This is the greatest architectural idea ever conceived... if you're a venture capitalist, invest! Thankyou, Treehugger, for helping me regain my faith in cities...

hah. wow. I love these visions of the future.

It could definitely be made economically feasible in New York, where everyone eats $10 a pound arugula and baby endive.

The Hudson used to be one of the great oyster fisheries of the world. If the PCBs are cleaned up, it could be again.

I see the article mentions hydroponics. I wanted to put the debate out there on whether food is better grown in soil then in water- considering both taste and the whole David Suzuki Sacred Balance sort of thing. Also, what about the importance of beneficial insects and microorganisms in the whole plant lifecycle?

This is great. I've been wondering if someone had researched and planned something like this.

If you check out the verticalfarm.com site, it's much more complete than just farming. Their plans call for greywater filtering, rainwater collection, and even an aquaculture as part of the full permaculture style arrangement.

They talk about using biomass waste from the farm as a pellet based fuel, though I'd thing an integrated alae biofuel level has more promise of self sufficiency.

After all is said and done though, The level of technical complexity as designed seems exessive. I'd like to see a simpler multi-tiered greenhouse design. Something obtainable by groups/cities without hundreds of millions of dollars.

This is pretty cool and it really appeals to me but I can't help but see a whole bunch of showstoppers...
For a start, plants need lots of sunlight. If you're going to stack many levels of crops on top of each other then most'll be growing in the shade which would severely affect their growth.
Then there's the embodied energy of the building which will be high. All that concrete was created by CO2 emitting methods.
The building will shade a large area behind it. That might be OK in hot climates but in cold climates it steals the light and warmth.
The ecomomics are pretty dubious. City real estate and skyscrapers are very expensive. Building them on a hectare scale will again be very expensive. Plants, soil or hydroponics are heavy & may require sturdier construction than human occupied buildings. Granted, as the world population rises, food prices will probably rise too and there are certainly crops that crop well under intensive greenhouse conditions but there are plenty of other crops that don't. If this is ever built I'll bet that the first crops are high value ones like capsicums, strawberries, tomatoes etc. Not potatoes.
Suggesting that eveything will be organically grown is questionable - you still get pests & diseases in glasshouses, they'll find their way in and getting rid of things like whitefly is very difficult.

As I said, I like the idea, there are certainly good reasons for trying it, there are some great synergies that can be captured (ie using sewage for nutrients, feeding scraps to chickens, using plant matter to fuel boilers etc). Unfortunately though I think the proponents are being excessively optimistic.

Good luck to them though.

Interesting idea and I think a simpler less 'engineered' version of it will work nicely. Perhaps integrated into an apartment building?

But why are all the people in the pictures wearing lab coats? Producing food isn't science, or at least it shouldn't be. Ditch the lab coats and wear your oldest jeans, an old shirt, some gardening gloves and a sun hat. That would be farming.

ka kite
Christopher.

I've really loved this idea since I heard this guy talk about it on NPR last year, though I can't help but think about all of the hormones and chemicals in the wastewater. I know that soy often has higher than natural levels of estrogen because it's fertilized with human waste which contains a huge amount of birth control estrogen. Then there are all the antibiotics that we take. I guess it's too much to expect this system to be organic too...

I wonder if it could be made even more local and be done (partly) in your apartment. The composting tower in my kitchen feeds my window box which grows tomatoes and herbs (though it doesn't, yet, filter my wastewater).

i understand that the idea here is to use up less wild acreage, but i guess the scientist "forgot" about the ecological footprint of all the metal, concrete and glass he used!

(maybe it has something to do with those white lab coats?)

"i guess the scientist "forgot" about the ecological footprint of all the metal, concrete and glass he used!"

If such a farm can be used for decades and save lots of shipping to a city and non-organic farming, it might be worth it, especially if extra care is taken in the construction to reduce the footprint.

Another thing they could use is fiberoptic cable to transmit light from the sun to the interior of the plant. They are looking into this for algae production, but it could just as easily be used in this application.

VERY COOL!

