|
Vertical farming
It's just crazy enough that it might work.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/sc...tml?ref=dining -- modom ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
Vertical farming
On 2008-07-15, modom (palindrome guy) > wrote:
> It's just crazy enough that it might work. > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/sc...tml?ref=dining Unfortunately, you give us a link we have to sign up for, provide our email address, and then log in. Screw the NYT! Why not just give us the information from the source? http://www.verticalfarm.com/ nb |
Vertical farming
Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries
in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing slope. And lots of labor. Steve |
Vertical farming
On 2008-07-15, Steve Pope > wrote:
> slope. And lots of labor. I can see it now. NY homeless with signs reading: will vert farm if u get me high nb |
Vertical farming
Steve Pope said...
> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries > in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast > or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing > slope. And lots of labor. > > Steve I don't see how it's going to be cheap or even feasible to provide controlled artificial sunlight to all the floors year round. In Kennett Square, PA, "The Mushroom Capital of the World," they VF indoor farm mushrooms since they can be carefully climate controlled and grow in the dark so artificial sunlight is minimal, mostly for the benefit of the mushroom farmers to work their crops. They've been vertical farming for years, just not 10 stories tall, I don't think. Since mushrooms grow so fast, farmers can turn over harvests every day in rotation. Vertical farmers would need to genetically engineer crops to grow in the dark. I don't think we're there yet nor should we be, imho. And what illegal alien with half a brain would go to work in a building to pick the harvest? Andy |
Vertical farming
In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>Steve Pope said... >> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries >> in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast >> or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing >> slope. And lots of labor. >I don't see how it's going to be cheap or even feasible to provide >controlled artificial sunlight to all the floors year round. I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land, like a business or residential district, taking advantage of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle rather than from straight above. Only pot farmers can afford much artificial light... Steve |
Vertical farming
On Jul 15, 12:22*pm, "modom (palindrome guy)" > wrote:
> It's just crazy enough that it might work.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/sc...tml?ref=dining I was wondering about something like that this afternoon. Thanks for the link. |
Vertical farming
notbob wrote:
> On 2008-07-15, modom (palindrome guy) > wrote: >> It's just crazy enough that it might work. >> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/sc...tml?ref=dining > > Unfortunately, you give us a link we have to sign up for, provide our email > address, and then log in. Screw the NYT! Why not just give us the > information from the source? I didn't have to sign up at all. I loved the slide show. Serene -- "I think I have an umami receptor that has developed sentience." -- Stef |
Vertical farming
On 2008-07-15, Serene Vannoy > wrote:
> I didn't have to sign up at all. I loved the slide show. hmmm... Might be cuz I have a browser utility that kills all scripts... java, cgi, php, etc... ('etc' is not a scripting language! ;) nb |
Vertical farming
Steve Pope said...
> In article >, Andy <q> wrote: > >>Steve Pope said... > >>> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries >>> in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast >>> or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing >>> slope. And lots of labor. > >>I don't see how it's going to be cheap or even feasible to provide >>controlled artificial sunlight to all the floors year round. > > I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial > light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects > sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land, > like a business or residential district, taking advantage > of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle > rather than from straight above. > > Only pot farmers can afford much artificial light... > > Steve It still can't work. Each succeeding lower floor would get less and less sunlight, yielding less and less. Even if the building rotated, the "inner sanctum" of each floor wouldn't see direct sunlight. Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. It would be "Insanity Architecture & Engineering." Let's just think of the illegal aliens and put VFs to rest!! :D Andy |
Vertical farming
In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>Steve Pope said... >> I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial >> light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects >> sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land, >> like a business or residential district, taking advantage >> of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle >> rather than from straight above. >It still can't work. Each succeeding lower floor would get less and less >sunlight, yielding less and less. Even if the building rotated, the "inner >sanctum" of each floor wouldn't see direct sunlight. All this implies is that the vertical spacing from floor to floor must be large compared to the width of the floor. >Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 >acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. I completely disagree. Why would you need to build a tall building (as opposed to a flat one) if you're simply piping in electricity for lighting? The whole purpouse of a vertical arangement is to intersect a large segment of sunlight for a given footprint, thus justifying the construction cost of a tall structure. Steve |
Vertical farming
Steve Pope said...
