Vertical Farming Crash

 A long piece on the decline in vertical farming. I think my past posts reflect skepticism about it.  I don't think it will work until fusion is a viable source of energy.

Was Vertical Farming a Bubble?

 That seems to be the argument of this piece.

While I've been skeptical of it, I think it's premature.  Lots of innovations have had their ups and downs before becoming stabilized.  Humans react with enthusiasm to new ideas and overpromise.  I've seen that in the 1950's with atomic energy, off and on with computers, with the internet, self-driving cars.

I suspect when the technology winnows out the impractical and too costly ideas to arrive at an industry standard it will reduce the capital costs.  Experience will also teach the best locations for vertical farming operations--how cheap the land must be, how close to population centers.  Genetics may tweak the plants for best production under lights.  And the switch away from fossel fuels may reduce energy prices.

All that said, based on an impulse to be fair, I'm still feeling some Schadenfreude.

A Test for "Vertical Farming"

 Starting to see articles on problems that "vertical farming" enterprises are encountering.  Basically it's energy costs, which have gone up recently. Unfortunately energy costs can be quite variable, as anyone who lived through the 1970's can attest. I'd also expect a lot of variation as society digests the conversion to renewable energy sources.

(I was dubious of vertical farming from back when it just was pie in the sky, relying on the sun for energy.  In the very long range, if we get to cheap fusion energy, vertical farming may indeed become economically feasible. But that's a long way away.)

Vertical Farming

 Here's the "manifesto" of a bunch of vertical farming outfits.

I still wonder about profitability. 

Farmland Preservation

 Modern Farmer has an upbeat review of an early farmland preservation initiative on Long Island, dating to 1974.  Farmers sell off the development rights to their land, getting lower assessment and lower taxes.

It sounds good, but I wonder about the economics.  There's reference to a 23 acre farm. It may have been growing potatoes in the 1970's; Long Island's glacial soil was great for potatoes. But with changing farming economics and inflation, I'm guessing today's farmer needs to switch to vegetables and specialty crops to make things work.  Perhaps tomorrow the land will grow greenhouse or vertical farming.  How long can the deal last?

Vertical Farming

So-called "vertical farming" is hot. I apply the adjective because I think the category is loose enough to apply to all envirnonments where controls are tight: maybe humans replace sunlight with Leds, replace the soil with a nutrient solution, ensure the temperature stays within optimum ranges, etc., regardless of whether there are two or more layers/stories worth of plants.   

The advantages are growing close to the market, tight control over diseases and pests, high degree of automation, more uniform quality of produce, etc.  The two big questions are the big capital investment required to start up and the continuing cost of inputs: mostly electricity for lighting and cooling and labor, especially for automation--these are questions because I don't think there's any installations which have had a long enough life to prove profitability. Perhaps a third question is the range of produce which can be grown for a profit in the most advanced setups. (After all, we've had hothouse tomatoes on the market for years.

The Limitations of Vertical Farming

 To be honest, I don't know that anyone has tried to use vertical farms to grow marijuana.  They use similar technology though, and as it turns out a hell of a lot more electricity to grow green pot than to grow green lettuce. See this Politico piece.

The bottom line of the piece is: legalize marijuana at the federal level so it can be grown where it is most efficient to grow it. 

Vertical Farming and Pot as an Example

 I think I'm now using "vertical farming" as a label for any high-tech growing system under artificial lighting.  In that regard. this Modern Farmer piece notes the environmental impact of growing pot indoors. Whether it's marijuana leaves or lettuce leaves, there's a tradeoff. 

The Price of Your Daily Bread (Vertical Farm)

 ". As a result, 91 m2 of artificially produced wheat is necessary for each person, with a total cost of 125,680 euros per year."

That's from a critical analysis of vertical farms at Low Tech Magazine.

Greenhouses Versus Vertical Farms

 This Post article on AppHarvest illustrates the difference between the two:

• Greenhouses are horizontal, basically relying on the sun for the energy to warm the house and grow the plants. Because they're land intensive, they aren't typically found in cities.  Like self-storage facilities they need to be close to their markets but far enough away to enjoy lower land costs.  Because their energy cost is low(er) as is their construction cost, they can be used to grow more nutrient intensive plants (as tomatoes in the piece).
• Vertical farms are vertical, basically relying on electricity for the energy to warm the facility and grow the plants. Because they minimize land costs, they can be sited in cities, minimizing the cost of transporting their produce.  But because of the cost of electricity and construction, low nutrient greens and herbs are their sweet spot.