My question. Why?

Realistically, the amount of light energy input to grow an acre of X is going to be the same whether you stack that acre under another one, or put it next to another (the way that people have been doing it for millennia). So, realistically, you would need as many acres of light acceptors as plants. Or some other power source (read coal, or possibly nuclear).

Do any toxic chemicals still remain in treated wastewater that could end up in these plants and thus the resulting food?

You'd also have to space each one of these tall towers far enough from each other that they do not shade each other.

"I know that soy often has higher than natural levels of estrogen because it's fertilized with human waste which contains a huge amount of birth control estrogen. Then there are all the antibiotics that we take."

Please cite some sources to back up your claims. Until then I'm going to consider you misinformed and paranoid.

"I know that soy often has higher than natural levels of estrogen because it's fertilized with human waste which contains a huge amount of birth control estrogen. Then there are all the antibiotics that we take."

Please cite some sources to back up your claims. Until then I'm going to consider you misinformed and paranoid.

mindblowing.

5 star

While it's great to invent new sustainable ways of building, I believe we'd have to address the food productioon raises population problem first. Or this will just more people in a over populated world.
Take Care.

Incredibly this is an idea which I have been toying with for a while in my independent college research. It combines a design method familiar to Japanese architects who have space conservation and localit-complexity in mind. With popuation growth and resource distribution becoming major issues in the coming years the design concept of building "up" instead of "out" will likely gain in popularity in the West.

But why limit tall story greenhouses to food production? Vegetation does something else crucially important in ecosystems - it provides oxygen and breathable air. The long cycles of vegetative growth filter air and water and nutrients. We harvest the nutrients already, but we could also use these greenhouses for the air and water.
If we could open up the greenhouses to outside air, and assuming the strcutures would be built in large population cities, the polluted air flow from cities would inevitably experience a percentage increase in filtration and re-oxygenation. That would also mean fewer greenhouse gases would make it all the way to the upper atmosphere. The more localized vegetation in a region, the cleaner the air. Also with each level of altitude, sunlight, and precipitation the diversity of species able to survive will increase. If allowed to grow organically, each system will evolve ecologically on its own in the same way large trees devlope their own subsequent colonies of symbiots. A colony of ants here, a snake there, a few vines that produce flowers, add some birds to eat and carry seeds, and presto - a thriving system.

The technological catasrophe of this age is one of time-lines: cycles are unable to regenerate in the fast-paced human world, waste deomposition, food production, air filtration...all these things would be taken care of by nature if we could give nature the time and space it needed. We can't however. Not with our limitations and our growing population.
The way I see it, there is the natural trophic scale and the technological trophic scale. We have unbalance in both scales because we have knocked out much of the bottom pieces - the primary producers. Our society is a primary consumer, and our tehcnologies are top heavy producer/consumers. By using technology to rebuild the bottom of the trophic scale, we will balance out both systems.

Plants trees until you have no more room. When you have no more room, grow algae on the ceiling...or make robotic grass. But good god, do something.

Any thoughts about vertical farming is asking for very costly food. Lack of sunlight will be it's gretest downfall.
What is wrong with present day hydroponics? They could also be located on water with the use of floating barges. The amount of food one person can produce in USA provides the consumer more food at a low cost.
Russia has a huge number of greenhouses using thermal heat to heat the units in cold weather.
Modern agriculture is producing surplus food so where is there a need?

I have yet to see anything concerning security. While I think this is a wonderful concept, it would have to be guarded like Fort Knox in every city. And then tested before it went out the door. Think of the possibility of terrorism on an entire city's food supply coming from a single source. Or maybe there would be a way to continuosly test the run off water.

Or, maybe we would need to produce twice what we need to stay prepared for such a situation and so long as there are no catastrophies, we can send the excess to poverty stricken countries. We are adding travel miles back to the food source but feeding the starving.

Hmmm, maybe they could consider that as part of the initial plan, to end hunger in 3rd world countries by producing the excess. And I wonder if a system like this could be developed in resource deprived countries.

Great possibilities here.

