Supervisors Lead the Way on Cannabis Odor Abatement Plan

Following the legalization of recreational cannabis in California in 2016 and the subsequent implementation of licensing regulations in 2018, the Carpinteria Valley witnessed a surge in cannabis cultivation operations. With this growth came an onslaught of resident complaints regarding the pungent odor emanating from these facilities. Since 2019, 3,900 complaints have been filed about the aroma of cannabis which, without proper odor control, can travel long distances.

Years of complaints with little redress inspired newly-seated Santa Barbara County Supervisor Chair Laura Capps and Vice Chair Bob Nelson to introduce a Cannabis Odor Abatement Plan at a January 14th Board of Supervisors meeting. 

According to Capps and Nelson, it was important for them to secure the collective support of their fellow supervisors prior to presenting this plan. Going into the January 14th meeting, Capps says she knew they could count on at least three “yes” votes from supervisors, so she was happy to see that it passed unanimously. “I am kind of still pinching myself that we were able to do that because it really represents a dramatic shift,” she said from her office. 

First District Supervisor Roy Lee, who replaced Das Williams this year, represents the Carpinteria area and campaigned on the use of “state-of-the-art odor technology” for cannabis odor abatement.

The plan that Capps and Nelson initiated would modify Chapter 50 of the Santa Barbara County Code of Ordinances to require mixed-light cannabis growers to install carbon scrubbers in their facilities. Until now, usage of vapor phase technology by farmers was voluntary.

According to Capps and Nelson, however, leaving it up to the neighbors and the cannabis growers to find common ground has not worked. “So, I think it was time for government to step in,” said Capps.

Capps and Nelson started drafting these changes after a 2021 volunteer agreement between The Cannabis Association for Responsible Producers (CARP) and the Santa Barbara County Coalition for Responsible Cannabis “broke down.” The growers agreed to take the necessary steps and install carbon scrubbers to reduce the smell emanating from their facilities. Still, few actually did, and the issue persisted. “As I said yesterday in the hearing, we didn’t have to do this if the industry had kept their bargain with the neighbors,” said Capps. 

The proposed amendments state that farmers must implement “carbon scrubbers or equivalent effective technology” into their farms. However, as discussed at Tuesday’s meeting, Supervisors Capps and Nelson believe that operators effectively mitigating odor impacts with their current scrubbers should not be burdened with unnecessary equipment upgrades, even as more advanced technologies emerge. Capps acknowledged that they’d welcome the use of “better technology,” especially if new environmentally friendly innovations become available. “We don’t want to have some rule in place that is so scrubber specific,” said Capps.

The few farms that already have carbon scrubbers have found them effective. Farmlane in Carpinteria was the first to install scrubbers. At the BOS meeting, co-owner David Van Wingerden said that since installing them, they’ve received no odor complaints and hope they will not have to replace their scrubbers if they continue to do their job. 

Besides their efficient odor masking, scrubbers have also been shown to benefit the plants by filtering mold and other pathogens. “Because, again, there are other benefits that having scrubbers in your greenhouse provide for your overall operations and the quality of your operations for your employees,” Nelson said. 

A 2022 study by Santa Maria Consulting firm SCS Engineers, found that the average efficiency of odor reduction of a carbon scrubber was 84%, and almost 100% at the property line, when compared with facilities that do not use scrubbers. The study used CFS-3000 carbon scrubbers from Envinty Group, an engineering firm based in the Netherlands. 

The study also compared carbon scrubbers to vapor phase, commonly used by some Carpinteria farmers, and found that vapor phase technology actually resulted “in a net increase of odor emissions.” They also found that a scrubber from the study that had been in operation for a year without maintenance and filter change still had over 90% efficiency. 

“These are not much more expensive to operate than Ecosorb or some of these other technologies in the past that they’ve had to do,” said Nelson. “So I think once [the operators] fully incorporate that into their program, I think they’ll be looking forward to it as well.” 

One of the concerns raised about carbon scrubbers is their energy usage, however Capps and Nelson noted that cannabis is an energy intensive industry, adding that Ever-Bloom farms in Carpinteria, who already has carbon scrubbers installed, has reported that the scrubbers account for less than 2% of their overall energy use. 

Following the unanimous vote to approve the amendments, the board will direct the CEO’s office and Planning and Development to develop ordinances consistent with the board letter. The ordinances will include measuring odor at the property line in the regulatory framework and revocation of business licenses as part of the odor enforcement program.

County staff will determine how many carbon scrubbers each facility needs, depending on the size and location of the facility. Cannabis operators will be responsible for hiring county-approved experts to assess the site. “All of these systems will be signed off by a licensed engineer,” Nelson said. 

When asked about the financial impact this regulation would have on the County, Capps noted that appeals and filed complaints can tie up a lot of county resources – from legal to compliance. By solving the odor abatement problem, the reduction in complaints (which have numbered in the thousands) would actually free up county resources and staff.

The BOS will review exceptions for growers who cannot meet the 12-month timeframe. An acceptable example of an exception would be if an operator ordered equipment shortly after the March 25th decision and if that equipment showed up after the 12-month mark. “We don’t want to put them out of business over that,” said Nelson. 

Nelson also said there will be site visits to monitor operations between various county departments at least four to five times yearly. “That’s one reason why we put it both in the planning side and the CEO side,” shared Nelson. “That’s why we wanted both of those permits, because we wanted that responsibility not to be a finger pointing thing between departments in the future.” 

When it comes to outdoor growers, both Capps and Nelson feel that smells emanating from those facilities are a separate issue. They hope to tackle it in the future, but right now they’re focused on implementing these new amendments and working together as supervisors to make a difference. 

Nelson emphasized the importance of keeping all growers in business and acknowledged that outdoor operations may be an issue of geographical placement – making sure that farms are located far enough from residential areas, or even using landscape features like canyons that naturally restrict the smell. He also mentioned involving other supervisors who represent areas with outdoor grows to consider the problem – for example, District 3 Supervisor Joan Hartmann. “So I’ve often said that, you know, I’m interested in what solution she wants to bring to the table here,” said Nelson. “I’ve got a couple ideas, but, you know, I think that it’s a much more robust and difficult conversation.”