Fantastic Prof. Dr. Despommier! I am from India and visiting the US and have been reading about and contacting people on aeroponics for use in my country where arable land is dwindling rapidly, rainfall is uncertain, gas prices are on the rise, fruit and vegetable prices are beyond the reach of many people. I want your help and for you to be my Guru. If I can start an aeroponics project I will be the happiest man,. Prof. Warm regards Vivek
This could make the food supply vulnerable to sinister people. It would have to have security, free from tampering and destruction, if this will be our only source of food in a single city. It could make populations vulnerable to starvation campaigns of the future.
The green revolution aka chemical farming was supposed to do that and was promoted by the same chemical companies. What do you think they feed the plants with if not chemical fertilizer?
Vertical farm advantages claimed lets look at them. Year round production and no weather related crop failures. Greenhouses already do that and are cheaper to build, produce lower cost food and are cause less damage to the ecosystem. No use of fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide. This is a blatant lie. Plants cannot live on your BS. VFs are hydroponic systems and they all need fertilizer. Pests find their way into the most secure systems and pesticides are used. Herbicides cannot be used because they would kill the crops. Use 70 to 95 percent less water. Than whom? Some farmers use no water than the rain that falls on their land. Greatly reduced food miles. Urban farms do that too More control of food security and safety. Not true. The food grown on UFs (urban farms) offer a greater diversity therefore greater security and safety. Ten thousand small urban farms can produce more and lower cost food than a hundred VFs. UFs are owned and operated by individuals and small groups and grow what they want to eat not just the restricted selection VFs can offer. VFs are vulnerable to natural disasters that cuts the electricity off for extended periods. A small terrorist group could do the same thing But it would take an army of them to stop all the UFs. Without electricity UFs can keep on but not the VFs New employment opportunities. VFs are mostly automated and can offer few jobs compared to UFs which are more labour intensive. There are health issues to consider. What effect does high dosages of purple light have on human health? Animal feed from post harvest plants. All farms can do that so that is not an advantage. Purification of grey water to drinking water. You did not tell how VFs did this. Is that because they don't? No agricultural run off. What is done with the spent fertilizing liquid? Do you consider it not to be runoff if it is dumped into a drain? None of the claimed advantages are true so lets get to the disadvantages you never mentioned. It takes the equivalent of five acres of solar panels to power one acre of plants grown under lights. To feed a city it will take thousands of acres in VFs. To solar power all the VFs needed to feed all the cities Is ridiculous. That leaves the electric grid. How many electrical generating plants would have to be built to provide all that required energy? Fossil fuel powered generators are major polluters and the fuels are in limited supplies. Dams for hydroelectric generators harm the ecology of the area. Nuclear power plants are worse with their radioactive waste and other dangers. These are all damaging to the environment. What kind of twisted thinking led you to claim VFs allows for ecosystem restoration when the electrical requirements would cause great destruction to the ecosystem? The best veggies to grow in VFs are high in water with little dry matter like lettuce with 95 percent water and 5 percent dry mass. The more dry mass the more electricity needed to grow. Crops like wheat, rice, squash and corn would be exorbitantly priced so only the wealthy could afford them. That is without taking into consideration the amount of space required. If you want to eat only micro and other greens go ahead. But even rabbits need foods high in dry matter like green twigs and bark. In WW2 urban gardens called Victory Gardens grew forty percent of the produce. Today with small solar heated greenhouses and vertical gardening outside plus growing on roofs and other spaces can grow most of their produce using only the sun and no electricity. They wil also remove CO2 frome the air andsequester it in the ground. Will VFs do that? I think not.
Fantastic Prof. Dr. Despommier! I am from India and visiting the US and have been reading about and contacting people on aeroponics for use in my country where arable land is dwindling rapidly, rainfall is uncertain, gas prices are on the rise, fruit and vegetable prices are beyond the reach of many people. I want your help and for you to be my Guru. If I can start an aeroponics project I will be the happiest man,. Prof. Warm regards Vivek
It's one thing to hear about a cool idea, but man is it another to find out that it's actually happening. Bravo and huzzah, Professor!
Literally uplifting ideas, congrats, Dickson!
Somehow forgets to mention how much power it needs
Awesome!
This could make the food supply vulnerable to sinister people.
It would have to have security, free from tampering and destruction, if this will be our only source of food in a single city. It could make populations vulnerable to starvation campaigns of the future.
I think to solve our food security
The green revolution aka chemical farming was supposed to do that and was promoted by the same chemical companies. What do you think they feed the plants with if not chemical fertilizer?
Vertical farm advantages claimed lets look at them.
Year round production and no weather related crop failures. Greenhouses already do that and are cheaper to build, produce lower cost food and are cause less damage to the ecosystem.
No use of fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide. This is a blatant lie. Plants cannot live on your BS.
VFs are hydroponic systems and they all need fertilizer. Pests find their way into the most secure systems and pesticides are used. Herbicides cannot be used because they would kill the crops.
Use 70 to 95 percent less water. Than whom? Some farmers use no water than the rain that falls on their land.
Greatly reduced food miles. Urban farms do that too
More control of food security and safety. Not true. The food grown on UFs (urban farms) offer a greater diversity therefore greater security and safety. Ten thousand small urban farms can produce more and lower cost food than a hundred VFs. UFs are owned and operated by individuals and small groups and grow what they want to eat not just the restricted selection VFs can offer. VFs are vulnerable to natural disasters that cuts the electricity off for extended periods. A small terrorist group could do the same thing But it would take an army of them to stop all the UFs. Without electricity UFs can keep on but not the VFs
New employment opportunities. VFs are mostly automated and can offer few jobs compared to UFs which are more labour intensive. There are health issues to consider. What effect does high dosages of purple light have on human health?
Animal feed from post harvest plants. All farms can do that so that is not an advantage.
Purification of grey water to drinking water. You did not tell how VFs did this. Is that because they don't?
No agricultural run off. What is done with the spent fertilizing liquid? Do you consider it not to be runoff if it is dumped into a drain?
None of the claimed advantages are true so lets get to the disadvantages you never mentioned.
It takes the equivalent of five acres of solar panels to power one acre of plants grown under lights. To feed a city it will take thousands of acres in VFs. To solar power all the VFs needed to feed all the cities Is ridiculous. That leaves the electric grid. How many electrical generating plants would have to be built to provide all that required energy? Fossil fuel powered generators are major polluters and the fuels are in limited supplies. Dams for hydroelectric generators harm the ecology of the area. Nuclear power plants are worse with their radioactive waste and other dangers. These are all damaging to the environment.
What kind of twisted thinking led you to claim VFs allows for ecosystem restoration when the electrical requirements would cause great destruction to the ecosystem?
The best veggies to grow in VFs are high in water with little dry matter like lettuce with 95 percent water and 5 percent dry mass. The more dry mass the more electricity needed to grow. Crops like wheat, rice, squash and corn would be exorbitantly priced so only the wealthy could afford them. That is without taking into consideration the amount of space required. If you want to eat only micro and other greens go ahead. But even rabbits need foods high in dry matter like green twigs and bark.
In WW2 urban gardens called Victory Gardens grew forty percent of the produce. Today with small solar heated greenhouses and vertical gardening outside plus growing on roofs and other spaces can grow most of their produce using only the sun and no electricity. They wil also remove CO2 frome the air andsequester it in the ground. Will VFs do that? I think not.
man americans sure like their clapping