I think in a few decades from now these will be all over the place. These would be excelent in countries like China where there is no room left.

Energy Independence begins with Energy efficiency - It's cheaper to save energy than to make energy

Updated October 9, 2007
MANDATORY RENEWABLE ENERGY – THE ENERGY EVOLUTION –R24
By Jay Draiman, Energy Consultant

Today’s energy industry is perhaps the world’s most powerful. Energy is the basis of all this world’s wealth, and for perhaps earth’s entire history, the sun’s energy has fueled all ecological and economic systems. If early humans did not learn to exploit new sources of energy, humankind would still be living in the tropical forests. Without the continual exploitation of new energy sources, there would have been no civilization, no Industrial Revolution and no looming global catastrophe.

In order to insure energy and economic independence as well as better economic growth without being blackmailed by foreign countries, our country, the United States of America’s Utilization of Energy Sources must change.
"Energy drives our entire economy.” We must protect it. "Let's face it, without energy the whole economy and economic society we have set up would come to a halt. So you want to have control over such an important resource that you need for your society and your economy." The American way of life is not negotiable.
Our continued dependence on fossil fuels could and will lead to catastrophic consequences..

The federal, state and local government should implement a mandatory renewable energy installation program for residential and commercial property on new construction and remodeling projects, replacement of appliances, motors, HVAC with the use of energy efficient materials-products, mechanical systems, appliances, lighting, insulation, retrofits etc. The source of energy must be by renewable energy such as Solar-Photovoltaic, Geothermal, Wind, Biofuels, Ocean-Tidal, Hydrogen-Fuel Cell etc. This includes the utilizing of water from lakes, rivers and oceans to circulate in cooling towers to produce air conditioning, increase the use of outside air for ventilation and cooling (which also reduces indoor pollution and healthier), and the utilization of proper landscaping to reduce energy consumption. (Sales tax on renewable energy products and energy efficiency should be reduced or eliminated) (Construct new transmission lines and renewable energy zones) (We should also utilize solar energy for ocean water desalinization to alleviate the increasing water shortages – the scientists are claiming ocean levels are elevating – population, economic advancement and technology are increasing which increases demand)

The implementation of mandatory renewable energy could be done on a gradual scale over the next 10 years. At the end of the 10 year period all construction and energy use in the structures throughout the United States must be 100% powered by renewable energy. (This can be done by amending building code)

In addition, the governments must impose laws, rules and regulations whereby the utility companies must comply with a fair “NET METERING” (the buying of excess generation from the consumer at market price), including the promotion of research and production of “renewable energy technology” with various long term incentives and grants. The various foundations in existence should be used to contribute to this cause.

A mandatory time table should also be established for the automobile industry to gradually produce an automobile powered by renewable energy. The American automobile industry is surely capable of accomplishing this task. As an inducement to buy hybrid automobiles (sales tax should be reduced or eliminated on American manufactured automobiles).

This is a way to expedite our energy independence and economic growth. (This will also create a substantial amount of new jobs). It will take maximum effort and a relentless pursuit of the private, commercial and industrial government sectors’ commitment to renewable energy – energy generation (wind, solar, hydro, biofuels, geothermal, energy storage (fuel cells, advance batteries), energy infrastructure (management, transmission) and energy efficiency (lighting, sensors, automation, conservation) (rainwater harvesting, water conservation) (energy and natural resources conservation) in order to achieve our energy independence.

For the benefit of mankind, maintain the quality of life and preserve the tranquility of world population. Water resources must be preserved to sustain humanity. We should utilize solar and or other source of renewable energy to operate desalinization projects from the oceans. As world population increases the scarcity of water will become a cause for conflict, unless we take steps now to develop other sources of water for drinking, rainwater harvesting and graywater utilization.
To preserve the future generations sustainability, we should look into urban farming – vertical farming. The term "urban farming" may conjure up a community garden where locals grow a few heads of lettuce. But some academics envision something quite different for the increasingly hungry world of the 21st century: a vertical farm that will do for agriculture what the skyscraper did for office space. Greenhouse giant: By stacking floors full of produce, a vertical farm could rake in $18 million a year.
I believe what America needs are cool headed government leaders who understand how markets function and can work with consumers, voters and oil industry leaders to develop a viable energy strategy that will help and not hinder as our nation transitions to our new energy reality.
"To succeed, you have to believe in something with such a passion that it becomes a reality."

