Sustainable Development Using Vertical Farms

Grow Up, Grow Smart 1

Grow Up, Grow Smart:

Sustainable Development Using Vertical Farms

Mohammad Beheshtaein

Jacob Deline

Craig Hyatt

Wilson Tsan

Chris Slafter

UNVS 196D

Professor Quill

December 5, 2008


Table of Contents

Page

Introduction 4

Section I. Sustainability and vertical farms 5

A. The general problem of sustainability 5

B. Sustainability and agriculture 6

Section II. Problems with current methods of farming 7

A. How is it unsustainable? 8

1. Soil 8

2. Water 10

3. Energy and Transportation 11

B. Urban farming 11

1. Vertical farms boost crop yield 12

2. Vertical farms make water use sustainable 13

3. Vertical farms improve waste management and distribution 14

Section III. How vertical farms will help San Jose State University 15

A. Spartan Dining's current environmental and business practices 15

B. Green rooftops and vertical farms are the next step for SJSU 16

C. Our proposed model 18

Section IV. Integration of a vertical farm into the San Jose State University campus 19

A. Potential structure sizes 19

B. Proposed structure locations 21


C. Estimated construction timeline 23

Section V. The nutritional benefits of eating healthy 23

A. Eating healthy is good for you both physically and mentally 24

Conclusion 29

References 30


Introduction

Our purpose is to examine, in the words of Thomas Friedman, what we can “do in

response to the truly massive challenge that we face to preserve the natural world that has been

bequeathed to us.”1 San Jose State has a long history of innovation and progress. Our plan is to

continue San Jose State University’s history of innovation by growing vegetables and fruits on

campus for use by the campus. We will utilize once unused land while taking advantage of

sustainable practices. Our proposal is to begin with rooftop gardens and then progress to

constructing a vertical farm on campus.

Our ultimate goal is to demonstrate the utility of vertical farms and develop their usage in

San Jose and beyond. This urban farming technique offers many benefits including: sustainable

farming techniques, low cost food production, a new sense of civic pride, more nutritious eating

habits, and an innovative plan that could make SJSU and San Jose an even better place to live,

work and play.

Beyond these benefits, we feel that urban farming offers San Jose a chance to

systemically address the problems facing the environment and the community. We do not aim

merely at a solution to fix an isolated problem. By asking San Jose to accept our proposal we are

giving San Jose the opportunity to embark on a path of real change. Already, we have garnered

support from Associated Students, Spartan Dining, and Professor Mathur. A change in behavior

will go a long way toward finding solutions to our environmental problems. John Gardner, the

founder of Common Cause, remarked that, “today’s energy – climate challenge is a series of

great opportunities disguised as insoluble problems”.2

1 Friedman, Thomas L. Hot, Flat, and Crowded. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. 2008. Pg 397.2 Ibid. 170.


Section I. Sustainability and vertical farms

The purpose of our paper is to clearly define the problem with which the human species

is confronted and to offer an answer. The proposed solution to this problem will be a proactive

approach that addresses the issue systemically rather than an approach that only addresses

technical problems as they arise. Solutions which solve individual technical problems do not

address the core issue. An examination of the history of how western thought3 has come to

understand the relationship between the human species and nature will reveal that the western

outlook has lead to the creation of methods of production that are not sustainable. A lack of

sustainability is the systemic problem that we are faced with and any proposed solution to the

myriad problems facing the human species needs to address this directly. This lack of

sustainability needs to be addressed first conceptually, and then at a technical level.

A. The general problem of sustainability

Our civilization cannot currently provide for itself without utterly exhausting the natural

resources that it uses. Derrick Jensen notes:

Industrial fishing practices have decimated every one of the world’sbiggest and most economically important species of fish….Fully 90 percent ofeach of the world’s large ocean species, including cod, halibut, tuna, swordfish,and marlin, have disappeared from the world’s oceans in recentdecades….[F]ishing has become so efficient that it typically takes just 15 years toremove 80 percent or more of any species unlucky enough to become the focus ofa fleet’s attention.4

The Earth’s resources are finite; therefore, we must live in a manner that is sustainable.

According to Jensen, a lifestyle “is sustainable if it does not damage the capacity of the landbase

3 We say ‘western thought’ because though there are many other ways of life, the way of life determined by western thought hasbecome the dominant paradigm in the world. Therefore, if we are going to address problems that have arisen within our culturewe need to discuss how our world view came to be.4 Jensen, Derrick. Endgame. Seven Stories Press, 2006. 235-236.


to support its members.”5 From a western perspective, the practice of unsustainably gathering

resources has its roots in how the relationship between human beings and nature has been

defined.

Clive Ponting, author of A New Green History of the World: the Environment and the

Collapse of Great Civilizations, discusses the history of how human beings have articulated their

relationship to nature. According to Ponting, there is a tendency to place human beings in a

position of privilege over nature; nature is seen as a resource to be used. Classical Greek thought,

Judeo-Christian thought, modern economics, science, and philosophy have all given weight to

arguments in support of anthropocentrism. Within these systems of thought, the unrestrained use

of natural resources has been justified and encouraged. Human beings now find themselves in a

position where their civilizations are using more resources than the natural world can provide.

