Riversntallbuildings t1_ixnjveq wrote on November 24, 2022 at 8:32 PM

Reply to comment by kenlasalle in Cheap, sensor-based agriculture could slash water use by up to 70% | We could definitely use something like this with all the droughts around. by chrisdh79

Vertical farming is acceptable for growing nutrients. It will not/cannot scale to grow calories more efficiently. (Corn, wheat, soybeans, rice, etc.)

It’ll be great to see all of these innovations blended appropriately.

But, the OP’s original post, there needs to be more incentives for change.

bionor t1_ixps6pj wrote on November 25, 2022 at 9:53 AM

Can you elaborate on this limitation?

Riversntallbuildings t1_ixqanl9 wrote on November 25, 2022 at 1:50 PM

Sure. Because I forgot to mention potatoes too.

Any food that is calorically dense like corn, wheat, potatoes, soybeans, rice etc, all those foods are grown most efficiently through our current horizontal farming methods. Our crop yields have increased dramatically in the most recent decades.

Have you seen the size of some of the industrial corn fields? We’re never going to put those in skyscrapers. You can do the math and see how many buildings it would take to get the same acreage and yields. There is no advantage. Only cost.

Additionally, other high calorie foods like bananas and nuts, often come from trees. As much as I love the idea of vertical forests and floating mountains (Pandora reference) the root systems of trees usually make any sort of container gardening a non-starter.

So that leaves us with nutrient rich green leafy vegetables mostly. And there’s nothing wrong with this. **I’m all for more food being produced as close to the source of consumption as possible. **

As important as sustainable farming practices are, the reduction of industrial animal production is far more impactful. Excess animal production causes a lot of waste and imbalance in our food supply chain. Not the least of which is the over production of grains for animal feed.

I’m most encouraged for our future by the work that’s taking place in cultured meat and proteins. If we can grow the proteins without the animal, that is a significant shift in food production.

Which is a great final point for another calorically dense food. Cheese and milk, those can’t be grown vertically. (yet) A dairy farm, or even almond farm if you prefer almond milk, all require significant space. And again there is no benefit for vertical orientation. You don’t want dairy animals on the 50th floor of a skyscraper.

Riversntallbuildings t1_ixqvl7i wrote on November 25, 2022 at 4:42 PM

I was just cleaning the kitchen and I thought of another calorically dense food that’s very important to humans nutritional needs.

Oil.

Olive oil, avocado oil, vegetable oil, etc. Can you grow any crops vertically that produce a significant, or even reasonable amount of oil in the space that you use?

CommonConfusables t1_ixq2fri wrote on November 25, 2022 at 12:20 PM

As a vertical farmer I get more yield from less square footage than other farmers.

I can have a smaller footprint to maintain, which means using less materials for watering and maintenance, and double or more yield by utilizing vertical space for growth.

I also intergrow species, meaning I plant more than one type of harvestable plant in one square foot of space because some grow up and some grow down. Use all the space.

Vertical growth also reduces noise and acts as a barrier.

I am confused why you think it couldn’t be scaled?

Riversntallbuildings t1_ixqbdw8 wrote on November 25, 2022 at 1:57 PM

Please don’t hear what I’m not saying.

I love vertical farming, and I want it to keep expanding as much as possible. It’s a wonderful addition to our food supply system.

Additionally, I love inter-specie growing practices. So many more farms need to use inter growth methods. The same is true for forestry methods. Plants grow better in a multi species environment. That makes harvesting a bit more complicated, but the sustainability trade off is worth it.