Thank you for Subscribing to Environmental Business Review Weekly Brief
Environmental Business Review | Friday, September 02, 2022
A new study questions the universal land-saving demands of vertical farming, finding that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for land use, food security, and sustainable agriculture.
FREMONT, CA: Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) is gaining fame due to population increase, environmental change, and growing concerns about food security and sustainability. Relating to growing space, commercial greenhouses and vertical farms promise a higher crop yield from locally obtained materials than open-field agricultural methods. Researchers analyzed the potential crop output of six vegetables (selected for nutritional content and suitability for CEA farming) concerning growing space in a report published in Nature Food.
The inclusion of extra acreage utilized by wind and solar farms to harvest low-carbon energy in the total "expanding space" estimates were crucial to the study. Vertical farms and commercial greenhouses are land-saving sustainable farming, although these farming systems rely heavily on power to keep crops growing in a healthy climate. A low-carbon power supply must back up this demand to be sustainable. The space needed to captivate renewable energy must be included in the overall land footprint to adequately analyze the sustainability and footprint of each agricultural practice. The researchers assessed vertical farms, greenhouses, and open-field farming in nine city areas: Reykjavik, Stockholm, Boston, Tokyo, Santiago, Johannesburg, Phoenix, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates, all of which had different land availability, meteorological conditions, and population density. When analyzing the total land required to cultivate the six vegetables, the results revealed that location was the deciding factor. Greenhouses and vertical farms could minimize the net land footprint (combined land use per capita) compared to open-field farming in colder climes. Open-field agriculture had a smaller land footprint than vertical farms in warmer climes. Despite energy use being very location-dependent, greenhouses had the smallest land footprint of the three produce-growing systems in most regions modeled—not just the temperate, less seasonal ones. Energy demand fluctuations resulted in a higher cost per energy unit, especially in colder places where the onshore wind was the primary renewable. However, commercial greenhouses had a lower energy demand per food unit. The researchers also conducted local geographical assessments of available farmland and land appropriate for energy generation in each area to decide where land could be reused, yielding exciting results. The aggregate land footprint of vertical indoor and open-field farming methods in Stockholm was similar. Still, there is more arable farmland in the area, and land fit for wind energy generation is relatively scarce, casting doubt on the viability of CEA farming in the absence of alternative low-carbon energy sources.
Stay ahead of the industry with exclusive feature stories on the top companies, expert insights and the latest news delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe today.
More in News