grid power. Costs are a direct function of the aforementioned factors, combined with electricity tariffs, which vary widely across the country and among customer classes. More in-depth analyses could explore the variations introduced by geography and climate, alternate technology configurations,and production techniques. 2. U.S. Department of Justice. National Drug Threat Assessment: 2010 http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs38/38661/marijuana.htm#Marijuana 3. World Drug Report: 2009. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, p. 97, http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR-2009.htmi For U.S. conditions, indoor yields per unit area are estimated as up to 15-times greater than outdoor yields. 4. Hudson, R. 2003. "Marijuana Availability in The United States and its Associated Territories." Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. Washington, D.C. (December). 129pp. See also Gettman,J. 2006. "Marijuana Production in the United States," 29pp. http://www.drui,,science.org./Archive/bcr2/app2.htmi 5. See http://www.justice.gov/dea/programs/marijuana.htm 6. Anderson, G. 2010. "Grow Houses Gobble Energy."Press Democrat, July 25.See http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100725/ARTICLES/100729664 7. Quinones, S. 2010. "Indoor Pot Makes Cash, but Isn't Green."SFGate, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.egi?f�=/c/a/2010/10/2 I/BAPO I FU9M S.DTL 8. A study by RAND appears to have severely underestimated the true energy costs. See J. P. Caulkins. 2010. "Estimated Cost of Production for Legalized Cannabis."RAND Working Paper, WR-764-RC. July. Although the study over-estimates the hours of lighting required, 11 it under-estimates the electrical demand and applies energy prices that fall far short of the inclining marginal-cost tariff structures applicable in many states, particularly California. 9. Lehman, P. and P. Johnstone. 2010. "The Climate-Killers Inside."North Coast Journal, March 11. 10. Harvey, M. 2009. "California Dreaming of Full Marijuana Legalisation." The Sunday Times, (September). http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/health/article6851523.eee 11. See Gettman, op cit., at ref 4. 12. See Gettman, op cit., at ref 4. 13. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, SAMHSA, 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health(September 2010). https://nsduhweb.rti.org/ 14. Total Production: The only official domestic estimate of U.S. Cannabis production was 10,000 to 24,000 tonnes for the year 2001. Gettman(op cit., at ref. 4)conservatively retained the lower value for the year 2006. This 2006 base is adjusted to 2011 values using 10.9%/year net increase in number of consumers between 2007 and 2009, per U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (op cit., at ref. 12). The result is approximately 17 million tonnes of total production annually (indoor and outdoor). Indoor Share of Total Production: The three-fold changes in potency over the past two decades, reported by federal sources, are attributed at least in part to the shift towards indoor cultivation [See http:/,�www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs37/37035/tiational_litm and Hudson op cit., at ref 4].A weighted-average potency of 10% THC (U.S. Office of Drug Control Policy. 2010. "Marijuana: Know the Facts"), reconciled with assumed 7.5% potency for outdoor production and 15% for indoor production implies 33.3%::67.7% indoor::outdoor production shares. For reference, as of 2008, 6%of eradicated plants were from indoor operations, which are more difficult to detect than outdoor operations. A 33% indoor share, combined with per-plant yields from Table 2, would correspond to a 4% eradication success rate for the levels reported (415,000 indoor plants eradicated in 2009)by the DEA (op cit., at ref 5). Assuming 400,000 members of medical Cannabis dispensaries in California(each of which is permitted to cultivate), and 50% of these producing in the generic 10-module room assumed in this analysis, output would slightly exceed this study's estimate of total statewide production. In practice, significant indoor production is no doubt conducted outside of the medical marijuana system. 15. Koomey, J., et al. 2010. "Defining A Standard Metric for Electricity Savings." Environmental Research Letters, 5, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014017. 16. Overcash, Y. Li, E. Griffing, and G. Rice. 2007. "A life cycle inventory of carbon dioxide as a solvent and additive for industry and in products."Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 82:1023-1038. 