Derrick Jensen points out, in Endgame, that this is evidenced by the historical fact that every

civilization, with the exception of hunter-gatherer communities, imports its resources once it has

exhausted the resources immediately available to it. “[C]ities must import resources, a process

also known as conquest, colonialism, and these days, the global economy.”6

B. Sustainability and agriculture

As an example, the agricultural industry currently does not preserve the very natural

systems upon which it depends. Global growth is causing more land and resources to be used for

agricultural purposes. Friedman notes that “Global growth is driving up commodity prices,

prompting companies to put more land under agricultural cultivation for food, fiber, and

biofuels”.7 In an echo of Ponting’s statement that the problems we face cannot be solved by

simply coming up with new resources or technological fixes, Thomas Friedman in his book, Hot,

5 Ibid, 233.6 Ibid, 104.


Flat, and Crowded, points out that this lack of a systemic approach to the problem of resources

“is why we need a strong ethic on conservation. There have to be limits to how much and where

we encroach on the natural world.”8 If we do not approach the problem in this manner “we will

continue to lurch from single response to single-issue response – without ever developing a

systematic approach”.9 The lack of resources is the problem facing the agricultural industry and

it is emblematic of the problem facing all aspects of our civilization. However, there is another

way to grow as a population and a civilization. Among, and in conjunction with, other solutions

“you can grow more food per acre”10, says Friedman.

Section II. The problems with current methods of farming

Citizens of the developed nations enjoy a wide range of foods. It is not until a detailed

look at the resources and systems needed, before the food even arrives into a person’s kitchen

that we begin to understand the enormous effect food has on industrial infrastructures and on the

environment. Environmental experts Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins in their

book Natural Capitalism, point out the inefficiency and linearity of conventional agriculture

lifecycle, from the use of raw material to the method in which food waste is disposed of.

Pioneers such as Dickson Despommier of Columbia University have too, noted these inefficiencies by the agricultural industry, and

developed a new system called a Vertical Farm, that can be non-polluting, energy efficient, and

an overall more effective way of feeding people. This new system of food production and

distribution can be the counter to the perilous method of agriculture that we have grown used to.

To understand the benefits of a Vertical Farm, we must first look at the techniques of modern

agriculture.

A. Current Methods 6 Friedman, Thomas L. Hot, Flat, and Crowded. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. 2008. Pg., 148.7 Ibid, 148.10 Ibid, 70.


1. Soil

According to J. P. Kimmins in Forest Ecology: a Foundation for Sustainable

Management, soil is “those upper layers of the unconsolidated surface of the landscape that

provide forest plants with the following necessities: water, nutrients, and a firm anchorage”.11

Samples of “healthy” soil can reveal two types of nutrients: primary nutrients and secondary

nutrients. Primary nutrients include nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium which is scarce in the

beginning of a plant’s growing stage. This is because the plant uses a large amount of these

nutrients in the beginning, to grow and survive. As the plant matures, the absorption of primary

nutrients decline and eventually, a state of homeostasis is reached between the plant and the

soil.12 The problem, however, begins when a farmer decides to grow a single species of crops, in

large amounts, also known as a monoculture.

Year after year of growing the same crop will eventually render the soil to be non-arable.

To counter this, conventional farming methods add chemical fertilizers primarily consisting of

nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium to “replenish” the soil nutrients. However, commercial

fertilizers focus on only primary nutrients, but do not provide much else in regards to the

secondary nutrients. This practice oversimplifies the biochemistry of the soil, which will

eventually diminish the soil’s ability to retain water and allow for a healthy microbe

population.13 The inability to retain and filter water by the soil has led to various water

pollutions, as exemplified by the creation of a Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico due to fertilizer

11 Dr. James, Danoff-Burg A. "The Terrestrial Influence: Geology and Soils." SEE-U: Module 10. 2000. Columbia University. 29Nov. 2008 <http://www.columbia.edu/itc/cerc/seeu/atlantic/restrict/modules/module10_content.html>.

12, 3 "Plant Nutrients." Mineral Nutrients & Soil. North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 29 Nov.2008 <http://www.agr.state.nc.us/cyber/kidswrld/plant/nutrient.htm>.


run off by nearby farms into the Mississippi River.14 A Dead Zone is a body of water where algal

growth is increased by the nitrogen-rich fertilizer runoffs enough to where it depletes the area of

any oxygen, rendering it uninhabitable for fishes, plants, and other types of organisms.15 In

addition to polluting water, cultivating monocultures also cause farmlands to be non-arable. Soil

that is not replenished naturally, with the right combination of components is susceptible to

erosion. According to a study from Cornell University, “around the world, soil is being swept

and washed away 10 to 40 times faster than it is being replenished, destroying cropland the size

of Indiana every year...”16 which leads to, “60-80% of farmland around the world is ‘moderately

to seriously degraded’ and harmful to agricultural productivity”.17 Soil erosion reduces the

amount of arable land for farming which can prove to be disastrous because as populations

around the world increase, the demand for food will also increase.18

In order to meet food demands, agribusinesses have chosen to develop monocultures

because of its ability to produce high volumes of crops.19 However, one of the residual effects of

a single-crop farm is pests.

The single-crop mentality both ignores natures’ tendency to foster diversity andworsens the ancient battle against pests. Monocultures are rare in nature, in partbecause they create paradises for plant diseases and insects – as science writerJanine Benyus puts it, they are like equipping a burglar with the keys to everyhouse in the neighborhood.20

14 Susan, Lang S. "Soil erosion threat." Chronicle Online. 20 Mar. 2006. Cornell University. 30 Nov. 2008<http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/march06/soil.erosion.threat.ssl.html>.15 "Dead Zone in the Ocean." Harm From Conventional Farming. 2004. Om Organics. Nov.-Dec. 2008<http://www.omorganics.org/page.php?pageid=90>.16Susan, Lang S. "Soil erosion threat." Chronicle Online. 20 Mar. 2006. Cornell University. 30 Nov. 2008<http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/march06/soil.erosion.threat.ssl.html>.17 "Degraded Soil" Harm From Conventional Farming. 2004. Om Organics. Nov.-Dec. 2008<http://www.omorganics.org/page.php?pageid=90>.8, 9 Despommier, Dickson. "The Vertical Farm Essay I." Vertical Farm-Essays. 2008. The Vertical Farm Project. 28 Nov. 2008<http://www.verticalfarm.com/vfessay1.aspx>.

20 Hawken, Paul, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. Natural Capitalism. New York, NY: Bay Back Books, 1999. 195.