Both types of facilities can benefit from technological advances, like computer management of the growing and harvesting process.  They can both appeal to producers by offering pesticide and insecticide free produce. They both are vulnerable to disease/pests from their concentrated production.

Bloomberg on Vertical Farming

 Here's a skeptical article from Bloomberg on the economics of vertical farming.

The issue is mostly the cost of energy usage--if you have cheap energy and efficient lights (LED) you can grow leaf vegetables and herbs, charge a premium price, and break even.  That's state of the art today. What happens tomorrow?

Interesting--as I write this I realize I've not been an enthusiast about vertical farming, but I have about sources of renewable energy.  My theory has been that the learning curve for innovations in solar panels and battery storage will work to drive the cost down below carbon-based fuels.  That seems a tad inconsistent with my lack of faith in the same factors in vertical farming.

Maybe I'll be around long enough to see what the results are.

The Future of Vertical Farming

 This asks the question: Can Vertical Farming Grow Beyond Herbs and Leaves?

I'm dubious, if we're talking generally.  I can see vertical farming might work in niche areas: on the moon and Mars or in permanently inhabited space stations, where it's the only economical alternative.  Or in areas such as Iceland, where geothermal power means cheap cheap electricity, which current powers aluminum smelters and datacenters for block-chain systems. Or in the grand future when we have practical fusion.  

Or there may be a technological breakthrough which drastically changes the economics.  But bottom line, I don't see its broad comparative advantage, particularly as long as we use fossil fuel to generate electricity and, if as I assume, it's a net contributor to carbon dioxide emissions.

Vertical Farming's Unnoted Advantage?

I'm guessing maybe vertical farming has an advantage I've not considered in the past.  I've mostly been skeptical of it and still am.  But...

One of the problems of growing produce is labor.  While farm labor isn't well paid, the harvesting of vegetables typically requires hand labor, which I think usually turns into seasonal labor (depending on the crop).  But I saw the other day a picture of a worker in a vertical farm growing lettuce.  He was wearing a white uniform, and standing by a tray of lettuce at shoulder height. I don't know whether it's standard for vertical farms to have their growing trays on a rotating drive arrangement, so that the work is always at eye level, but it makes sense they would.  It's a slight additional expense and a complication for maintenance but still.

So consider the labor advantages of such a system:

• no back-breaking labor, no bad weather of heat or rain, etc., clean.
• the job is not seasonal, it's year round, meaning the workers can be permanent.
• while the vertical farming factory is located in or near a city, with its higher living costs, the much bigger labor pool and the much better working conditions might well counterbalance the costs.

Just some guesses, but I'll be interested to see if I'm right or wrong.

Vertical Farming of Wheat

This was a tweet which attracted attention.

Vertical farming is my favorite solarpunk invention.

Imagine humanity using less and less of the land, allowing it to revert to nature as we stack our farms to the sky. All powered by solar energy, of course. https://t.co/ZZEIQ0oYFJ

— Noah Smith 🐇 (@Noahpinion) August 3, 2020

The link is to a study of really intensive wheat farming under lights.  It got very high productivity.   From the study summary:

Here we show that wheat grown on a single hectare of land in a 10-layer indoor vertical facility could produce from 700 ± 40 t/ha (measured) to a maximum of 1,940 ± 230 t/ha (estimated) of grain annually under optimized temperature, intensive artificial light, high CO2 levels, and a maximum attainable harvest index. Such yields would be 220 to 600 times the current world average annual wheat yield of 3.2 t/ha.

The writers admit it's not economically feasible now or in "near future".  Since they're talking 20+ hours of lighting and boosting CO2 levels and temperature-controlled (i.e., air conditioning) IMHO it's not likely to be feasible until we get electricity from fusion.  I'd assume inventing the equipment to plant and harvest the wheat would be relatively easy, but their 10-layer farm assumes 1 meter separation between layers and super dwarf wheat, so rather cramped quarters.

The study turns out to be a computer modelling exercise, based on extrapolating from one real-life experiment in growing wheat and estimating theoretical maximums. 

