Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

eater.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 291 posts

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#281

Post by cryptonector »

joshuamcginnis wrote: post #53
vilhelm_s wrote: post #48

According to [1], lettuce grown by California farmers cost 993,567,000/84,000 = $11,900 per acre. According to this article, electricity and power costs $216,000 for a 30,000-square-foot vertical farm, or $313,000/acre. It seems hard to make that competitive. [1] https://www.nass.usda.gov/Quick_Stats/Ag_Overview/stateOverv...

$993,567,000 is the total value of lettuce production for the year, not the cost.

Yeah, but that's at a profit, so the costs are less, which makes vertical agriculture even less competitive.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#282

Post by ghthor »

contravariant wrote: post #228
hanniabu wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked in this field. I'll list a few points for it. 1) Pesticide free. There's a lot of chemicals that go into growing crops and they contaminate our bodies, water, and soil. 2) Sun is free, but sun exposure and temperature aren't consistent year round. 3) Shipping may be cheap, but the time of travel from the farm to the table is long. Growing locally increases the amount of time a plant can be on the shelf or…

>7) In hydroponics you can control the taste of the product by the light spectrum and nutrients. Some customers ask for specific tastes, which is something farms can't provide. I think you're selling farmers short there, I reckon quite a few of them could affect the taste of their produce, but can't because the market just buys from them in bulk with no regard for taste.

Apple farms in my experience can have so many different flavours and varieties. Always stop at Apple farms and hopefully go pick some of your own. The store apples will never seem the same.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#283

Post by chrido »

nostromo wrote: post #28

There's a lot of misunderstanding of agriculture in this thread. 1) No, land is not expensive. In agricultural areas, land is quite cheap. Organizing shelves of crops vertically solves for a problem that isn't actually a problem. 2) The sun is free and electricity isn't cheap. Putting plants indoors and then buying electricity to create light is going to be expensive compared to using the free sun. (The absurdity of…

2) This is incorrect. Plants are not efficient, photosynthesis needs only a tiny part of the spectrum. Just he numbers, the efficiency of photosynthesis is 3-6% while the majority of the solar cells have around 16% efficiency or even higher. Hence it makes absolutely sense to cover everything with panels and use leds to produce the exact amount needed.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#284

Post by rini17 »

cjrp wrote: post #134
mikro2nd wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "breakthrough tech" I'm NOT seeing: There's all the excitement over electric cars and electrical trucks, and I, for one, can't wait to get an electrically powered car I don't have to drive. But the thing I'm not seeing is electrically powered farm machinery. I think people underestimate just how hard that problem is. These machines, when they're working at peak times of the year (planting time, harvest) are requi…

This may be a stupid idea, but is there any reason that this kind of heavy machinery needs a battery and couldn't just be connected to a power source via a (admittedly, very long) cable?

Not a stupid idea, but it requires whole approach to farming, together with machinery to be reinvented from the ground up. Agrokruh is one example of electrically driven machinery which was already proven to be energetically efficient and profitable: https://vimeo.com/99343531

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#286

Post by sargun »

hanniabu wrote: post #221
nostromo wrote: post #28

There's a lot of misunderstanding of agriculture in this thread. 1) No, land is not expensive. In agricultural areas, land is quite cheap. Organizing shelves of crops vertically solves for a problem that isn't actually a problem. 2) The sun is free and electricity isn't cheap. Putting plants indoors and then buying electricity to create light is going to be expensive compared to using the free sun. (The absurdity of…

I've worked in this field. I'll list a few points for it. 1) Pesticide free. There's a lot of chemicals that go into growing crops and they contaminate our bodies, water, and soil. 2) Sun is free, but sun exposure and temperature aren't consistent year round. 3) Shipping may be cheap, but the time of travel from the farm to the table is long. Growing locally increases the amount of time a plant can be on the shelf or…

Why not aeroponics?

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#287

Post by hanniabu »

sargun wrote: post #286
hanniabu wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked in this field. I'll list a few points for it. 1) Pesticide free. There's a lot of chemicals that go into growing crops and they contaminate our bodies, water, and soil. 2) Sun is free, but sun exposure and temperature aren't consistent year round. 3) Shipping may be cheap, but the time of travel from the farm to the table is long. Growing locally increases the amount of time a plant can be on the shelf or…

Why not aeroponics?

Aeroponics I would technically classify as a subset of hydroponics. It's just a variation of technique.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#288

Post by magduf »

rorykoehler wrote: post #197
brainwad wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Within a decade? I'd be surprised if even 0.1% of meat is lab grown in 2028.

Investor in a previous startup is heavily invested in this. Knowing what i know i expect the market to explode once it hits is economic potential.

Is it even really technically feasible yet? If we could grow meat in a lab, then we should be able to grow replacement human organs in a lab too, but we're definitely not there yet, though we're making progress.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#289

Post by magduf »

throwawayqdhd wrote: post #186
rorykoehler wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a pretty good case to wean us off cereals. They aren’t the best diet health wise. We only consume so much because they are calorie dense and easy to grow.

If the developing world switched over to a high meat diet as the developed world, it would be an environmental catastrophe

Even worse is all the people adopting the "ketogenic" diet these days.

Re: Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?

#290

Post by magduf »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #123
jaskerr wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have data, but I do have anecdotal evidence to contradict #1. I live in upstate NY, where farm land is cheap (in relative terms). We are seeing an influx of Amish, who can no longer afford land in Ohio and Pennsylvania. (To be clear, they might be able to afford land, but at such a cost as to risk the enterprise and family. The Amish won't do that.) We are also seeing new farmers moving here from states such…

No, because: when the land becomes expensive you just move somewhere else, as evidenced by your own statement. Yes, because: there isn't an unlimited supply of land at the bottom of the gravity well. But I'm willing it bet it's cheaper to irrigate the desert than grow food in multi-story buildings. There's an intermittent push to put agriculture in nothern Australia, which is presently very sparsely populated.

Shipping produce from northern Australia to the Americas or Europe is going to mean you'll either have a bunch of spoiled produce, or produce that was picked far too early and has no taste or nutritional value. Are you planning to ship food by jet to deal with this?
Post reply on HN