The manifestation of pests has led agribusinesses to resort to using pesticides. The unexpected

effect, however, is that using pesticides frequently actually helps pest species to evolve to be

more resilient “as most pesticides tend to affect the weaker pests, thereby leaving the stronger,

more resilient pests alive to reproduce.”21 Farmers in return will use more quantities or more

toxic forms of pesticides to kill those pests, which creates a cycle of stronger pests and increase

potency chemicals.

2. Water

Studies found in Natural Capitalism revealed that conventional methods of watering have

led farms to be the number one leading cause of water waste, in the United States.

Agriculture is responsible for about twice as much of total U.S. water withdrawalsas all buildings, industry, and mining combined. It accounted for 81 percent of all1995 consumptive use. Eighty-eight percent of the nation’s 1995 irrigation waterwent to 17 western states, where the great majority of all water districts weremining groundwater faster than it was being recharged.22

What had led to this trend was not necessity or the biology of the crops, but lack of incentives to

use water efficiently because of government subsidies. A 1997 study by researchers at Cornell

University suggests that more than 50 percent of irrigation water never reaches crops because of

losses during pumping and transport.23 Current watering technology and methodology reflects

the linearity of practices in farming: The current technology is able to dispense water but not

reclaim it. Once the water is used, it is allowed to be lost because recovering it would cost more

than using newly drawn water.

3. Energy and Transportation

21 Ibid, 195.22Ibid, 214.23 Ibid, 193.


The lifecycle of delivering food from a farm to a kitchen is quite significant. Most of the

energy needed in the lifecycle of getting food goes towards other areas besides the actual

cultivation of food. Two-fifths of the energy needed is used to process, package, and distribute

the food, and another two-fifths is used by the end user to refrigerate and cook the food. Only

one-fifth is actually used on the farm, in which half of that is used to apply chemicals to the

farmland.24

Hawken the Lovins note that the process to get strawberry yogurt, in Germany,

totaled to 7, 250 miles of transportation, “enough in all to bring the yogurt to Germany

from New Zealand”25 Although this case study highlights the process of Germany, the

methodology of their food processing industry is not too different from that of the United

States.

These problems associated with current farming methods can be solved by

adopting vertical farming practices.

B. Urban Farming

Our current agribusiness industries operate in a linear fashion: raw materials and

resources are used to cultivate food, the food is transported to the end user and the leftovers or

wastes from the farm and the end user are not recycled, but discarded. According to a report

done by the New York Times,

In1997, in one of the few studies of food waste, the Department of Agricultureestimated that two years before, 96.4 billion pounds of the 356 billion pounds ofedible food in the United States was never eaten. Fresh produce, milk, grainproducts and sweeteners made up two-thirds of the waste.26

24 Ibid, 193.25 Ibid, 200-201.26 Martin, Andrew. "One Country’s Table Scraps, Another Country’s Meal." NYTimes.com. 18 May 2008. The New YorkTImes. 30 Nov. 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/weekinreview/18martin.html?_r=2&oref=slogin>.


In order to make significant changes in food production, we must change the entire model. Paul

Hawken, Amory Lovins and Hunter Lovins put it simply in Natural Capitalism that,

Because farms are (or used to be) natural systems, they offer major opportunitiesto combine the resource-productivity first principle of natural capitalism with theloop-closing second principle.27

Part of what the authors mean by “Loop-closing”, is a design-integration strategy that reuses the

waste generated by a system, as a resource to be utilized by that system. Trying to implement

this on a conventional farm can be difficult, and does not necessarily remedy the components of

the agribusiness system that withdraws the most energy: crop cultivation, water use, and waste

management and distribution. A vertical farm can provide a way to implement these changes.

1. Vertical farms boost crop yield

One benefit that a vertical farm provides is protection of crops from external factors such

as floods, droughts, and other weather factors.28 Since the construction of a vertical farm is in a

commercial grade building; it will not be susceptible to the changes in weather. Conversely,

Despommier suggest that vertical farms equipped with a climate control system could even be

better for growing crops. In an interview with Scientific America, while refuting skepticism that

indoor crop would be subjected to genetic modification, a controversial practice of agriculture,

he also promoted the abilities of indoor climate control for crops.

None of these crops has to be modified further for life indoors. In fact, they’ll domuch better because we can match their growth characteristics with temperatureand humidity conditions and nutrition profiles.29

In addition to protecting crops from weather variability, an indoor farm will also prevent diseases

and insects infestation by virtue of being indoors and having an air system that circulates the

27 Hawken, Paul, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. Natural Capitalism. New York, NY: Bay Back Books, 1999. 201.28 "The Vertical Farm Project." Home Page 2008. The Vertical Farm Project. 28 Nov. 2008 <http://www.verticalfarm.com/>.29. Fischetti, Mark. "Growing Vertically." Scientific American: Earth 3.0 Sept. 2008: 74-79.


indoor air with the air outdoor. Disease and insect prevention translates to an increase in overall

crop yield.

Disease already damages or destroys 13 percent of the world’s crops, insects 15percent, and weeds 12 percent; in all, two-fifths of the world’s harvest is lost inthe fields, and after some more spoils, nearly half never reaches a human mouth.30

Eliminating the issue of pests, diseases, and weeds would conversely eliminate the need for

herbicides and pesticides. Preventing crop loss due to disease and insects ultimately means a

higher yield of crops per production cycle. In the vertical farm, having a higher crop yield can be

quite significant as Despommier and his researchers propose that year-round crop production can

occur, with a possible indoor to outdoor acre ratio of 1:4 or 1:6. This means that every acre

inside a vertical farm is equivalent to 4-6 acres on a conventional, outdoor farm. Depending on

the crop, such as strawberry, Despommier and his researchers note that the ratio can be as high

as 1:30.31 An estimation of yield, as Despommier mentioned in Scientific American, is that “a 30-

story farm that covered a city block could feed 50,000 people year-round.”32 Additionally,

Despommier and his researchers mention that smarting growing techniques such as a hydroponic

system, organic farming, and diverse crop culture, the use for fertilizers are become obsolete.

2. Vertical farms make water use sustainable

Circle of Blue, a nonprofit affiliate project of the Pacific Institute noted that the benefits

vertical farms can provide for the water industry,

In present day hydroponics farms outside of Phoenix, for example, water use isabout 90 percent less than in traditional farms. Why? Because traditional outdoorfarming loses thousands of gallons of water daily to runoff, evaporation, andtranspiration — water “breathed out” by the plant’s leaves. Indoors all this wateris captured and reused. The end result is closed system, where the only waterleaving is the water in the produce itself.

30 Hawken, Paul, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. Natural Capitalism. New York, NY: Bay Back Books, 1999. 195.

32. Fischetti, Mark. "Growing Vertically." Scientific American: Earth 3.0 Sept. 2008: 74-79.


This exemplifies the closed-loop system that is non-existent in conventional farming.

Despommier, in his website, expands on a system that could make watering a closed-loop

system. “A cold brine piping system could be engineered to aid in the condensation and

harvesting of moisture released by plants.” Additional water needed for the vertical farm can also

come from black and gray water by collecting the water of evapotranspiration.

Evapotranspiration is the process by which plants expire water as a by-product of metabolism.

This not only gives a vertical farm a double use as a water treatment facility,33 but it ultimate

means that a vertical farm system can be virtually water-self-reliant: drawing little or no water

from natural resources.

3. Vertical farms improve waste management and distribution

Despommier discusses the issue of current waste management practices:

One of the toughest challenges facing urban planners is trying to incorporate theconcept of sustainability into waste (both solid and liquid) management. Even inthe best of situations, most solid waste collections are compacted and relegated tolandfills. In a few rare instances they are incinerated to generate energy. Liquidwastes are processed, then treated with a bactericidal agent (e.g., chlorine) andreleased into the nearest body of water34

What vertical farm advocates suggest, is that food waste generated by the end user (i.e.

individuals, restaurants, and grocery stores) could be sent back to the vertical farm, where it can

be treated and broken down into compost and reused for the crops inside. In addition, a “vertical

farm [can] add energy back to the grid via methane generation from composting non-edible parts

of plants and animals”.35 A vertical farm system has the potential to not only affect the

agricultural production model, but from the example of recycling solid and liquid waste, a

second infrastructure advantage of waste management is created.

21,33 25 "The Vertical Farm Project." Home Page 2008. The Vertical Farm Project. 28 Nov. 2008 <http://www.verticalfarm.com/>.34 Despommier, Dickson. "The Vertical Farm Essay I." Vertical Farm-Essays. 2008. The Vertical Farm Project. 28 Nov. 2008<http://www.verticalfarm.com/vfessay1.aspx>.


Besides the benefits of managing waste, locating a vertical farm within an urban setting

changes the conventional model of food processing and distribution. Producing food in a

building, as Despommier and his researcher suggest, will not require the use of tractors or plows,

which could significantly reduce the use of fossil fuels. Additionally, producing food in a

building and locating the building within an urban area will reduce or eliminate the need to

transport the food to the consumer.

Section III. How vertical farms will help San Jose State University

A. Spartan Dining's current environmental and business practices

Spartan Dining is a non profit organization which means the students receive fair prices

uninhibited by a desire for large profits. Spartan Dinning also has other great practices, such as:

providing nutritional facts for all food served by Spartan Dinning, using potato based plastic

containers which help the environment, sourcing local ingredients when possible, changing the

menu with the seasons to allow more local ingredients to be used, much of the food is trans fat

free to help student and faculty health, a majority of food waste is composted into fresh soil, and

waste fry oils are turned into bio-diesel.

Additionally, Spartan Dinning is currently working with the school's Nutrition Department

to provide healthier food to SJSU. Spartan Dining plans to have a fruit cart sometime in 2009 to

provide low cost fresh fruit to students. Spartan Dinning has also agreed to work with our project

to bring most fresh locally sourced foods to SJSU. Having Spartan Dinning on board makes

distributing our harvest much easier and is beneficial to all parties involved.


B. Green rooftops and vertical farms are the next step for SJSU

The urban and vertical farming idea is the next step of progress for Spartan Dining and

SJSU. One great example of rooftop gardening is mentioned in Kym Pokorny's article,''Rocket

Science – An edible rooftop garden in Portland”(2007). In the article, Pokorny explains how the

garden atop the Rocket building successfully grows vegetable for the nearby Rocket restaurant.

Changing what is planted with the seasons allows the garden to produce a variety of vegetables.

It is the first of its kind in Portland and has drawn new attention to the idea of rooftop farming. In

the article Pokorny says, “All of this saves money for Rocket co-owners Leather Storrs and

Mukund Devan.” The garden is relatively new, but it's ability to provide the restaurant with a

variety of fresh vegetables shows promise that urban farming can be applied successfully in

businesses.

The rooftop garden in Portland Oregon

http://www.cityfarmer.info/rocket-science-%E2%80%93-an-edible-rooftop-garden-in-portland/


Possibly the best example of what we are proposing is located at Trent University in

Peterborough, Ontario. “In from Rooftop to Restaurant: A University Café Fed by A Rooftop

Garden” Blyth and Menagh explain how the garden supplies an on campus café called The

Seasoned Spoon Café, with fresh ingredients grown on campus. In the article Blyth and Menagh

(2006) say, “the price is easy to swallow as The Spoon's food is often less costly than other food

served on campus.” This shows that rooftop gardens at universities can not only provide

Roof top garden at Trent University

http://www.trentu.ca/admin/eab/files/Rooftop_Gardens-Zipple.pdf

vegetables grown on campus with a neutral or negative carbon footprint, but they can also do so

at a lower cost than vegetable and fruits traditionally sourced. Trent Universities' rooftop is a

good example of our proposed project at SJSU.


C. Our proposed model

Our initial plan at SJSU is to establish rooftop farms in order to provide students with on

campus grown, cheaper food. This project can benefit SJSU in many ways and make SJSU more

self reliant. It can also lower the carbon footprint of SJSU while helping to create healthier,

lower cost food choices to students and staff. We plan to establish the initial roof top gardens to

research growing techniques and other factors with the next step being to establish a vertical

garden at SJSU and eventually several throughout the city of San Jose. The initial project should

be able to provide low price high quality produce since it will be exempt from several costs.

Extensive use of volunteers will allow labor costs to be extremely low. The use of

rooftops rather than land that would normally have to be purchased or leased eliminates land

costs and the project has the ability to receive grants and donations that could allow it to provide

food to SJSU nearly cost free. Since it will be a non-profit organization it will sell at cost or at a

small profit margin to allow for expansion and the purchasing of other materials, but these

margins will be much lower than what is typical of the agriculture industry.

Another benefit of the rooftop garden would be the natural evaporative cooling plants

provide, Jeff Sonne's (2006) article “Evaluating Green Roof Energy Performance” goes into the

detail about the energy savings associated with green roofs, which would be similar to our

rooftop garden.

Summertime data indicate significantly lower peak roof surface temperaturesand higher nighttime surface temperatures for the green roof. The maximumaverage day temperature seen for the conventional roof surface was 130°F(54°C) while the maximum average day green roof surface temperature was91°F (33°C), or 39°F (22°C) lower than the conventional roof.


All of this adds to the potential viability of the project and its ability to bring healthier lower cost

food to SJSU. The next step is to discuss how a vertical farm can be integrated into the

university.

Section IV. Integration of a vertical farm into the San Jose State University campus

San Jose will require an innovative strategy to successfully implement a vertical

farming project throughout the city. This section will address how to implement the project,

making urban farming a reality. Relevant considerations include the possible sizes of vertical

farm structures, the process of choosing a proper location for the pilot project at San Jose State

University, what costs would be involved with construction, and how long the project should

take to get off the ground. These estimates and plans are tentative and based on data gathered

from existing research and urban development expert analysis.

A. Possible structure sizes

The objective of this project is to develop a farm that suits San Jose State’s needs as

well as its current landscape.

Photo: Craig Hyatt - © Chris Jacobs

Vertical farms have great potential for increasing production well beyond traditional farming

methods and can reach as heights beyond fifty stories (Despommier et al., 2006); however, we

are proposing a much smaller design. By farming indoors and upwards, it is possible to grow


continuously year-round and compact a great deal of land currently used for farming into a

smaller area. Wheat, one of the foods that can be grown indoors, is an excellent example of this

method. Suppose the project requires a vertical farm structure that sits on one acre of land and is

built with standard ten feet tall ceilings. Using National Institute of Standards and Technology

conversion standards and average crop heights of wheat as found in the Blaes and Defourny

study published by Remote Sensing of Environment, the average height of wheat crops are

between 1.54 and 1.91 feet tall. By farming wheat on one floor of a vertical farm, we can achieve

up to 5 times the amount of wheat grown on one acre on a traditional farm, (Despommier, 2007).

The same can be achieved with other crops as well. By farming upwards, we are substantially

reducing the amount of necessary land needed to produce food.

These numbers demonstrate the potential for even a small structure at San Jose State.

The suggested height for farms throughout San Jose is 3 stories above ground, based on

recommendation of Dr. Shishir Mathur, an associate professor of San Jose State’s college of

Social Sciences urban and regional planning department. This height would prevent residents

from rejecting the farms as intrusions on the city’s skyline, (Mathur, personal communication,

November 10, 2008). We recommend the structure at San Jose State be similar in height in order

to demonstrate the efficiency of the design and minimize initial costs.

Though constraints on the above ground height of these farms create limitations on the

total output of the farm, there are several processes that are possible below ground. By building

farms both skyward and earthward, the production of the farm can remain high while the

intrusion on the skyline can remain low. Fish farming, water filtration, and composting are prime

examples of functions that can take place below ground in 1 to 3 basement levels.


A very important part of the project is choosing the optimal location to showcase a

vertical farm at San Jose State. This process is critical to the success of urban farming’s launch in

San Jose. A good location should offer maximum exposure to the public and San Jose State

students. A location that is in an area with a large amount of pedestrians will spark interest and

promote the initiative.

B. Proposed structure locations

San Jose State offers several locations for a vertical farm. The first is near south

campus near Spartan Stadium, (Mathur). This area has three potentials including the track on the

east side on Tenth Street, the field directly beside Spartan Stadium, and the old student housing

building property, located on the north side of Spartan Stadium. Though these locations are away

from the main campus, the area receives a good deal of attention from motorists and pedestrians.

The San Jose Sharks’ practice facility, the San Jose Giants stadium, and Spartan Stadium provide

a great deal of attraction to the area, so the farm will achieve a high degree of visibility. These

areas are also currently being used minimally or not at all in the case of the old student housing

property. If placed at these locations, there will be little displacement of current activities on the

land; however, if the property of the old student housing is chosen, the current buildings will

need to be either modified greatly or taken down.

Another potential location is on the east side of the main campus beside the Boccardo

Business Tower, (Mathur). At this location there is currently a ground level parking lot. This

location offers great potential because there would be little to no displacement of the parking

spaces and the location is in a heavily trafficked area of the San Jose State campus. This location

would make the facilities easy for students and local residents around San Jose State to access.

The location is directly beside the business school, several ATMs, the career center, the Student


Union, and a short walk from the Campus Village housing and the engineering building. These

are all factors that make this a prime location for the San Jose State vertical farm.