 

Linking "Vertical Farms" With Microgrids

If I understand this article, a microgrid is a set of power generators dedicated to supplying a set of power consumers.  When the generators are a combination of solar and natural gas and the consumers are "vertical farms" there might be a workable and economic combination.  Vertical farms use lots of energy (the old dream of using sunlight which I laughed at years ago seems now defunct).

The big advantage of a microgrid is that it can be installed along with the vertical farm, so you don't rely on the power company to have the capacity to support your farm.  The microgrid operator can guarantee a price, making it easier to figure out your business plan.

Seems to me in the long run the microgrid is not the best solution.  Vertical farms need a lot of energy and for many hours in the day (apparently if you blast a seeding with light for 18 hours a day instead of 6 you get more growth--that's my impression). But it strikes me that plants are relatively forgiving, which means if you're operating a smart transmission system, vertical farms could easily be cut off when the system gets overloaded for some reason.  See this.

I assume it's also true that there are economies of scale in power generation.  Such economies should mean a power company could undercut a microgrid in many cases.

The article notes it's not clear what price for electricity would enable vertical farms to make a profit.

We'll see.

Another View of Automated Indoor Growing

For some reason I feel more kindly to the operation in this article than I do the one in my previous post.

Why?

For one reason, the farm described is in a warehouse, one story, not multiple stories.  My guess is then that the cost for the building/real estate is lower per plant.  Might not be true but that's my take.

Another reason, the operation is described as experimenting, learning from failure.

A third reason, admission of problems, such as using cameras to monitor the health of plants is not always a replacement for eyeballs on the plants.

A fourth reason, the writer notes the cost differential and ask why people should pay the difference.  That's key to me.  I'm not convinced that simply better taste and fresher produce is going to be enough.  Maybe it will be; after all the Fuji apple has gained market share replacing the Red Delicious  as a standard apple.

Another Vertical Farm Dream

A dream by Framlab described in this piece promising to turn Brooklyn into an agricultural community.

My problem with the outline: it completely omits any discussion of people, at least the people who are supposed to do the work of tending the farm.  Apparently AI is supposed to do it all.  Not going to happen, they'll need a minimum crew.  And there's no discussion of marketing the produce (greens)--maybe it's supposed to be a grow your own operation.  Again, I don't think it's going to happen.

"Vertical farming" or at least hydroponics paired with AI can accomplish a lot, but not what's described here.

The Growth of "Vertical Farming"

I think the term "vertical farming" has come to mean indoor agriculture under LED lights with lots of technology and automation.  I'm still skeptical about current economics, but, if I'm to be consistent with supporting technology in the case of climate change and self-driving cars, I have to agree that vertical farming will become economical for at least some crops.

But...

As is the case with most innovation and technology, there are trade-offs.  One trade-off which comes to mind is vulnerability.  Transitioning from field agriculture to vertical farming for greens, for example, would increase the demand for electricity. More significantly, if a solar flare of sufficient intensity fried many transformers which would take years to replace, reactivating field agriculture for greens would also take years.

Top 25 Vertical Farms?

Here's a listing of the top 25 vertical farms, although it appears some are equipment providers for aeroponic or hydroponic setups.  There's some mention of LED's, particularly for marijuana. (Indoor farming of marijuana seems to make sense based on what's desirable for the plants, not just because it's easier to hide the plants from law enforcement.)  Mostly these farms are growing greens and herbs.

When I first blogged on vertical farms it was to mock the idea of sun-based vertical farms. That idea seems to have died a natural death; artificial lights are used, changing the economics.  The linked article talks of the possibility of a multi-billion dollar industry by 2022 or so.  Personally I expect there's a fair amount of froth and hype in its current state--at some point the market will sort out which designs and sets of technology can make money in which cities.

Vertical Farms and Big Greenhouses

Seems to be a lot of activity with vertical farms (depending on LED lights, not the sun) and big greenhouses.  The initial idea was to grow greens, which made sense because they're quick and easy to grow and reasonably valuable.  With the legalization of marijuana the horizons have expanded in some states. Hydroponic tomatoes have been around for a while.

See this Reuters piece on vertical farms.

See this on an urban farm in Paris.

And this on an aquaponics/greenhouse farm in Maine.

And this NYTimes piece on a big greenhouse in Kentucky.

I'm not convinced that such farms will make a big contribution to the food supply over the next 10 or 20 years, but hope I'm around to see.