The Viability of Vertical Farming Across Different Scales

by Student’s Name

Code + Course Name

Professor’s Name

University Name

City, State

Date

Abstract

For decades, the problem of food security has influenced people’s well-being. Academics and industry experts are actively working to develop alternative approaches to resolve this problem. Vertical farming is a concept that has recently gained popularity. And free space to provide food protection, and one of these innovations is environmental sustainability. However, this idea was still in its infancy, and for several years, its growth was intermittent. This paper employs a detailed method for performing a feasibility study to begin vertical farming at various levels, which can an indicator of how widely this approach. Using this method, they performed a case study at various levels to determine ROI and nutritional sufficiency. A post-investment model using the central boundary principle, and we examine different scenarios. Introducing these farms took about 10 to 20 years to break even, and the annual profit was $ 92,000.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction4

2. Materials and methods5

1. Definitions5

2. Reasons for vertical planting5

1. Security of food and nutrition 6

2. Changes in the climate 7

3. Energy scarcity 8

4. Water8

5. Supply chain logistics 9

3. The factors that contributed to the emergence of vertical farms historically and geographically10

4. Vertical farming can take many different forms. 11

1. Aquaponics11

2. Hydroponics12

3. Aeroponics12

5. Advantages of vertical farming14

6. Existing vertical farms16

7. Expand vertical farming that faces many types of challenges. 19

8. The spotlight on China20

9. Methodology23

10. Central limit theorem25

3. Results28

4. Discussion30

5. Conclusion32

6. References33

The Viability of Vertical Farming Across Different Scales

Introduction

The topic of food and nutrition protection is at the heart of the problems we’re dealing with right now on the ground. According to a new survey, over 815 million people are food insecure, a rise of 38 million people due to climate change and the spread of violent conflict. According to these statistics, we must take responsibility for resolving this issue to eliminate hunger and poverty in our current situation. The global food system is currently under pressure to feed an ever-increasing population. Consumer behavior and food production practices influence any form of diet inefficiency. Nearly 80% of the world’s population will live in cities by 2050. In the meantime, we would need land to feed the increasing population, according to conventional food production practices. In this fast-paced environment, land scarcity and the depletion of natural resources have been motivating factors for smart solutions. There has been a slew of promising experiments and novel approaches to combating this problem in our built environment. One of these advances is “organic agriculture,” which involves incorporating agriculture into building systems. This is an alternative method whereby the food supply chain directly from producer to consumer. This has a much smaller carbon footprint and is more environmentally friendly. Although this technology is still in its infancy, real-world examples demonstrate that vertical farming can provide high-quality products while conserving resources. Organic agriculture has yielded notable results in countries such as the United States, Japan, and Singapore.

Provides a framework that encourages enterprises, this study also looks at food data, which includes and compares production and financial outcomes using vertical farming. might contribute to the company producing its food on-site and reinvesting the savings in something more useful. May be an incentive for both commercial and residential sectors to take the lead and build environmental responsibility on behalf of humanity. The study examines vertical farming approaches and how they can contribute to saving fossil fuels and reducing the waste of resources.

2. Materials and methods

1. Definitions

Vertical farming has a variety of meanings, but in its simplest form, it is a method of urban cultivation of fruits, vegetables, and grains within a structure in a city or metropolitan area, where there are pavers to house crops without soil (hydroponics and aeroponics). Gilbert E. Bailey, an American geologist, had a great idea for developing agricultural products in large multi-story buildings. In modern agriculture, his book Vertical Farming was groundbreaking (François Mancibo, 2018). Vertical farming is a method of commercial farming in which plants, livestock, fungi, and other life forms vertically on top of each other for food, fuel, fiber, or other products or services (Banerjee, C; Eden, Lam, 2014). The idea of saving food using the city is not new, but the concept of customizing a building, a whole skyscraper for growing produce, known as vertical farming, expands urban farming within the building.

Another recently coined word is “farming without open space.” Rooftop gardens, indoor agriculture, and rooftop greenhouses are examples of farming without the use of additional farmland. I consider this a branch of sustainable, decentralized urban agriculture. This idea, first introduced in Berlin (Germany), encourages other cities to adopt these activities while keeping in mind their advantages and challenges (Thomaier, S.; Specht, K.; Henckel, D.; Dierich, A.; Siebert, R..; Freisinger, UB; Sawicka, M., 2015). This may also become a single of options that allow the general public to have a greater influence on the quality and quantity of their merchandise.