> In article >, Andy <q> wrote: > >>Steve Pope said... > >>> I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial >>> light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects >>> sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land, >>> like a business or residential district, taking advantage >>> of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle >>> rather than from straight above. > >>It still can't work. Each succeeding lower floor would get less and less >>sunlight, yielding less and less. Even if the building rotated, the "inner >>sanctum" of each floor wouldn't see direct sunlight. > > All this implies is that the vertical spacing from floor to > floor must be large compared to the width of the floor. > >>Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 >>acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. > > I completely disagree. Why would you need to build a tall building > (as opposed to a flat one) if you're simply piping in > electricity for lighting? The whole purpouse of a vertical > arangement is to intersect a large segment of sunlight > for a given footprint, thus justifying the construction cost > of a tall structure. > > > Steve OK, let's take the Pentagon, for example. It sits on 34 acrews but has 149.219467 acres of floor space. Would you rather pay electricity and water and construction costs for building 150 acres of vertical farm or just use 150 acres of God's green earth. Which is the greener solution? When you add up all the time it would take to creat the Pentagons you'd have to build to have supply meet demand, we'd all be dead of starvation. Andy |
Vertical farming
Andy <q> wrote:
>Steve Pope said... >> All this implies is that the vertical spacing from floor to >> floor must be large compared to the width of the floor. >>>Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 >>>acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. >> I completely disagree. Why would you need to build a tall building >> (as opposed to a flat one) if you're simply piping in >> electricity for lighting? The whole purpouse of a vertical >> arangement is to intersect a large segment of sunlight >> for a given footprint, thus justifying the construction cost >> of a tall structure. >OK, let's take the Pentagon, for example. It sits on 34 acrews but has >149.219467 acres of floor space. > >Would you rather pay electricity and water and construction costs for >building 150 acres of vertical farm or just use 150 acres of God's green >earth. Which is the greener solution? The premise of vertical farming is that you can site the things in the middle of a densely populated area, thus saving transport cost/energy in taking the product to market relative to conventional farming. Whether these costs offset the cost of building/maintaining the vertial structure are to me unclear, but that's the premise. Steve |
Vertical farming
Andy wrote: > > Steve Pope said... > > > In article >, Andy <q> wrote: > > > >>Steve Pope said... > > > >>> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries > >>> in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast > >>> or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing > >>> slope. And lots of labor. > > > >>I don't see how it's going to be cheap or even feasible to provide > >>controlled artificial sunlight to all the floors year round. > > > > I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial > > light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects > > sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land, > > like a business or residential district, taking advantage > > of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle > > rather than from straight above. > > > > Only pot farmers can afford much artificial light... > > > > Steve > > It still can't work. Each succeeding lower floor would get less and less > sunlight, yielding less and less. Even if the building rotated, the "inner > sanctum" of each floor wouldn't see direct sunlight. > > Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 > acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. It would be "Insanity > Architecture & Engineering." > > Let's just think of the illegal aliens and put VFs to rest!! :D > > Andy Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. Still very expensive to get going. |
Vertical farming
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:48:13 -0600, Arri London >
wrote: >Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more >sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that >much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, >although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. > >Still very expensive to get going. I agree that it would be way too expensive to make any sense (hydroponic gardening under full spectrum lighting isn't all it's cracked up to be either).... but it's fun to dream. How about mixed usage? The lower, "darker" floors could be set aside for businesses and residences. I'd also like to see rooftop parks and orchards. -- I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond. Mae West |
Vertical farming
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:30:17 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>On 2008-07-15, modom (palindrome guy) > wrote: >> It's just crazy enough that it might work. >> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/sc...tml?ref=dining > >Screw the NYT! Awwww. I really don't wanna. Do I have to? >Why not just give us the information from the source? > >http://www.verticalfarm.com/ > Thanks for the link. -- modom ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
Vertical farming
Arri London said...
> Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more > sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that > much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, > although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. > > Still very expensive to get going. Arri, OK, so if you constructed a Vertical Farm at Bryant Park, Midtown Manhattan, NYC, shadowed by the American Radiator Building (prior offices of the "Chuckle of the Day"), you'd still be blocked by the sun! Whatcha gonna grow? :))) <Chuckle> Andy CotD #2 |
Vertical farming
Steve Pope wrote:
> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries > in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast > or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing > slope. And lots of labor. Common in many parts of the world where good soil is scarce. |
Vertical farming
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:22:23 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>On 2008-07-15, Serene Vannoy > wrote: > >> I didn't have to sign up at all. I loved the slide show. > >hmmm... > >Might be cuz I have a browser utility that kills all scripts... java, cgi, >php, etc... ('etc' is not a scripting language! ;) > >nb once you've registered at the n.y.t. site, it seems to remember you for a pretty long time. your pal, blake ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
Vertical farming
On Jul 15, 6:03*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
> Andy *<q> wrote: > >Steve Pope said... > >> All this implies is that the vertical spacing from floor to > >> floor must be large compared to the width of the floor. > >>>Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10 > >>>acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. > >> I completely disagree. *Why would you need to build a tall building > >> (as opposed to a flat one) if you're simply piping in > >> electricity for lighting? *The whole purpouse of a vertical > >> arangement is to intersect a large segment of sunlight > >> for a given footprint, thus justifying the construction cost > >> of a tall structure. > >OK, let's take the Pentagon, for example. It sits on 34 acrews but has > >149.219467 acres of floor space. > > >Would you rather pay electricity and water and construction costs for > >building 150 acres of vertical farm or just use 150 acres of God's green > >earth. Which is the greener solution? > > The premise of vertical farming is that you can site the > things in the middle of a densely populated area, thus > saving transport cost/energy in taking the product to market > relative to conventional farming. *Whether these costs > offset the cost of building/maintaining the vertial structure > are to me unclear, but that's the premise. You also need to include the assumptions of higher yields due to better weather and moisture control and, the some dubious assumption of fewer preditors and diseases. One could also probably postulate 3-4 harvests per year for many items. According to a reference in one of the papers at the website NASA had been funding closed ecology research that may be adaptable. John Kane Kingston ON Canada |
Vertical farming
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:25:41 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote: >On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:22:23 GMT, notbob > wrote: > >>On 2008-07-15, Serene Vannoy > wrote: >> >>> I didn't have to sign up at all. I loved the slide show. >> >>hmmm... >> >>Might be cuz I have a browser utility that kills all scripts... java, cgi, >>php, etc... ('etc' is not a scripting language! ;) >> >>nb > >once you've registered at the n.y.t. site, it seems to remember you >for a pretty long time. > I had no trouble accessing it and I didn't need to sign in either. -- I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond. Mae West |
Vertical farming
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:05:16 -0700, sf wrote:
>On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:25:41 -0400, blake murphy > wrote: > >>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:22:23 GMT, notbob > wrote: >> >>>On 2008-07-15, Serene Vannoy > wrote: >>> >>>> I didn't have to sign up at all. I loved the slide show. >>> >>>hmmm... >>> >>>Might be cuz I have a browser utility that kills all scripts... java, cgi, >>>php, etc... ('etc' is not a scripting language! ;) >>> >>>nb >> >>once you've registered at the n.y.t. site, it seems to remember you >>for a pretty long time. >> >I had no trouble accessing it and I didn't need to sign in either. are you sure you didn't register at some point? sometimes it wants me to sign in and sometimes it doesn't. when it does, my name and password is already filled in. i'm not sure why this is (firefox 2.0.0.something, and i do have firefox remember passwords, but the n.y.t. page looks different somehow.) your pal, blake ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
Vertical farming
blake murphy > wrote:
>are you sure you didn't register at some point? >sometimes it wants me to sign in and sometimes it doesn't. when it >does, my name and password is already filled in. i'm not sure why >this is (firefox 2.0.0.something, and i do have firefox remember >passwords, but the n.y.t. page looks different somehow.) Unless the NYT website is persistently storing login info somewhere other than a cookie, the link in question required no login for me. Steve |
Vertical farming
Steve Pope wrote:
> blake murphy > wrote: > >> are you sure you didn't register at some point? > >> sometimes it wants me to sign in and sometimes it doesn't. when it >> does, my name and password is already filled in. i'm not sure why >> this is (firefox 2.0.0.something, and i do have firefox remember >> passwords, but the n.y.t. page looks different somehow.) > > Unless the NYT website is persistently storing login info somewhere > other than a cookie, the link in question required no login for me. > > Steve I'm registered at the NYT site, but occasionally wipe out cookies. Sometimes I can get in after wiping cookies, sometimes I have to re-register. I think they allow unregistered views with certain stories, maybe if they are popular(?) as an advertisement for the site. There sometimes seems to be a link depth, maybe two or three, before they want a login. -- Dave S |
Vertical farming
sf wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:48:13 -0600, Arri London > > wrote: > > >Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more > >sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that > >much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, > >although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. > > > >Still very expensive to get going. > > I agree that it would be way too expensive to make any sense > (hydroponic gardening under full spectrum lighting isn't all it's > cracked up to be either).... but it's fun to dream. > > How about mixed usage? The lower, "darker" floors could be set aside > for businesses and residences. I'd also like to see rooftop parks and > orchards. > Mixed usage is always a better use of space in any case. Plenty of those rooftop parks and gardens (and swimming pools) in any city with skyscrapers. Helps insulate the top of the building besides providing a respite from the urban landscape. > Mae West |
Vertical farming
Andy wrote: > > Arri London said... > > > Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more > > sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that > > much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, > > although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. > > > > Still very expensive to get going. > > Arri, > > OK, so if you constructed a Vertical Farm at Bryant Park, Midtown > Manhattan, NYC, shadowed by the American Radiator Building (prior offices > of the "Chuckle of the Day"), you'd still be blocked by the sun! > > Whatcha gonna grow? :))) Shade-grown coffee of course. One has the altitude and the shade :) > > <Chuckle> > > Andy > CotD #2 |
Vertical farming
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:39:03 -0600, Arri London >
wrote: > > >Andy wrote: >> >> Arri London said... >> >> > Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more >> > sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that >> > much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides, >> > although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light. >> > >> > Still very expensive to get going. >> >> Arri, >> >> OK, so if you constructed a Vertical Farm at Bryant Park, Midtown >> Manhattan, NYC, shadowed by the American Radiator Building (prior offices >> of the "Chuckle of the Day"), you'd still be blocked by the sun! >> >> Whatcha gonna grow? :))) > > >Shade-grown coffee of course. One has the altitude and the shade :) >> >> <Chuckle> >> >> Andy >> CotD #2 But not the soil and water and the happy plants. NYC is out of the range, so sorry. Coffee needs the sun a lot of the year! Just my $.02. aloha, beans roast beans to kona to email farmers of Pure Kona |
Vertical farming
|
Vertical farming
|
Vertical farming
Andy said...
