Comments on: High hopes for high-rise horticulture

By: GregP

GregP — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:11:05 +0000

You might be right there Rob, but on the other hand, who knows what comes up from this idea of vertical farming? With new technologies , it may become a base for some new ideas resulting in great technologies of the future. As they say, need is the mother of all invention.

By: Rob Jara

Rob Jara — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:05:37 +0000

No problem Greg. I really think that instead of putting too much hype on the vertical farming technology, efforts must be targeted on finding ways to develop further traditional farming and try to find more innovative ways to sustain it. A change as radical as vertical farming isn’t what agriculture needs, no matter what country, to provide food for its people.

By: GregP

GregP — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:53:36 +0000

Nice find Rob, thanks for sharing! If those calculations are correct, don’t see how vertical farming can be competitive for standard farming.

As a side note – I was wondering about insects, needed to growing and fructifying some types of crops – like tomatoes etc. How would this be resolved? Surely, having that many , for example, bee hives outside of your window in city centre flat is not the most comfortable thing.

By: Rob Jara

Rob Jara — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:45:31 +0000

I agree Greg that vertical farming only addresses only a few issues but not necessarily replace traditional farming. There are not only danger to account for in vertical farming, but also economic issues. I found one article wherein the author isn’t too enthused about vertical farming, and he posits this as one of his reasons:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/16/green-ivory-towers-farm-skyscrapers?msg=a&showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

“They show that the light required to grow the 500 grammes of wheat that a loaf of bread contains would cost, at current prices, £9.82. (The current farm-gate price for half a kilo of wheat is 6p). That’s just lighting: no inputs, interest, rates, rents or labour.”

This “minor” issue not only involves raising prices on production, but would also affect the consumers. Not really cost efficient, this artificial lighting for vertical farming is.

By: GregP

GregP — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:32:26 +0000

To be honest, it is only partly true. Of course, we (as humans) were hunters and gatherers once. It was wiser in terms of energy spent, time needed and profitability for a human being to hunt let’s say a deer than growing crops for few months or breed animals for season or more to have any products from it. Ask any archaeologist about that, surely will confirm that. Why did we do it then? No one is 100% sure. Problem for ‘neolithic revolution’ archaeologists to come up with another theory for that.

But how do you imagine such thing now? Have everyone go out into woods to do some hunting for evening meal? Farming is the only way to go, and with more and more people living in the cities these days, vertical farming might be an answer to some problems. Might be, but not necessarily have to be. Plus, I can’t see it taking the role of standard, horizontal farming, imagine a sheer amount of crops that city’s population consumes everyday.

By: Rob Jara

Rob Jara — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:21:54 +0000

While vertical farming is an interesting new technology, I’m afraid it can be made a lucrative excuse for the refusal to put more importance in developing agriculture in appropriate and traditional locations. Aside from the danger it poses to buildings and surrounding areas these vertical farms are built, this practically paves the way for eliminating traditional farming in the near future.

Here’s an article that proves my point:

http://agrosoftbrazil.com/agropage/354.htm

here’s an excerpt from it:

“Farming is an unnatural behavior”
We didn’t always farm. Despommier points out that our ancestors were hunters and gathers, not farmers. Humans have adapted technology to feed themselves for thousands of years.

I say this technology can be further developed but with the welfare of people who depend on agriculture being prioritized rather than its potential to be a great money making scheme.

By: GregP

GregP — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:00:27 +0000

“Protip: Even buildings with completely glass facades are internally lit with electric lights. Sunlight only penetrates so far. How many plant leafs in a multistory building do you think sunlight penetrates through before that light is gone?’
This does actually give a bit of food for thought and makes one wonder if these highrise farms would suffer from a reduction of light if they’re surrounded by other highrise buildings.”

What about UVA and UVB lighting that can be used? I’m not completely sure whether it would be sufficient for plants to grow? If so, what kind of plants can be stimulated like that?

Surely, it would be economically wise to have artificial lighting in place if we calculate costs of transportation, packaging and so on, needed for foods taken from outside of cities.