The third, and most public of the locations is at the south east entrance to the Dr. Martin

Luther King, Jr. Library. This location is ideal for many reasons. The exposure is the most

apparent. It is next to the largest public and college library west of the Mississippi, the downtown

area of the city, and in a great place for students to access the facilities. Construction of a vertical

farm in this location would best serve the initial stage in the plan to introduce urban farming to

San Jose and as a showcase the progressive image of San Jose State and the city of San Jose,

which continues the legacy the King library has already started. The library is used greatly by

both students and the community, thus, bringing a meeting of the two to one location. A structure

placed here would receive maximum exposure from both.

Beginning this project will require several other considerations. Initial costs to build

these structures include architectural and design processes with assistance from specialist

consultants with experience building vertical farms, (Mathur). This consideration also requires

the project managers to determine whether the first structure on San Jose State University

property adheres to city building codes, because the university does not have to comply with

those standards, (Mathur). We submit that the first structure be compliant with city codes to

encourage the greatest support for furthering the project’s implementation throughout the city.

Other initial costs are environmental impact research, land, and construction.

C. Estimated construction timeline

The estimated time for the completion of the first structure given that there is

acceptance of the project, financial investment, and support from city officials and university

personnel is one year, (Mathur). The primary parties on which the success of the project is


contingent on are the City Council, Mayor, City Manager, Planning Director, Public Works

Director, Vice President of Finance, and the University Committee, (Mathur). Without the

support of these parties, the proposed urban and vertical farm development system within San

Jose would be difficult. The most probable impediments other than the previously mentioned are

location controversy and lack of funding, (Mathur). Now that we have discussed how urban

farming can be integrated into a community, we will discuss the benefits that will be derived

from the fruits and vegetables that the farm supplies.

Section V. Nutritional benefits of eating healthy

A number of College students now run a greater risk of developing chronic diseases, a

situation due, in part, to a low intake of fruits and vegetables (Brown, Dresen, and Effett, 2006).

Studies have shown that a healthier diet (consumption of more fruits and vegetables as well as

whole grains) is positively associated with better academic performance (Adams, T, PhD., &

Colner, W, BS. 2008). Dr Adams, from the Exercise and Wellness Department at Arizona State

University, and Ms Colner from the Nutrition Department at Arizona State University, following

their study on nation wide sample of college students, state that, “predictors of high fruit and

vegetable intake for men and women include better: seatbelt and helmet use, physical activity,

perceived health, sleep, self-care behaviors, and grades.” (2008). A similar study conducted by

the American College Health Association36, included thirty-seven US colleges in a Spring 2003

survey. The data collected was striking. 20,724 surveys were collected, which revealed that only

6.9% of college students (n=1,312) ate five or more serving of fruits and vegetables on daily

basis.

A. Eating healthy is good for you both physically and mentally

36 American College Health Association – is the principal advocate and leadership organizationfor college and university health.


In a research article published by the American Dietetic Association (2006) Richards,

Kattelmann, and Ren (2006), studying the consumption of fruits and vegetables in 18- to 24-

year-olds, the authors suggested that there was a strong positive correlation between the

consumption of adequate amount of fruits and vegetables (5 servings of fruits and vegetables)

and a decreased in the risk of chronic disease. In addition, Amy Richards (2006), who is a child

nutrition program specialist, suggested that consuming a healthy diet that contains a variety of

fruits and vegetables can prevent up to 20% or more incidences of cancer.

During college years, the consumption of a healthy diet is not a high priority for many

students; an unfortunate situation that, due to heightened stress levels, contributes to ill health.

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) “fruits and vegetables are a natural source of

energy and are one of the best eat-on-the-go foods.” (2008). Furthermore, the CDC (2008)

suggests that consumption of more fruits and vegetables may help protect you from chronic

diseases, including stroke and other cardiovascular diseases, as well as certain cancers.

According to a study by Florence, Asbridge, and Veugelers, a healthy diet does make an

impact on students over all health and their academic performance (2008). In this study Florence

et al. (2008) surveyed 5,200 fifth grade students and their parents as part of the children’s

Lifestyle and School-performance study in Nova Scotia, Canada. In this survey, the researchers

measured information on weight, height, dietary intake and other important factors such as

sociodemographic status. In addition, to make sure they collected enough information on dietary

intake, the participants Diet Quality Index – International (an effective tool for cross- national

comparison of diet quality) was used to sum-up the participants over all diet quality, and rate

each participants food intake based on their over all nutrition needs. The survey was intended to

illustrate the correlation between healthy food and literacy (Florence et al., 2008). The results of


this study suggested that the students with poor dietary habits (reduced consumption of fruits and

vegetables and increased fat and sugar intake) were likely to perform poorly on the assessment.

In addition, a healthy diet is not only good for your mind, but it is also good for ‘personal

well-being.’ According to another study conducted by Jyoti, Frongillo, and Jones, six- to twelve-

year-old children with food insufficiency37 had poorer math scores, higher grade repetition,

absenteeism, and tardiness (2005). In addition, this group paid frequent visits to psychologist,

reported higher anxiety, aggression, psychological dysfunctions, and difficulty getting along with

other children in their age range (13-15 years old). Finally, amongst the adolescent participants,

who were fifteen to sixteen years old, food insufficiency was positively correlated with

depressive disorder and suicidal symptoms despite their family income and other factors such as

low-socioeconomic status that could affect their food sufficiency. Thus this study suggests that

food nourishes your psychological state and that the availability of healthier and affordable food

options would result in better mental and physical stability as well as an improved academic

performance.