2. Reasons for vertical planting

The United Nations reports that (2017), At the halfway point of the year, the global population stood at 7.6 billion people, with projections of 9.8 billion by 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100. Annually, 19.5 agricultural lands with a million hectares are expected to be turned into urban areas. Since cities are the epicenters of innovation, research, jobs, growth, social development, and prosperity, among other things. Rapid urbanization has placed water supply, sanitation, biodiversity, land and soil resources, and public health in jeopardy. The social, legal, and environmental demands on land use must be addressed in an integrated manner for sustainable urban and rural growth.

Since more than A total of two billion hectares of arable land area available for cultivation. have been depleted, the world’s food production must increase to feed the 9.5 billion people predicted to exist by 2050. Surprisingly, only about 46% of the 130 ice-free lands covering a million square kilometers are used for agriculture. Forests account for 7 % of gross revenue, while urban and pre-urban areas account for what’s left 7%. The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization claims (FAO), up to 25% of the land is currently highly degraded, 36% is moderately degraded, and only 10% is growing. Nearly 42 percent of the population of two of the world’s countries with the most citizens suffer from chronic hunger. An unsustainable environmental catastrophe may result from the unprecedented growth of megacities. The year was 2000, the world’s main cities accounted for 2% of the ground surface, accounting for roughly 75% of industrial wood use, Water use is 60%, 80% of CO2 emissions. With these findings in mind, it makes sense to incorporate techniques like vertical farming into our built environment to conserve natural and economic resources.

1. Security of food and nutrition

Many reports have shown that climate change harms food security. Traditional agriculture’s negative effects can be mitigated by sustainable land management. Outdoor freelancers such as chemicals, heavy equipment, and other environmentally harmful factors can be significantly minimized by incorporating vertical farming. It will also help increase soil nutrient supply by conserving resources such as water and electricity. There are several options for achieving benefits, including afforestation, pest management, flood control, and plant management, to name a few.

2. Changes in the climate

As the global average temperature rises by 0.85 degrees Celsius, grain yield falls by around 5%. Carbon emissions increased dramatically over the last three decades, from 2000 to 2010. The graphs below show how these figures have risen in recent years, demonstrating that climate change is significant. Annual temperatures have been colder than the 136-year average since 2001. (Figure 1).

Low-energy food intake has had a major effect on serious health problems such as obesity reduction and climate change mitigation. Increased active transportation such as walking and cycling, combined with public transportation for long-distance travel could help meet greenhouse gas (GHG) emission goals while also improving public health. (An, R.; Ji, M.; Zhang, S, 2018). Figure 2 shows evidence from a number of the world’s largest economies on the rise in greenhouse emissions, which is a significant contributor to climate change.

3. Energy scarcity

Energy accounts for about 60% of overall global emissions of greenhouse gases, making it a significant contributor in reaction to global warming. Long-term climate targets include a rapid expansion of low-carbon, clean, and renewable sources of energy. In the field of agriculture, it is a significant factor to remember. According to research, nearly 1.4 billion people don’t have access to electricity, and 2.7 billion people rely on biomass cooking. By 2030, 1.2 billion individuals will still lack electricity supply, of which 87% will reside in rural areas. The power usage is depicted in the diagram below.

Figure 3 depicts the trend of energy usage across various industries concerning the various energy sources available. As a result, a shift from nonrenewable to renewable energy sources is crucial. Furthermore, the transportation sector consumes 92 percent of all gasoline, which can be decreased by implementing innovations such as vertical farming. Figure 3: Energy consumption patterns by sectors and sources. Figure 2: Major economies’ emissions of greenhouse gases.

4. Water

Water decision-making is linked to land growth, and water conservation is critical. To do this, alleviate the shortage of water, sustainable land practices must include cost-effectively enhancing water efficiency and quality, besides, preserving habitats. The issue of scarcity of water is significantly reduced when vertical farming is used. Nearly 40% of the global population is hampered by a lack of water, and with 1.7 billion individuals living in river basins where recharge is limited relative to use, It’s possible life-threatening. Furthermore, water drainage for irrigation accounts for 70 % of the world’s total water supply use, while 80 % of the wastewater is dumped into the atmosphere free of charge (Connor, R., 2015). Vertical farming has a lot of potential for saving resources in terms of consumption and food production, and the system can be built to be off-grid, or local supply.