> beans, > > I'd love to visit and have breakfast in HI, and taste your coffee on the big > island! > > Best, > > Andy P.S. I'm fairly certain I caused Kilauea to erupt back in 1983! Stole an airplane bottle of black sand from South beach your big island, HI. :(( Day before leaving, it erupted! :(( Pele hates me. I mean to return it! It's all my fault! SORRY! :((( --A |
Vertical farming
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:07:46 -0500, Andy <q> wrote:
>Andy said... > >> beans, >> >> I'd love to visit and have breakfast in HI, and taste your coffee on the >big >> island! >> >> Best, >> >> Andy > > >P.S. I'm fairly certain I caused Kilauea to erupt back in 1983! Stole an >airplane bottle of black sand from South beach your big island, HI. :(( > >Day before leaving, it erupted! :(( > >Pele hates me. I mean to return it! > >It's all my fault! SORRY! :((( --A Oh I am a realist first. You and others and+++++ who knows what Pele was thinking. Just happens when you live on a "young" island. Check out this site to see what living on Hawaii is like. http://tux.wr.usgs.gov/ I look at this every morning wondering what if anything happened or whether it was the fat Border Collie who loves avocados ran through the house ----or the earth making new stuff.... Part of the fun. with aloha, beans roast beans to kona to email farmers of Pure Kona |
Vertical farming
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:54:56 -0600, Arri London >
wrote: > > wrote: > >People grow coffee in all sorts of places that don't have that much sun. >Soil and water aren't a problem for rooftop gardens. Sun can be >reflected from all sorts of places and artificial light to fill in the >gaps. It's called shade-grown for a reason :) My SO who has a BS in Tropical Ag, claims that it is soil and water and conditions as much as everything. Just because you plant Jamaica in NYC does not make it JBM. Kona typica either.... aloha, beans roast beans to kona to email farmers of Pure Kona |
Vertical farming
said...
> Oh I am a realist first. You and others and+++++ who knows what Pele > was thinking. Just happens when you live on a "young" island. > > Check out this site to see what living on Hawaii is like. > http://tux.wr.usgs.gov/ beans, I visit that site several times a day (the USA & world views), being a Kalifornia BUM!!! Always a constant wonder! Concerned about other BUMS!!! in the family over there. Best, Andy Earthquake insured in Pennsylvania |
Vertical farming
|
Vertical farming
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:21:16 -0600, Arri London >
wrote: > > wrote: >> >> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:54:56 -0600, Arri London > >> wrote: >> >> > >> > >> wrote: >> >> > >> >People grow coffee in all sorts of places that don't have that much sun. >> >Soil and water aren't a problem for rooftop gardens. Sun can be >> >reflected from all sorts of places and artificial light to fill in the >> >gaps. It's called shade-grown for a reason :) >> >> My SO who has a BS in Tropical Ag, claims that it is soil and water >> and conditions as much as everything. Just because you plant Jamaica >> in NYC does not make it JBM. Kona typica either.... >> aloha, >> beans >> roast beans to kona to email >> farmers of Pure Kona > >No of course not. We all know that. The same cultivars will turn out >differently in different environments/microclimates. That doesn't mean >the product can't be marketable in the end...Rooftop Coffee (TM) LOL like manhattan silver. similar in concept to sewer alligators, manhattan silver was pot growing from stashes flushed down the toilet when unwelcome guests arrived. said to be especially potent because it survived despite a distinct lack of sunlight. your pal, blake ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter