4 ms·

So 300% more efficient than farms in yield but there is criticism in costs related to electricity to run it all. how about no need for traditional pesticides pl

So 300% more efficient than farms in yield but there is criticism in costs related to electricity to run it all. how about no need for traditional pesticides plus lack of exposure to pollution or animal feces. the reduction in water usage alone should be pay back. The 300% number is not substantiated in the linked articles and comes with typical qualifying comments. So reading about about the potential pitfalls avoided by just farming indoors has always looked amazing but now with better computers and LED lighting reducing electricity use you could play the game of having your indoor farm solar powered without direct contact of sun and plant, just cover your roof in panels. Anyone with knowledge that besides fruits what else does not lend itself to this type of farming.

eesmith 7y ago
"the reduction in water usage alone should be pay back." How? Farmland irrigation water is cheap. Really cheap, compared to what you can get in the city. Prices I see are something like $5,000 per acre-foot in the city vs. $40 per acre-foot for the Central Valley. (see https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-irrigation-water-and-urban-farming/ https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-irrigati... )
- BoorishBears 7y ago
  If we're being forward thinking, as water scarcity kicks in over the next several decades, maybe we'll start seeing farms paying closer to the true worth of water. You can bury your heads in the sand and downvote all you want, doesn't change reality my friends: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/federal-dollars-are-financing-the-water-crisis-in-the-west/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/federal-dollars-a...
  - stevenwoo 7y ago
    I would hope for that future, but the electoral college and Senate rules/makeup favoring low population rural areas ( at federal level and most state senates) which turn out to be farm areas argues against farm subsidy trend overriding common sense water usage i.e. irrigating deserts to grow negative profit crops will continue until a prolonged disaster forces a reckoning.
- leggomylibro 7y ago
  Depends on where you live. Cape Town, for example, has been experiencing frequent and prolonged droughts recently. Parts of India like Chennai are also having serious problems. And so on. California also isn't a great example, because it is regularly criticized for selling water rights far too cheaply at times when the state has been suffering from drought; I think "Nestle" and "almond farms" are the usual culprits.
  - tzs 7y ago
    I'm not convinced about almond farms. Yes, I've seen the claim that it takes 1.1 gallons of water to grow one almond. But 1.1 gallons of water has about 3500 times the mass of 1 almond, so almost none of that 1.1 gallons is actually in the almond when it is exported from California. So how much water is actually consumed to produce that one almond, and how much remains available to go on to be used to produce more almonds or other crops?
    - idoh 7y ago
      Almonds come from a tree, the tree requires the water to grow the almonds. The tree draws water from the ground, then there is transpiration where the water moves through the tree and out, like through the leaves. None remains, all the water goes into the air.
      - tzs 7y ago
        Are drip or micro-irrigation systems so precise that most of what they put into the ground ends up in the plant? Also, what happens to that water that ends up in the air? California winds are mostly from the west or northwest. I'd expect a lot of what goes into the air to come out as rain or snow on the windward side of the Sierra Nevada mountains, which is the same side the almond growing regions are on.
        idoh 7y ago
        With the water, there is transpiration, which is the water that flows through the plant, evaporation, which is water that goes from the ground to the air directly, and then when the water goes into the water table. With drip irrigation, you get less loss to the water table and to evaporation, but it doesn't impact transpiration. For water that winds up the air, no idea there. I'd guess that irrigation would have no impact to down wind precipitation in a given area.
- tzs 7y ago
  For the curious, an acre-foot is 325 851 US gallons or 1 233 482 liters. To compare that to residential use, my little 1/2 HP home well, which has a steady state of 3.75 gallons/minute, would take about 60 days pumping continuously to produce an acre-foot and use about $60 worth of electricity. This is what I like about having a private well. I get about 5000 gallons of water per dollar of electricity. For all practical purposes as a residential user non-heated water is essentially free. The downside is that if there is a power failure the well stops working. The level of annoyance of a power failure goes way up when you lose running water and flushing toilets. But since cold water is essentially free, whenever the weather forecast calls for high winds or a lot of snow (the two things that can cause widespread enough outages here in western Washington that it can take a while to get power back), I can just fill a bathtub beforehand. That provides water for toilet flushing.
  - dillonmckay 7y ago
    I currently pay approx. $28 per 1,000 gallons of water from my municipality.
- ginko 7y ago
  >Farmland irrigation water is cheap. Really cheap, compared to what you can get in the city. Is that also true for Singapore though? Seems like much of the city's water is sourced from desalinated water.
  - eesmith 7y ago
    90% of the country's food is imported too. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Singapore#Food_security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Singapore#Food_... . That link also mentions their plans to reduce that to 70% "through high-tech vegetable farms (i.e. multi-storey hydroponics farms), and through aquaculture farms." I just want to know how the cost savings due to water alone can justify switching to aeroponics. I don't see how the numbers will work, even with desal water, if economics (and not food security) is your main concern.
wefarrell 7y ago
I'd be wary of the effects it would have on our gut bacteria. There are tons of microorganisms in the soil that make their way into the fruits/veggies and eventually our guts. Sterilizing our food would not be good for our digestion.
- moftz 7y ago
  We already sterilized a lot of fruits, vegetables, and meat using gamma radiation sources. It's perfectly safe and has been done with animal feed much longer than with human food. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation
  - noja 7y ago
    and what has the result of this been?
    - moftz 7y ago
      Reduction in foodborne illness and spread of invasive species.
  - wefarrell 7y ago
    Food allergies have skyrocketed in the last 30-40 years and there is a direct connection with intestinal flora: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190624111545.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190624111545.h... There is evidence that soil influences a person's microbiome: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6780873/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6780873/ Both of these studies are less than a year old, intestinal flora is something that's only recently started to get attention.
  - totalZero 7y ago
    "we do it" != "it is perfectly safe"

eesmith 7y ago

"the reduction in water usage alone should be pay back." How? Farmland irrigation water is cheap. Really cheap, compared to what you can get in the city. Prices I see are something like $5,000 per acre-foot in the city vs. $40 per acre-foot for the Central Valley. (see https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-irrigation-water-and-urban-farming/ https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-irrigati... )