Jay Draiman, Energy Consultant
Northridge, CA. 91324
October 9, 2007

P.S. I have a very deep belief in America's capabilities. Within the next 10 years we can accomplish our energy independence, if we as a nation truly set our goals to accomplish this.

I happen to believe that we can do it. In another crisis--the one in 1942--President Franklin D. Roosevelt said this country would build 60,000 [50,000] military aircraft. By 1943, production in that program had reached 125,000 aircraft annually. They did it then. We can do it now.

"The way we produce and use energy must fundamentally change."
The American people resilience and determination to retain the way of life is unconquerable and we as a nation will succeed in this endeavor of Energy Independence.

The Oil Companies should be required to invest a substantial percentage of their profit in renewable energy R&D and implementation. Those who do not will be panelized by the public at large by boy cutting their products.

Solar energy is the source of all energy on the earth (excepting volcanic geothermal). Wind, wave and fossil fuels all get their energy from the sun. Fossil fuels are only a battery which will eventually run out. The sooner we can exploit all forms of Solar energy (cost effectively or not against dubiously cheap FFs) the better off we will all be. If the battery runs out first, the survivors will all be living like in the 18th century again.

Every new home built should come with a solar package. A 1.5 kW per bedroom is a good rule of thumb. The formula 1.5 X's 5 hrs per day X's 30 days will produce about 225 kWh per bedroom monthly. This peak production period will offset 17 to 2

4 cents per kWh with a potential of $160 per month or about $60,000 over the 30-year mortgage period for a three-bedroom home. It is economically feasible at the current energy price and the interest portion of the loan is deductible. Why not?

Title 24 has been mandated forcing developers to build energy efficient homes. Their bull-headedness put them in that position and now they see that Title 24 works with little added cost. Solar should also be mandated and if the developer designs a home that solar is impossible to do then they should pay an equivalent mitigation fee allowing others to put solar on in place of their negligence. (Installation should be paid “performance based”).

Installation of renewable energy and its performance should be paid to the installer and manufacturer based on "performance based" (that means they are held accountable for the performance of the product - that includes the automobile industry). This will gain the trust and confidence of the end-user to proceed with such a project; it will also prove to the public that it is a viable avenue of energy conservation.

Installing a renewable energy system on your home or business increases the value of the property and provides a marketing advantage. It also decreases our trade deficit.

Nations of the world should unite and join together in a cohesive effort to develop and implement MANDATORY RENEWABLE ENERGY for the sake of humankind and future generations.

The head of the U.S. government's renewable energy lab said Monday (Feb. 5) that the federal government is doing "embarrassingly few things" to foster renewable energy, leaving leadership to the states at a time of opportunity to change the nation's energy future. "I see little happening at the federal level. Much more needs to happen." What's needed, he said, is a change of our national mind set. Instead of viewing the hurdles that still face renewable sources and setting national energy goals with those hurdles in mind, we should set ambitious national renewable energy goals and set about overcoming the hurdles to meet them. We have an opportunity, an opportunity we can take advantage of or an opportunity we can squander and let go,"

Solar energy - the direct conversion of sunlight with solar cells, either into electricity or hydrogen, faces cost hurdles independent of their intrinsic efficiency. Ways must be found to lower production costs and design better conversion and storage systems.

