Are Skyscrapers the Farmlands of the Future?

Design by Olive Foster

Massive skyscrapers are more commonly associated with exacerbating, rather than mitigating, global warming. But if Dr. Dickson Despommier--author of The Vertical Farm, and professor of environmental sciences and microbiology at Columbia University--has any say in the matter, skyscrapers could play a big role in not just helping the environment, but also alleviating hunger. 

The main idea behind vertical farming is that fruit and crops will be grown hydroponically—nutrient rich water replaces the need for soil—in high-rise buildings. Planting, monitoring growth and harvesting would all take place within the building, and the cultivation process would employ what Despommier calls “close-loop agricultural technologies”: all water and nutrients are recycled substantially reducing runoff. 

According to Despommier, the benefits of vertical farming are manifold. Transportation and energy costs would reduce dramatically, since consumers would be located near by. Large tracts of land taken over for cultivation could be returned to their natural state, reducing carbon dioxide levels. Ancillary industries would burgeon around skyscrapers that specialized in one crop. Growing crops in a controlled environment would facilitate healthier, organic produce. Hunger would reduce: a 30-storey tower could feed upto 50,000 people.

“The biggest social benefit is that everybody gets fed healthy, clean food,” says Despommier. “The world would be a much better place if we had vertical farms.”

He points out that 40 years from now about the world’s population will have increased by 3 billion, and 80 percent are expected to live in urban areas. If current farming practices were sustained, land area equaling that of Brazil would have to be brought under cultivation to feed this population. Despommier sees vertical farming as the world’s answer to urban hunger. Beyond cities, he believes the practice could be a solution in places like Australia, Iceland, and much of the Middle East, that lack cultivable soil.

Just another pipe dream?

If vertical farming is such a panacea, why aren’t cities around the world already dominated by crop filled skyscrapers? The idea has undoubtedly sparked interest: everyone from the New York Times to the BBC has written about it and even the White House has contacted Despommier to enquire after what all the fuss is about. The myriad futuristic designs that have followed since the concept was publicized—massive, alienesque, multi-level glass buildings boasting solar panels or spiral shaped protrusions to trap and transform wind energy—have only served to further the appeal.  

The fact remains though, it’s been 11 years since the concept first took seed in a medical ecology class Despommier taught at Columbia University, but no vertical farms have been built to date.   

“Vertical farming is one of those concepts that sound good, but when you do a deeper analysis it is not the magic bullet that it first appears to be,” says Bruce Bugbee, a crop physiologist at Utah State University in Logan.

Bugbee points out that the most expensive inputs in hydroponic planting methods are not the cost of real estate but the energy costs. According to his calculations, the overall conversion of sunlight to light for plants in a vertical farm is 3%. This means that over 30 acres of solar collectors are needed to provide sunlight for one acre in a vertical farm.

“Whether the energy to operate a vertical farm comes from massive solar installations (which would either block the light for our current food production or destroy many acres of wildlife habitat), from fossil fuels, or from a nuclear power plant next to the vertical farm, the concept is environmentally irresponsible,” says Bugbee. 

George Monbiot—who writes a weekly column for the Guardian and is the author of Heat: how to stop the planet burning—is of a similar view, pointing out that the light required to grow the wheat for a loaf of bread in the type of vertical farm Despommier advocates would cost £9.82 ($15.7.) In an August column, Monbiot wrote that Despommier expects “all usual rules of business, economics, physics, chemistry and biology to be suspended to make way for his idea.”

Be that as it may, Despommier insists that he expects to see the world’s first vertical farm within 3 years. He believes that, in the interest of food security, the government should fund the concept versions of vertical farms. These are estimated to cost about $40 million, while a real vertical farm of the size he envisions would cost hundreds of millions. 

A scaled down reality

In a 2008 interview with the New York Times, Jerry Kaufman, professor emeritus of urban and regional planning at the University of Wisconsin, said that a modified version of Despommier’s vertical farm would be more feasible: “Why does it have to be 30 stories? Why can’t it be six stories? There’s some exciting potential in the concept, but I think he overstates what can be done,” said Kaufman.

Kaufman is in fact board president of a nonprofit called Growing Power, which recently announced plans to launch a 34,000 square foot, 5-storey vertical farm in Milwaukee. Growing Power is still in the initial stages of fundraising for the vertical farm—which is estimated to cost between $8-10 million—however earlier this month, its zoning plans were approved by the Milwaukee City Plan Commission. 

The company already employs some aspects of vertical farming technologies and has used these to convert 3,000 square feet of floor space into over 25,000 square feet of growing space area.

Another project that offers support for the idea of a scaled down vertical farm is the UK based Paignton Zoo, which has successfully harnessed 1000 square feet to cultivate 11,000 leafy plants for its animals through hydroponic vertical farming techniques. The plants are grown in baths of water on vertically stacked rotating shelves, allowing them all enough light to flourish.

For Despommier the scaled down versions are welcome stepping-stones, however he remains convinced that their towering counterparts will in fact become a reality in the near future. 

In response to his critics, he points to the initial stage of development for any product that required a technological leap: “Think of the initial prototypes for an airplane, or a cell phone,” he says. “They looked nothing like they look today, they may not have worked, but you don’t just give up and walk away. Nothing is impossible to a willing heart.”