It has come to our attention that our Global Perspective (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00844) contains several numerical errors. We note that these errors do not affect the overall findings and conclusions of our Global Perspective.

• In the first paragraph of the Water Use section, our comparison of water use from cannabis versus from total crop irrigation cited estimates from Butsic and Brenner(1) for cannabis water use at the watershed (11,000 m³/year) rather than county (688,000 m³/year) level. The corrected comparison should read: “[···] estimated annual water use for cannabis irrigation in their study area at 688,000 m³, equivalent to less than 1% of the annual water use for crop irrigation in Humboldt County, California.”
• In the second paragraph of the Energy Use section, we omitted the word “million” in our citation of the New Frontier Data report,(2) therefore reporting a total of 4.2 MWh of energy consumption rather than 4.2 million MWh of energy consumption. We further reported associated CO₂ for the legal cannabis sector rather than for the combined illegal and legal sectors. These numbers should be corrected in the modified sentence: “Combined illegal cultivation and legal cultivation were estimated to consume 4.2 million MWh (or 4.2 TWh) of electricity-based energy annually, equivalent to 1.8 million tons (or approx. 1.6 million Mt) of associated electricity-based CO₂ emissions. We note that these estimates, which are lower than those reported by Mills,(3) did not account for off-grid energy use (e.g., solar), transportation, fertilization, or irrigation.” We thank Dr. Evan Mills for pointing this out.

In the first paragraph of the Water Use section, our comparison of water use from cannabis versus from total crop irrigation cited estimates from Butsic and Brenner(1) for cannabis water use at the watershed (11,000 m³/year) rather than county (688,000 m³/year) level. The corrected comparison should read: “[···] estimated annual water use for cannabis irrigation in their study area at 688,000 m³, equivalent to less than 1% of the annual water use for crop irrigation in Humboldt County, California.” In the second paragraph of the Energy Use section, we omitted the word “million” in our citation of the New Frontier Data report,(2) therefore reporting a total of 4.2 MWh of energy consumption rather than 4.2 million MWh of energy consumption. We further reported associated CO₂ for the legal cannabis sector rather than for the combined illegal and legal sectors. These numbers should be corrected in the modified sentence: “Combined illegal cultivation and legal cultivation were estimated to consume 4.2 million MWh (or 4.2 TWh) of electricity-based energy annually, equivalent to 1.8 million tons (or approx. 1.6 million Mt) of associated electricity-based CO₂ emissions. We note that these estimates, which are lower than those reported by Mills,(3) did not account for off-grid energy use (e.g., solar), transportation, fertilization, or irrigation.” We thank Dr. Evan Mills for pointing this out. We also note two issues with the references:

• In the second paragraph of the Land-Cover Change section, a citation for Wang et al.(4) was moved during revision of the text and should be reinserted into the following modified sentence: “Further research in Humboldt County(4) indicated a relatively limited impact of cannabis cultivation on land-cover change, with a contribution of 1.1% of forest canopy area loss compared to 53.3% from timber harvest in 2000–2013.”
• In the first paragraph of the Energy Use section, our original phrasing suggests a direct comparison between Mills’ 2012 estimated annual CO₂ emissions from indoor and mixed-light cannabis(3) with the total energy consumption of the U.S. agricultural sector. Our intent was to compare Mills’ estimate of 1% of U.S. national electricity use from cannabis(3) with a different estimate of 1% of U.S. national electricity use from the U.S. agricultural sector,(5) as clarified in the following correction: “In a 2012 publication,(3) energy use for indoor and mixed-light cannabis cultivation in the United States was estimated to have a total electricity-use footprint of 20 TWh annually, which was equated to 1% of United States national electricity use across all sectors and embodied an annual emission of 15,000,000 Mt of CO₂.(3) Elsewhere, energy consumption from the entire United States agricultural sector has been estimated to equate to 1% of the total direct national energy use.(5)”

In the second paragraph of the Land-Cover Change section, a citation for Wang et al.(4) was moved during revision of the text and should be reinserted into the following modified sentence: “Further research in Humboldt County(4) indicated a relatively limited impact of cannabis cultivation on land-cover change, with a contribution of 1.1% of forest canopy area loss compared to 53.3% from timber harvest in 2000–2013.” In the first paragraph of the Energy Use section, our original phrasing suggests a direct comparison between Mills’ 2012 estimated annual CO₂ emissions from indoor and mixed-light cannabis(3) with the total energy consumption of the U.S. agricultural sector. Our intent was to compare Mills’ estimate of 1% of U.S. national electricity use from cannabis(3) with a different estimate of 1% of U.S. national electricity use from the U.S. agricultural sector,(5) as clarified in the following correction: “In a 2012 publication,(3) energy use for indoor and mixed-light cannabis cultivation in the United States was estimated to have a total electricity-use footprint of 20 TWh annually, which was equated to 1% of United States national electricity use across all sectors and embodied an annual emission of 15,000,000 Mt of CO₂.(3) Elsewhere, energy consumption from the entire United States agricultural sector has been estimated to equate to 1% of the total direct national energy use.(5)” This article references 5 other publications.