Based on the 2006, National College Health Assessment, published by the American College

Health Association, which analyzed 94,806 student from 117 schools in the U.S., the following

data was revealed:

Table 1.General Health of college Students

(117 campuses in the U.S)Anorexia 1.9%Anxiety disorders 12.4%Bulimia 11.2%Chronic fatigue syndrome 3.4%Depression 17.8%Diabetes 0.9%High blood pressure 4.5%

37 Food Insufficiency – Restricted availability of, or incapability to acquire nutritious, safe, andacceptable foods, due to financial instability.


High Cholesterol 4.0%Other Health Related issues 43.09%

In addition, the National College Health Assessment (2007) was also performed for San Jose

State University which revealed the following:

Table 2.General Health of college Students

(San Jose State University)Anorexia 1.4%Anxiety disorders 7.5%Bulimia 1.1%Chronic fatigue syndrome 2.0%Depression 15.0%Diabetes 0.9%High blood pressure 5.2%High Cholesterol 4.1%

Other Health Related issues 62.8%

Given these figures, it is obvious that over 50% of students (nationally) and approximately 37%

of students at San Jose State University, are suffering from health issues that are related to their

poor eating habits. Thus, all efforts should be taken to make nutritious food available at

affordable prices for students.

College years for many are often the start of independent living, and students at this

period are faced with different food choices, which often results in an unhealthy diet (Brunt, B,

PhD., Rhee, Y, PhD., Zhong, L, MS. 2008). Brunt et al. (2008) state that consumption of fat,

sodium, and sugar is higher in these groups. Furthermore, for students to control their weight,

skipping meals is a common habit (Brunt et al., 2008). According to Racette, Deusinger S, Stube,

Highstein, and Deusinger R, the weight that is gained and behavioral patterns during college,

account for obesity and overweight in adulthood and beyond (2005). In their study Racette et al.

(2005) examined 764 freshman and sophomore college students with an even number of men and

women, for weight and exercise assessment as well as dietary patterns. According to this study,


29% of the participants did not exercise regularly, 70% ate fewer than 5 servings of fruits and

vegetables per day, more than 50% consumed high-fat fast food three times in the prior week

before the testing and assessments, and by the end of their sophomore year, 70% of the 290

participants had gained weight. These startling statistics suggested these students’ unhealthy

eating habit (high-fat and sugar diet), together with lack of exercise and inadequate

consumption of vegetable and fruits (5 servings per day) contributed to overweight, which could

lead to future health problems.

A well-balanced and wholesome diet is a proven way to improve and maintain successful

academic scores. According to the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion38 at least 5

servings of fruits and vegetables are recommended per day to develop a healthy diet. However,

referring to the previous study conducted by the American College Health Association for San

Jose State University (2007), approximately 65% of students are consuming 1 or 2 servings of

fruits and vegetables on daily basis, while only 8% of students consuming the minimum amount

of 5 servings per day. In addition, in the same study, it has been reported that large number of

student (25%) at San Jose State University, are considered overweight, with an estimated

average Body Mass Index of 25-29.9. In comparison, in the national level, it is shown that

approximately 57% of students consume 1 or 2 servings of fruits and vegetables per day, while

only less than 8% are consuming the recommended 5 servings of fruits and vegetables per day

(2006). Also, approximately 22% of students are considered overweight, based on this report

(2006). In addition to poor eating habit, it is indicated that a large percentage of students at both

national level and at San Jose State University, practice healthy and unhealthy ways of losing the

excess weight that has been gained, due to an unhealthy diet (illustrated in Table 3.)

38 The Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion – is an organization of the U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, established to improve the nutrition and well-being of Americans.


Table 3.

Nutrition and Exercise

PracticesNationally(117 U.S

Campuses)(%)

San JoseState

University(%)

Exercising to lose weight 55.2 45.4Dieting to lose weight 34.5 23.0Vomiting or taking laxatives to lose weight 2.5 1.2Taking diet pills to lose weight 3.6 3.2Doing none of the above 37.6 38.6

In summary, College should not only be about academic learning but also about

developing healthy eating habits for life. With obesity being at the clinical level and

approximately 24 million Americans (7.8% of the U.S. population) being diagnosed with

diabetes (CDC, 2007), the food that is available at college campuses should be carefully selected

and healthy foods should be more available at lower costs. San Jose State and other colleges in

California should make the choice to have healthier foods available and reasonable price, thus

setting an example for other college campuses in the United States.

Conclusion

Vertical farms offer a solution to the problems that we face due to a lack of sustainability.

A vertical farm can be distinguished from simply a technological solution and can be

characterized as a systemic solution because the purpose of a vertical farm is to facilitate a

process by which more food is grown per acre while preserving the resources of the natural

world. Additionally, a vertical farm provides business opportunities, efficient city planning, and

easy access to essential nutritional food.

We have come to understand that a change in behavior is necessary to overcome the

sustainability problem and must come in the form of a change in resource acquisition and


management. We cannot look at this world as something merely to be used for our purposes. The

lives we lead, no matter what our personal convictions are regarding humanity’s relation to

nature, are dependent on the systemic health of Earth. Civilization, as it is currently organized, is

unsustainable because it exhaustes natural resources and/or harms the environment with the

methods of resource use. In order to address this problem we need to change our behavior, we

need to become sustainable.

References

Adams, B. T, PhD., & Colner, W, BS. (2008). The Association of Multiple Risk Factors With

Fruit and Vegetable Intake Among a Nationwide Sample of College Students. Journal Of

American College Health, 56, NO. 4: 455 – 461.

American College Health Association. (2006). Reference group executive summary. American

College Health Association – National College Health Assessment.

Retrieved November 24, 2008, from http://www.acha-ncha.org/pubs_rpts.html

American College Health Association. (2007). San Jose State University executive summary.

American College Health Association – National College Health Assessment.


Retrieved November 24, 2008, from http://www.acha-ncha.org

Baumguartner, J., Chambers, L., Despommier, D., Harman, A., Mitsumoto, J., Rothschild, J. The

Vertical Farm Entrepreneurship: Developing a Model of Profitability, Targeting

Funders and Stakeholders. (Spring 2006).