Disenco Energy of the UK has announced it has reached important
milestones leading to full commercialization, such as the completion of
field trials for its home, micro combined heat and power plant (m-CHP).
The company expects to begin a product roll out in the second quarter of
2008.
Operating at over 90 percent efficiency, the m-CHP will be able to
provide 15 kilowatts of thermal energy (about 50,000 Btu’s) for heat and
hot water and generate 3 kilowatts of electricity. The m-CHP uses a
Stirling engine generator and would be a direct replacement for a home’s
boiler.
Running on piped-in natural gas the unit would create some independence
from the power grid, but still remain connected to the gas supply
network.
Whereas heat is supplied only when the generator is running (or
conversely electricity is generated only when heat is needed) a back-up
battery system and heavily insulated hot water storage tank seem
eventual options for more complete energy independence.

FEDERAL BUILDINGS WITH SOLAR ENERGY – Renewable Energy
All government buildings, Federal, State, County, City etc. should be mandated to be energy efficient and must use renewable energy on all new structures and structures that are been remodeled/upgraded.
"The government should serve as an example to its citizens"

A new innovative renewable energy generating technology is in development. The idea behind Promethean Power came from Matthew Orosz, an MIT graduate student who has worked as a Peace Corps volunteer in the African nation of Lesotho. Orosz wanted to provide electric power, refrigeration, and hot water to people without electricity. He and some MIT colleagues designed a set of mirrors that focus sunlight onto tubes filled with coolant. The hot coolant turns to pressurized vapor, which turns a turbine to make electricity. The leftover heat can be used to warm a tank of water and to run a refrigerator or an air conditioner, using a gas-absorption process that chills liquid ammonia by first heating it.
IS TECHNOLOGY BEING HELD BACK
New Solar Electric Cells - 80% efficient
Mr. Marks says solar panels made with Lepcon or Lumeloid, the materials he patented, ... Most photovoltaic cells are only about 15 percent efficient. ...
A major increase in daily petroleum output is deemed essential to meet U.S. and international oil requirements in 2020, and so we should expect recurring oil shortages and price increases. Only by expediting the diminishing our day-to-day consumption of petroleum and implementing of efficiency and renewable energy policy can we hope to reduce our exposure to costly oil-supply disruptions and lower the risk of economic strangulation.
Quick Facts
 Energy is vital to every sector of the U.S. economy. As our economy grows, the demand for energy rises.

 Total energy consumption is projected to increase 35 percent by 2030.

 Energy-efficiency improvements have played a major role in meeting national energy needs since the 1970s, relative to new supply.
ULTRACAPACITORS - But what if you could harness a technology that would enable you to drive 500 miles round-trip on a 5-minute charge?

That's the promise of U.S. Patent No. 7,033,406 which promises, maybe even threatens, to do away with the internal combustion engine, and the traditional car battery, all in one swoop.
The patent is the property of Austin-based startup called EEStor, which touts "technologies for replacement of electrochemical batteries." In layman's terms, that means you could use the EEStor technology to drive from Boston to Philly and back without a drop of gasoline.

STEP INTO THE LIGHT – AND OUT TO THE WORLD
Jay Draiman, Energy Consultant
Northridge, CA 91324
Email: renewableenergy2@msn.com

Posted on: 10/9//2007

If you have ever grown anything indoors you will realise a few problems with this idea.

First there will only be enough light for the plants on the south facing side and maybe 10ft into the structure. In the winter the light will be enough to keep the plants alive but they will not produce. If you don't believe me try growing tomatoes or peppers indoors. They do well next to the window but come winter, no fruit.

Second the additional lighting required to have plants grow will increase the carbon foot print hugely. The sun puts out about 1000 watts/m2 that has to be replaced by lights which are not 100% efficient. This means it will take more than 1000 watts/m2 of lighting to do the same job.

Factor in the carbon footprint of building such a structure and you have a enviromental disaster on your hands.

Its a nice idea but like a perpetual motion device it just will not work. The designer should try growing something themselves before redesigning the system of growing.

due to the light limitations (brought up by several commentors) it seems that doing this on only the top floors of structures would make more sense. If the top of every building in the city housed a food producing garden using some low tech concepts, that would be just swell.

If was impressive with the idea !!
Just Imagine there are big and small Futurama farming building's in every city or town.

Is there already a real building like this in the country ? Let me know, perhaps It's worth for a visit.