5. Supply chain logistics

Transportation ranks second among industries that contribute to climate change. This energy use applies to the food industry’s supply chain logistics (Figure 4). A standard food supply logistics cycle is depicted in the flowchart below. Technology for vertical farming, it can be deduced, can save a large number of fossil fuels and time. The food industry consumes a large number of resources such as different types of machinery, labor, and capital. The majority of a useful resource is time, which has been heavily invested in supplying food for people.

Food processing and distribution methods have been rethought as a result of the rapid depletion of fossil fuels and the emergence of digital technologies. The promise of farming on a vertical scale is huge to provide valuable resources to the whole world while also improving health for the average person. Most significantly, there is an expense involved with each phase of this process, that might be used to increase the quantity of food available to the general public. Farming on a vertical scale is a form of farming that allows for the effective use of capital such as fossil fuels, fertilizers, manpower, and machinery. The yield from these farms can change the way we think about agriculture.

3. The factors that contributed to the emergence of vertical farms historically and geographically

The first vertical farm, as far as I’m aware, debuted in Japan in 2010. Instead of becoming a commercial venture, Dr. Kozai and his research team developed a pilot farm at Chiba University. Due to saltwater and radioactive waste, 5% of Japan’s agriculture was lost or not used in the aftermath of the 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear crisis. Dr. Kozai suggested a vertical farming model that grows food in a healthy and regulated indoor climate, free of polluted water or soil, in response to the government’s public demand for a solution. The Japanese government began to provide widespread funding for vertical farms, which resulted in a significant increase in their number. Several hundred commercial vertical farms, such as Spread Co., are operating throughout Japan’s islands as of 2018. Green leafy vegetables, which are particularly easy to grow in this kind of setting, have become a staple of Japanese cuisine.

South Korea was the second nation to experiment with vertical agriculture. It began as an experimental seed bank complex in Sawan, then extended to include agricultural training so that others could replicate the model. As a result, a powerful industry sprung up all over the world.

A three-story building in Chicago’s old meatpacking district was the third recorded case of vertical farming. Fish, mixed vegetables, fish oil, and barley were among the products grown in each story. Since its inception in 2013, this program has been solely devoted to educational purposes.

Since that time, a large number of vertical farms have sprouted all over the world. They doubled in a year and have continued to rise at a breakneck pace since then. The number of vertical farms would likely grow at an engineering rate rather than an arithmetic rate over the next five to ten years. This means that vertical farming is on its way to being a popular feature of city landscapes and that cities would be able to produce enough food to feed more than 60% of the population.

I will explain this latest development through two main factors:

The first is that now is the right time for urban agriculture innovation. In reality, even though the concept of a vertical farmhouse was conceived many years before 2010, it may not have received the requisite attention to ensure its survival and expansion. However, the industry now supports vertical farms, resulting in their popularity.

A second element, (2) rapid climate change, adds to this. Unsurprisingly, the number of vertical farms is increasing at the same rate as human climate change. Vertical farm planners are inspired by the fact that existing food production practices are disrupting the Earth’s ecosystem and climate, necessitating the development of new methods of food production. Consumers and environmentally conscious people, on the other hand, welcome vertically farmed items into their diets. Food production and consumption are being pushed to adopt new and more sustainable patterns as climate change, population growth, and city expansion continue – all of which are unlikely to slow down – with vertical farming playing a key role. As a result, vertical farming is expected to continue to grow around the world.

4. Vertical farming can take many different forms.

1. Aquaponics

In a symbiotic environment, this is a form of plant production that includes both edible and non-edible sources that combine support for an aquatic ecosystem such as fish, snails, etc. with a hydroponic system harvesting with only water and nutrients. The toxicity of the water is increased by the suspended remains of the marine animals raised in the tank. Nitrogen-fixing bacteria then break it down into nitrates and nitrites, which are fed into hydroponic systems and used as nutrients by plants. This is an example of a continuous cycle since the water is continuously recycled; the plant roots are nourished with nutrient-rich water as owing to this process. The aquaculture subsystem’s water is washed and oxygenated before being returned to the aquaculture tanks. These systems work together to allow toxic ammonia to leach out of the system to aquatic animals while still supplying nutrients to the plants.