中文翻译：

---

更正“大麻与环境：科学告诉我们什么以及我们仍然需要知道什么”

我们注意到，我们的全球视角 (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00844) 包含几个数值错误。我们注意到这些错误不会影响我们全球视角的整体发现和结论。

• 在用水部分的第一段中，我们对大麻用水与作物灌溉总量的比较引用了 Butsic 和 Brenner(1) 对流域（11,000 m ³ /年）而不是县（ 688,000 m ³ /年）水平。更正后的比较应为：“[...] 研究区大麻灌溉的年用水量估计为 688,000 m ³，相当于加利福尼亚州洪堡县农作物灌溉年用水量的不到 1%。”
• 在能源使用部分的第二段中，我们在引用 New Frontier Data 报告(2) 时省略了“百万”一词，因此报告的能源消耗总量为 4.2 兆瓦时，而不是 420万兆瓦时。我们进一步报告了合法大麻部门而不是非法和合法部门的相关 CO ₂。这些数字应在修改后的句子中更正：“非法种植和合法种植的结合估计每年消耗 420 万兆瓦时（或 4.2 太瓦时）电力能源，相当于 180 万吨（或约 160 万公吨）伴生电基CO ₂排放。我们注意到，这些估计值低于 Mills 报告的估计值，(3) 没有考虑离网能源使用（例如太阳能）、运输、施肥或灌溉。” 我们感谢 Evan Mills 博士指出这一点。

在用水部分的第一段中，我们对大麻用水与作物灌溉总量的比较引用了 Butsic 和 Brenner(1) 对流域（11,000 m ³ /年）而不是县（ 688,000 m ³ /年）水平。更正后的比较应为：“[...] 研究区大麻灌溉的年用水量估计为 688,000 m ³，相当于加利福尼亚州洪堡县农作物灌溉年用水量的不到 1%。” 在能源使用的第二段部分，我们在引用 New Frontier Data 报告时省略了“百万”一词，(2) 因此报告的能源消耗总量为 4.2 MWh，而不是 420万兆瓦时。我们进一步报告了合法大麻部门而不是非法和合法部门的相关 CO ₂。这些数字应在修改后的句子中更正：“非法种植和合法种植的结合估计每年消耗 420 万兆瓦时（或 4.2 太瓦时）电力能源，相当于 180 万吨（或约 160 万公吨）的电力。伴生电基CO ₂排放。我们注意到，这些估计值低于 Mills 报告的估计值，(3) 没有考虑离网能源使用（例如太阳能）、运输、施肥或灌溉。” 我们感谢 Evan Mills 博士指出这一点。我们还注意到参考文献的两个问题：

• 在土地覆盖变化部分的第二段中，在修订文本期间移动了对 Wang 等人（4）的引用，应重新插入以下修改后的句子：“在洪堡县的进一步研究（4）表明大麻种植对土地覆盖变化的影响相对有限，占森林冠层面积损失的 1.1%，而 2000-2013 年木材采伐的影响则为 53.3%。”
• 在能源使用部分的第一段中，我们最初的措辞建议直接比较 Mills 2012 年估计的年度 CO ₂室内和混合光大麻 (3) 的排放量与美国农业部门的总能源消耗量之比。我们的目的是将 Mills 对美国 1% 的大麻用电量的估计(3) 与美国农业部门对美国全国用电量 1% 的不同估计 (5) 进行比较，如以下更正中所述：“在 2012 年的一份出版物中，(3) 美国室内和混合光大麻种植的能源使用估计每年总用电量为 20 TWh，相当于美国全国用电量的 1%所有行业，每年排放 15,000,000 公吨 CO ₂.(3) 在其他地方，整个美国农业部门的能源消耗估计相当于全国直接能源使用总量的 1%。(5)”

在土地覆盖变化部分的第二段中，在修订文本期间移动了对 Wang 等人（4）的引用，应重新插入以下修改后的句子：“在洪堡县的进一步研究（4）表明大麻种植对土地覆盖变化的影响相对有限，占森林冠层面积损失的 1.1%，而 2000-2013 年木材采伐的影响则为 53.3%。” 在能源使用部分的第一段中，我们最初的措辞建议直接比较 Mills 2012 年估计的年度 CO ₂室内和混合光大麻 (3) 的排放量与美国农业部门的总能源消耗量之比。我们的目的是将 Mills 对美国 1% 的大麻用电量的估计(3) 与美国农业部门对美国全国用电量 1% 的不同估计 (5) 进行比较，如以下更正中所述：“在 2012 年的一份出版物中，(3) 美国室内和混合光大麻种植的能源使用估计每年总用电量为 20 TWh，相当于美国全国用电量的 1%所有行业，每年排放 15,000,000 公吨 CO ₂.(3) 在其他地方，整个美国农业部门的能源消耗估计相当于全国直接能源使用总量的 1%。(5)”本文引用了其他 5 篇出版物。