BoorishBears 7y ago
If we're being forward thinking, as water scarcity kicks in over the next several decades, maybe we'll start seeing farms paying closer to the true worth of water. You can bury your heads in the sand and downvote all you want, doesn't change reality my friends: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/federal-dollars-are-financing-the-water-crisis-in-the-west/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/federal-dollars-a...
- stevenwoo 7y ago
  I would hope for that future, but the electoral college and Senate rules/makeup favoring low population rural areas ( at federal level and most state senates) which turn out to be farm areas argues against farm subsidy trend overriding common sense water usage i.e. irrigating deserts to grow negative profit crops will continue until a prolonged disaster forces a reckoning.
leggomylibro 7y ago
Depends on where you live. Cape Town, for example, has been experiencing frequent and prolonged droughts recently. Parts of India like Chennai are also having serious problems. And so on. California also isn't a great example, because it is regularly criticized for selling water rights far too cheaply at times when the state has been suffering from drought; I think "Nestle" and "almond farms" are the usual culprits.
- tzs 7y ago
  I'm not convinced about almond farms. Yes, I've seen the claim that it takes 1.1 gallons of water to grow one almond. But 1.1 gallons of water has about 3500 times the mass of 1 almond, so almost none of that 1.1 gallons is actually in the almond when it is exported from California. So how much water is actually consumed to produce that one almond, and how much remains available to go on to be used to produce more almonds or other crops?
  - idoh 7y ago
    Almonds come from a tree, the tree requires the water to grow the almonds. The tree draws water from the ground, then there is transpiration where the water moves through the tree and out, like through the leaves. None remains, all the water goes into the air.
    - tzs 7y ago
      Are drip or micro-irrigation systems so precise that most of what they put into the ground ends up in the plant? Also, what happens to that water that ends up in the air? California winds are mostly from the west or northwest. I'd expect a lot of what goes into the air to come out as rain or snow on the windward side of the Sierra Nevada mountains, which is the same side the almond growing regions are on.
      - idoh 7y ago
        With the water, there is transpiration, which is the water that flows through the plant, evaporation, which is water that goes from the ground to the air directly, and then when the water goes into the water table. With drip irrigation, you get less loss to the water table and to evaporation, but it doesn't impact transpiration. For water that winds up the air, no idea there. I'd guess that irrigation would have no impact to down wind precipitation in a given area.
tzs 7y ago
For the curious, an acre-foot is 325 851 US gallons or 1 233 482 liters. To compare that to residential use, my little 1/2 HP home well, which has a steady state of 3.75 gallons/minute, would take about 60 days pumping continuously to produce an acre-foot and use about $60 worth of electricity. This is what I like about having a private well. I get about 5000 gallons of water per dollar of electricity. For all practical purposes as a residential user non-heated water is essentially free. The downside is that if there is a power failure the well stops working. The level of annoyance of a power failure goes way up when you lose running water and flushing toilets. But since cold water is essentially free, whenever the weather forecast calls for high winds or a lot of snow (the two things that can cause widespread enough outages here in western Washington that it can take a while to get power back), I can just fill a bathtub beforehand. That provides water for toilet flushing.
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  I currently pay approx. $28 per 1,000 gallons of water from my municipality.
ginko 7y ago
>Farmland irrigation water is cheap. Really cheap, compared to what you can get in the city. Is that also true for Singapore though? Seems like much of the city's water is sourced from desalinated water.
- eesmith 7y ago
  90% of the country's food is imported too. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Singapore#Food_security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Singapore#Food_... . That link also mentions their plans to reduce that to 70% "through high-tech vegetable farms (i.e. multi-storey hydroponics farms), and through aquaculture farms." I just want to know how the cost savings due to water alone can justify switching to aeroponics. I don't see how the numbers will work, even with desal water, if economics (and not food security) is your main concern.

wefarrell 7y ago

I'd be wary of the effects it would have on our gut bacteria. There are tons of microorganisms in the soil that make their way into the fruits/veggies and eventually our guts. Sterilizing our food would not be good for our digestion.

moftz 7y ago
We already sterilized a lot of fruits, vegetables, and meat using gamma radiation sources. It's perfectly safe and has been done with animal feed much longer than with human food. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation
- noja 7y ago
  and what has the result of this been?
  - moftz 7y ago
    Reduction in foodborne illness and spread of invasive species.
- wefarrell 7y ago
  Food allergies have skyrocketed in the last 30-40 years and there is a direct connection with intestinal flora: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190624111545.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190624111545.h... There is evidence that soil influences a person's microbiome: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6780873/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6780873/ Both of these studies are less than a year old, intestinal flora is something that's only recently started to get attention.
- totalZero 7y ago
  "we do it" != "it is perfectly safe"