Blaes, X., & Defourny, P. (2003, December 30). Retrieving crop parameters based on tandem

ERS 1/2 interferometric coherence images. Remote Sensing of Environment, 88(4), 374.

Retrieved November 17, 2008, doi:10.1016/j.rse.2003.08.008

Blyth, A. & Menagh, L. (2006, Fall). In from Rooftop to Restaurant: A University Café Fed by A

Rooftop Garden. Retrieved Nov. 29th 2008 from

http://www.cog.ca/documents/RooftopRestaurantFA06.pdf

Brunt, A, PhD., Rhee, Y, PhD., & Zhong, L, MS. (2008). Differences in Dietary Patterns Among

College Students According to Body Mass Index. Journal Of American College Health, 56, No.

6: 629 – 634.

Brown, B. L, EdD, RD., Dresen, K. R., & Eggett, L. D, PhD. (2005). College Students Can

Benefit by Participating in a Prepaid Meal Plan. Journal Of The American Dietetic

Association, 105: 445 – 448.

"Dead Zone in the Ocean." Harm From Conventional Farming. 2004. Om Organics. Nov.-Dec.

2008 <http://www.omorganics.org/page.php?pageid=90>.

"Degraded Soil" Harm From Conventional Farming. 2004. Om Organics. Nov.-Dec. 2008

<http://www.omorganics.org/page.php?pageid=90>.

Despommier, Dickson. "The Vertical Farm Essay I." Vertical Farm-Essays. 2008. The Vertical

Farm Project. 28 Nov. 2008 <http://www.verticalfarm.com/vfessay1.aspx>.

Despommier, D., (2007, November 19). Video posted to www.youtube.com, (2008, January 26).


Original broadcast CNN Eco Solutions, (2007, November 19).

Dr. James, Danoff-Burg A. "The Terrestrial Influence: Geology and Soils." SEE-U:

Module 10. 2000. Columbia University. 29 Nov. 2008

<http://www.columbia.edu/itc/cerc/seeu/atlantic/restrict/modules/module10_content.html

Fishetti, Mark. Scientific American: Earth 3.0. Solutions for Sustainable Progress. October 1,

2008.

Florence, D. M, MSc, PDt., Asbridge, M, PhD., & Veugelers, J. P, PhD. (2008). Diet Quality

and Academic Performance. American School Health Association, 78, No. 4: 209 – 215.

Friedman, Thomas L. Hot, Flat, and Crowded. New York, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux,

2008, pp. 70, 148, 397.

GrowingPower.org. (2008) http://www.growingpower.org/growing.htm

Hawken, Paul, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. Natural Capitalism. New York, NY: Bay

Back Books, 1999.

Jensen, Derrick. Endgame. New York, New York: Seven Stories Press, 2006, pp. 104, 233, 235-

236.

Jyoti, F. D., Frongillo, A. E., & Jones, J. S. (2005). Food Insecurity Affects School Children’s

Academic Performance, Weight Gain, and Social Skills. American Society for Nutrition,

135: 2831 – 2839.

Kurasek, Blake. "The Living Skyscraper: Farming the Urban Skyline" 2 Dec. 2008. Graduate

School of Architecture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign.

Martin, Andrew. "One Country’s Table Scraps, Another Country’s Meal." NYTimes.com. 18

May 2008. The New York TImes. 30 Nov. 2008

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/weekinreview/18martin.html?_r=2&oref=slogin>.


Narain, Sunita. "The politics of inefficient irrigation technology." Subsidy Watch. 2007. Global

Subsidies Intiative. 03 Dec. 2008 <http://www.globalsubsidies.org/en/subsidy-

watch/commentary/the-politics-inefficient-irrigation-technology>.

Pokorny, K. (2007). Rocket Science – An edible rooftop garden in Portland. Retrieved Nov. 29th

2008 from http://www.cityfarmer.info/rocket-science-%E2%80%93-an-edible-rooftop-

garden-in-portland/

"Plant Nutrients." Mineral Nutrients & Soil. North Carolina Department of Agriculture and

Consumer Services. 29 Nov. 2008

<http://www.agr.state.nc.us/cyber/kidswrld/plant/nutrient.htm>.

Racette, B. S, PhD., Deusinger, S. S, PT, PhD., Strube, J. M, PhD., Highstein, R. G, RN, PhD.,

& Deusinger, H. R, PT, PhD. (2005). Weight Changes, Exercise, and Dietary Patterns

During Freshman and Sophomore Years of College. Journal Of American College

Health, 53, No. 6: 245 – 251.

Richards, A, MS, RD., Kattelmann, K. Kendra, PhD, RD., & Ren, C, PhD. (2006). Motivating

18- to 24- Year-Olds to Increase Their Fruit and Vegetable Consumption. Journal Of The

American Dietetic Association, 106: 1405 – 1411.

Sonne, J. (February 2006). Evaluating Green Roof Energy Performance. Retrieved Dec. 3rd

2008 from

http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/media/newsletters/brpost/winter2006/ASHRAEJeffSonne.pdf

Susan, Lang S. "Soil erosion threat." Chronicle Online. 20 Mar. 2006. Cornell University. 30

Nov. 2008 <http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/march06/soil.erosion.threat.ssl.html>.


The American Journal Health Association. (2008). The American College Health Association

National College Health Assessment (ACHA-NCHA), Spring 2003 Reference Group

Report. Journal Of American College Health, 53, No. 5: 199 – 210.

United States National Institute of Standards and Technology. Conversion Standards [Data file].

Retrieved from http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Publications/Upload/h4402_app

enc.pdf

Yale University. (2008). Yale sustainable food project. Retrieved on Nov. 29th 2008 from

http://www.yale.edu/sustainablefood/farm.html

Education

Sustainable Development Using Vertical Farms