Why Vertical Farming Won't Save the Planet

[VIDEO] Been sending this video to every charlatan pushing vertical farming for years now. The math is pretty obvious and insurmountable on this one.

A very informed and informative lecture filled with facts that supports the former argument: [VIDEO] Myself I am a chemical engineer working in agricultural research. We are working on aquaponics and also test vertical growbeds. Vertical growbeds underperform significantly unless you put expensive light on them. Generating the electricity for light through PV uses about ten times the area compared to using direct sunlight. No way to counter that by using the full spectrum.

A very informed and informative lecture filled with facts that supports this argument: [VIDEO] Myself I am a chemical engineer working in agricultureal research. We are working on aquaponics and also test vertical growbeds. Vertical growbrds underperform significantly unless you put expensive light on them.

Why Vertical Farming Won't Save the Planet [0] is a lecture by the preeminent authority in the field, Bruce Bugbee, Utah State University Department of Plants, Soils and Climate, who has studied plant growth in controlled environments for most of his career and has consulted on all NASA missions with these goals. In particular see 13m26s[1] and 37m17s[2]. [0] [VIDEO] [1] [VIDEO] [2] [VIDEO]

This article is all over the place and then apparently quotes an academic out of context. The real problem with indoor farming is not setup cost. For the fundamentals: [VIDEO] ... Bruce Bugbee, Utah State University Department of Plants, Soils and Climate, has studied plant growth in controlled environments for most of his career presents the results of his analysis of the environmental effects of Vertical Farming/Indoor Agriculture (September 2015). With regards to the machinery shown at the top of the article, it is standard industrial automation equipment you can purchase off the shelf, apparently not even hardened or substantially adjusted for outdoor use.

Unsurprising. I'm not sure much has changed since this recording of Bruce Bugbee's talk "Why Vertical Farming Won't Save the Planet". There's nothing surprising there but he does give hard numbers to do the math that shows that vertical farming is not as good as its proponents have made it out to be. Solar energy input dwarfs all other energy inputs to agriculture, and the cost to replace one acre of solar energy with electricity comes out to $400,000 per acre (per some unit of days per a growing season). I don't think the economics have tended favorably since. The space needs for solar panels doesn't favor vertical farming either. He also shows the efficiency of modern agriculture, and why vertical farming has a pretty tall order ahead of it to beat the economics of outdoor farming. It's quite unlikely factors have changed enough since to alter his conclusion: only high-value, high-water-content specialty crops might be economically viable. [0] = [VIDEO]

See previous recent discussion of indoor/vertical farming (1). As discussed on that thread, vertical/indoor farming is great for leafy greens, but much harder for other plants. See this video [2] - "Why Vertical Farming Won't Save the Planet: Bruce Bugbee, Utah State University Department of Plants, Soils and Climate, has studied plant growth in controlled environments for most of his career. Here he presents the results of his analysis of the environmental effects of Vertical Farming/Indoor Agriculture (September 2015)". A copy of the slides can be downloaded here (the link shown on the youtube page is dead - correct link[3]). [1] [LINK] [2] [VIDEO] [3] [LINK]

>greenhouse + aquaponics + high levels of automation seems to work well Indeed, that's a big point in the video. Artificially lit farming can't compete with field production or heated/unheated greenhouses. link to time [VIDEO]