Comments on: Z-Axis Urban Agriculture: The Vertical Farm Project

By: alex_burson

alex_burson — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:38:46 +0000

It won’t work. If anything it will make the population problem worse. An increase in food production will always lead to an increase in population.

We won’t be fixing the problem, we’ll be making it worse.

By: Correct me if I'm wrong, but:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but: — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:34:54 +0000

[quote]Ragtime333 said: “Uh just a note there is no chance of this structure being cost effective. Unless we create a whole new level of prices making “organic” seem cheap. this will not work!”[/quote]

uh, yes it would. I mean think of a modern day sky scraper. Obviously it’s cost effective, and yet what does it do? Nowthink of a building devoted to producing a product that everyone needs. Im pretty sure it would do just fine.

By: Correct me if I'm wrong, but:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but: — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:18:40 +0000

[quote]alipardiwala said: ” Wouldn’t the air be full of pollution in 2050? What do you expect the crops to breathe? .”[/quote]

well… first off i dont think the air would be full of pollution in 2050. Secondly if it was, plants inhale CO2 and breathe out O2, so i think the plants will do just fine, thrive even. And if you think the air is going to be that full of pollutants then you should probably be more concerned with what the humans will breathe ;)

By: cinndave

cinndave — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 02:34:09 +0000

These things are never never NEVER going to take off. To solve the food crisis, food must be made in the absolute most economical fashion possible. Is land prices really going to get so high that this becomes the necessary alternative? If it ever does, the private sector will build these all on their own without this nutjob professor’s help.

There is huge room for improvement in crop yield per acre. The answer is in genetically engineered crops designed to increase output per acre, and thrive in harsher climates. In other words, you can forget that 80% arable land statistic because we’ll be able to use the other land that isn’t considered arable.

This doesn’t address the original problem that causes the farm shortage problem in the first place: overpopulation. The most rampant population growth happens in backward 3rd world countries that can’t afford fancy projects like Z-axis farms in the first place. If we can just address the social forces that pressure women to have 4 kids or more, we can get growth under control, reduce sprawl, reduce poverty, and we won’t have the strain on land that would necessitate this stupid farm tower in the first place. The wealthy countries are better off because they don’t have rampant pop growth, so their land isn’t strained, so cities like New York don’t need these towers at all.

Btw, urbanization is rising. 51% of humans live in urban areas now, not rural. So there is room for everyone in the cities. Better land management can keep land use efficient so we will have enough land to produce, and still have land to

By: stephengeorge

stephengeorge — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:30:09 +0000

I really want to see this project succeed because I think this is could be a solution to are rising food shortage…I am trying to get the first working tower built: http://www.thepoint.com/campaigns/vertical-farm-in-new-york-city

By: Merciless

Merciless — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 18:29:19 +0000

Great idea. Would be nice to see rather than some crumbly old building. One question though. Is organic foods out-the-window so to speak? Hydroponics definitely has potential to help hunger. It’s amazing how much can come from so little space.

By: Codog

Codog — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 10:35:26 +0000

I believe the food crisis has already been solved. They made a movie about it. It's called Soilent Green. Ten million people=ten million plus meals. We are just wasting the dead as it is now, we're not even using them as any sort of fertalizer.

There are starving children in foreign countries who would just love to eat your grandma!

By: alexyouker

alexyouker — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 06:38:06 +0000

I am in no way educated in the field of agriculture, but back in elementary school I was taught how to read so let me clear some things up. Almost all of your arguments are useless because you decided to debate a topic that you educated yourself about minimally. (and to fight an entire universitys collective efforts to make a positive change in our world.) First of all, the article stated it will be run off of inedible biomass, solar and wind power. Secondly the reason you dont understand the 80% figure is because you are only thinking of the country you live in. This product is being created for global use. The land in most of Africa is probably a lot less productive in the area of agriculture than say for example, Virginia in the United States maybe? The reality of this project is that it is being made to feed nations where starvation and poverty are a problem more than anything. and guess what secret ninja our government is going to put up millions to make it happen. because the average US citizen cares about humanity as a whole. We are doing pretty well here no matter how much we like to complain about where the US is at. I would also love to know all of your education histories and what makes you more knowledgable in this area than the people who have dedicated much of their lives to making this happen.