17. Specifically, 2% of total Provincial electricity use or 6% of residential use, as reported by BC Hydro in Garis, L. 2008. "Eliminating Residential Hazards Associated with Marijuana Grow Operations and The Regulation of Hydroponics Equipment," British Columbia's Public Safety Electrical Fire and Safety Initiative, Fire Chiefs Association of British Columbia, 108pp. See also Bellett, G. 2010. "Pot Growers Stealing $100 million in Electricity: B.C. Hydro studies found 500 Gigawatt hours stolen each year."Alberni Valley Times. October 8. Analysis by B.C. Hydra in 2006 identified nearly 18,000 residential utility accounts in Vancouver with suspiciously high electricity use [see Garis 2008]. There were an estimated 10,000 indoor operations in B.C. in the year 2003, generating $1.2413 in wholesale revenue [See Plecas et al., op cit., at ref 1.]. 12 18. See, e.g., this University of Michigan resource http://www.hrt.msu.edu/energy/Default.htm 19. "Environmental Impacts of Pot Growth." 2009. Ukiah Daily Journal. (posted at http://www.cannabisnews.org/united-states-cannabis-news/env ironmental-impacts-of- pot-growth/) 20. For observations from the building inspectors community, see http://www.nachi.org/marijuana-grow-operations.htin 21. See Garis, L., op cit., at ref 17. 22. The City of Fort Bragg, CA, has implemented elements of this in TITLE 9—Public Peace, Safety, & Morals, Chapter 9.34. http://city.fortbragg.com/pages/searchResults,lasso?- token.editChoice-9.0.0&SearchType—MC superSearch&CurrentAction—viewResult#9.32 .0 13 Bill Bradbury Jennifer Anders Chair Vice Chair Oregon Montana Henry Lorenzen Pat Smith Oregon Montana W.Bill Booth Tom Karler Idaho Northwest Power and Washington James A.Yost Conservation Council Phil Rockefeller Idaho Washington September 3, 2014 MEMORANDUM TO: Power Committee FROM: Massoud Jourabchi SUBJECT: Electrical load impacts of indoor commercial cannabis production BACKGROUND: Presenter: Massoud Jourabchi and Maggie Lahet Summary: Under state of Washington initiative 1-502 legal production of cannabis started in 2013-2014. Council analysis estimated the demand for electricity for the growers of cannabis represent about 80-163 Mwa of new load to the regional system. Relevance: Producing a long-term Load forecast is a requirement of the Act. In responding to this requirement, Council's load forecast keeps track of all forms of electricity consumptions, in particular new and emerging loads. Three such emerging loads are data centers, electric vehicles and in-door cannabis production. In this presentation we will present results of preliminary analysis on load impact from cannabis production. Workplan: 1.D. Update long-term load forecast. In preparation of the Seventh Power Plan, forecast of loads from cannabis producers will be incorporated into the long-term demand forecast. Background: The State of Washington, through its initiative process, enacted a law allowing for recreational use of cannabis. Hundreds of producers have now been licensed to grow and process cannabis. Those producers using indoor growing facilities place a significant load on the electrical system to provide lighting, HVAC and other required services for the plants. Staff conducted interviews with a number of these producers in order to develop estimates of existing and forecast of electrical loads from these operations. More Info: NA 9/3/2014 IMPACT OF CANNABIS PRODUCTION IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST ON REGIONAL ELECTRICITY LOADS September 9, 2014 Acknowledgement THIS PRESENTATION BENEFITED FROM INDUSTRY BACKGROUND WORK DONE BY CLEARESULT COMPANY. *Narthxes�Powv ancf CO.FM..ft.C�- rcti Why are we doing this study ■ Better understanding of impact of I-502 on electric loads in state of Washington. ■ Indoor cannabis production can be a very electricity intensive. ■ Provide information on energy efficiency potential for Seventh Plan development �No,mwes w...n Conwnvlkm Gauncn 1 9/3/2014 Presentation Overview ■ Growing Cycle — Why Growing Has Moved Indoors • Stages and pace of plant development in nature • Stages and pace of plant development in modern indoor growing facilities ■ Results from Council's survey of I-502 producers ■ Load Forecast Range ■ Identify Potential Energy Efficiency Options N.gMi t PON.nntl Consawib•Cwncr . -t ,tiiia IIN' i4'uz -cam—`�. 'm." Ji W 11131i'k 3; F _ d Aw4w.w' Northwest o. nntl Cervmrvdlan Cwr>Lil ' 2 9/3/2014 Estimated State Shares of National Cannabis Production (2006)* L —D t HE ,. Idaho _ ox 'As estimated by Oregon --'--Montana Federal Government .. oy� ' 1% }�Northwest rawv arM 'y�Comwvaaon Cw:c' Natures Growing Cycle Time Mid Up to Summer Mid Late Spring Solstice Summer Summer v, > Seedling Vegetative Flower Seed Plant Mode g Mode Mode Mode 12-14 weeks � "8-12 weeks LONG DAYS SHORTER, Norttr V Po Ono Cansarvallvn Cwru.i: iW 3 9/3/2014 Method of Production 120% 100% sorb Indoors 40% ■outdoors *�.,fP war d Cwvw,vft.C",e. Why producers go indoors? Indoor operations seek to: ■ Reduce cycle time • Replicate and standardize ideal outdoor conditions: • Temperature • Lighting Atmosphere • Watering • Nutrients / plant food ■ Increased security Gonwewibn Gwrw'r. 4 9/3/2014 Modern Indoor Growing Cycle Time Always Always Always Always Clone Vegetative Flower Seed Plant ModeeMode Mode Mode 6-8 weeks � � 18-10 weeks LONG DAYS SHORTER DAYS Nona ,f F..aM CtlM1iNlWWn�(KIS G 11 1 it An indoor grow module accommodating 4 planb sucks as much electricity as zg refrigerators. NorlFwest Poww nrc1 COn10fYOaOn Cwr4R 5 9/3/2014 Electricity Use in Indoor Production Nam,r,1„rrrnx� �Aluminum Production^16 KWH/kg Co-mwe"Cv rv; Indoor Cannabis production^5D00 KWH/kg Hourly Load profile of one indoor producer Producers do not have a flat profile ca—1z I TIM 11q 17"120 W-TF M 11"12 WlM.bOI a-� E I _ North a r laww nntl Contmrallon Cauru:i 6 9/3/2014 Hourly Load Shapes (one producer) Can contribute significantly to winter peak 25 20 _.. 1s 10 _. .,.._.. ,. Average ' +Maximum Minimum 0 _. _.. .-1 N M V Ul t0 n W Ot O .-1 N M V �'1 lD r W Ol O ti N M V Hour of the Day Northwest Pared oMl Co.�ss�w�Me Ce4ea� Findings from Council 's Survey of 1-502 Producers ■ 121 out 2626 Producers approved in July ■ 1,913 Processor applications ■ 2,167 Retail applications ■ 13 Indoor producers were surveyed ■ Square footage, facility layout, plant strain and number of plants etc. vary by producer ■ Lighting ,directly or indirectly, accounts for 8o% of electricity use Ncr"r OP.and C011t01YCIi�D11CWltiil 9/3/2014 Survey Results (continued) Baseline for indoor production: • Vegetation Room • i,000W Metal Halide,plus other lights • 2-8 plants per lamp • Operated 24 hours on, 18 hours on/6 hours off • Flowering room • 1000W High Pressure Sodium w/adjustable ballast 600W-1150W • 2-3 plants per lamp • Operates 12 hours on/12 hours off • HVAC • Rooms have separate HVAC and lighting • Mini split for every 1,000 sq.ft.with additional large unit • Temperature and Humidity set points Nartttteesf Powv�rxi Cmnenallon Coux+! Preliminary Estimate of Demand for Cannabis 2014-2035 400 _ 350 a 300 ... m N Vf 250 .._. ...... ._ e , 200 --- € Y xr m E 100 rr -yi ou 50 }a 1 0 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 *Washington Low 103 217 139 164 187 214 Washington central. 131 350 178 210 241 277 11 d Washington high 161 3,g4 17n 261 300, 346 .i CPoiA40e0O CW IA:iI 8 9/3/2014 Preliminary Estimate of Demand for Cannabis 2014-2035 800 700 VIf€ a 600 _.. .. _.. n 3 I11 W ur 500 400 s w 300 a :: E 200 10 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 ■Regional Low 205 233 276 325 371 424 w Regional central'; 261 297 353 418 479 549 a Re81_ondl high 320 366 437 518 595, J 685 sNf}O ,t Pm..,.I COIIFNWN9n CcJ„L Forecast of Demand from Producers* 2014-2035 (preliminary) 200 250 c 150 _.. _. •o so m lOD e 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 ■Idaho 10 12 14 17 20 22 W Montana 8 10 11 13 15 17 ■Oregon 37 43 51 60 68 78 WWashingtonl 57 65 77 91 104 120 Kanm v now-r and * Does not include processors and retailers .. ConavMbn Caur.; 9 9/3/2014 Range of Forecast of Demand for Electricity ■ 6o MWa calculated using estimated demand for cannabis in Washington and borrowed metric of kWh/kg ■ 8o MWa calculated using % of total sq. ft. that each tier occupies and primary source metric of .04 kW/sq. ft. ■ 16o MWa calculated using total allowable square footage for Washington cannabis production and using borrowed metric of kWh/sq.ft./cycle Forecasted range of 6o 16o MWa NOrt1AYCSf PONY Olid r.Pe1OlNPaPn CW pCt Efficiency Potential • Surveyed Washington producers expressed interest in switching to energy efficient lighting (concerned about cost of LED lamps) • LED Lighting Being Tested Test t-Cannabis Strain:Bio-Diesel LIPS: • 1.6816s total Yield,1,000W,q'xq'area,1.53lb/kW,27.95%THC LED: • 1.9lbs total yield,780W,q'xq'area,2.44lb/kW,26.07%THC Test 2-Cannabis Strain:Durban Poison HPS: 1.751bs total yield,11O0W,q'xq'area,i.6lb/kW,14.39%THC LED: 1.85 lbs total yield,78oW,4'x4'area,2.371b/kW,22.28%THC Findings:LED provided 6%increase in yield,48%increase in conversion efficiency in lb/kW Ivorthuesi P.and CP ffvalbn council 10 9/3/2014 Savings Potential Washington 2014-2035 40 35 30 25 Na c 20 10 15 •`R w` h x yr 5 �T ". 2014 2015 2020 '.. 2025 : 2030 2035 '.■Savings from HVAC 1 1 1 1 2 2 u Savings from lighting 17 19 23 27 31.. 36 NOffI1WCSf PW.Gf flntl (y11}6rWl,pn COV,iCit Summary ■ Indoor cannabis production is very energy intensive. ■ There are significant efficiency gains possible by: • Using better lighting and HVAC • Moving to greenhouses • More research needed to establish the current and future baseline. A 11