2. Hydroponics

Hydroponics is a branch of hydroponics in which plants are cultivated without soil rather than using mineral nutrient solutions in an aqueous solvent. Some plants, such as terrestrial plants, may have their roots exposed to mineral solutions and protected by an inert medium. One of the most intriguing aspects of this diet is that the nutrients may come from a variety of places other than duck dung or fish droppings. This necessitates the least amount of effort, time, and resources. These systems can be installed in a variety of ways, and the user can choose the form that best suits his or her needs. The use of toxic agrochemicals, pesticides, and other chemicals would be reduced by switching from conventional irrigation to hydroponics. Hydroponics depends on automated nutrient supplies to avoid unnecessary costs and boost income. Several forms of research are being conducted to automate the nutrient cycle in closed systems and standardize substrate analysis.

3. Aeroponics

Aeroponics is a plant-growing method in which the roots are immersed in containers filled with flowing plant nutrition rather than being submerged in some kind of substrate or soil (Figure 5). This method employs a continuous cycle in an enclosed environment, allowing workers to learn skills quickly, while conventional agriculture needs workers to possess skills that are difficult to pass. To bring these systems into context, one kilometer of tomatoes takes up to 400 liters of traditional irrigation, 70 liters of hydroponics, and just 20 liters of aerobic irrigation (Ziegler, R., 2015). Aeroponics also allows oxygen to provide nutrients to the root zone, which is the plant’s root zone, rather than utilizing richer soil as in conventional methods.

Some vertical farming models may be more suitable for the future than others.

Aeroponics has two benefits over hydroponics in terms of methods: It uses around 70% freshwater, and since this technology eliminates the need for aeration of the nutrient solution, the device becomes more profitable and easier to track. Aeroponics is a more effective method of vertical implantation. Farmers who use air systems, on the other hand, have faced a problem for some time: The nutrient-rich water spray nozzle is used to clog daily. An Essence Grows, based in Shanghai, has developed a nozzle design that does not clog when water is delivered to flight terminals, improving the fog system’s reliability. Today, Essence offers a proprietary indoor air engineering system that enables vertical farms to develop a wide variety of items.

However, aside from the technological aspect, the urban vertical farm’s business model must be viable to be promising and sustainable. The farm, for example, is a high-potential commercial vertical farm design. in the farm, a company for which I consult was established in Germany in 2013 and has since spread to several European countries, employing over 200 people. She creates high-tech indoor gardens in supermarkets, as well as hydroponic walkways and biomimetic growth ponds that are stacked vertically and held in a safe setting. The on-farm software keeps track of everything from pH levels to cutting-edge technology. Major retailers, such as Metro, have partnered with in farm to install compact, LED-powered growth units in their stores, allowing customers to select the fresh vegetables they want to eat, although they are more costly and thus purchased by the upper-middle class. It’s all about the class.

From a technological and business standpoint, An Essence and in the farm are excellent examples of startups that provide a very robust growing ecosystem for urban environments.

5. Advantages of vertical farming

Vertical farming has the potential to produce a crop that is environmentally sustainable, nutritious, and inexpensive. These farms would not necessitate long-distance transportation, minimizing fuel consumption, which currently accounts for 20% of total energy consumption in the US (USA). Plants may be grown in hydroponics or hydroponics, which do not require conventional soil-based agricultural practices. Vertical farming not only produces year-round crops that are more environmentally friendly but also allows for more effective waste management. Irrigation may be done with gray, brown, and black city water wastes. Anaerobic digesters can turn solid waste and plant material into methane, which can then be used to produce energy for the farm (Despommier, 2010).

Since the farm would need labor to construct and maintain its structure, a vertical farm will help alleviate the unemployment issues that plague many urban areas. It could also include a grocery store, organic food market, and restaurant infrastructure, as well as local distribution and transportation networks that would open up opportunities for several other food service jobs. Consumers can gain trust and satisfaction understanding where their goods are made from a psychosocial standpoint.

By growing food in a community, indigenous people will not only have year-round access to a safe food supply, but they will also have the assurance that their food is grown locally. Furthermore, since there will be less need for transportation, costs will be lower. The neighborhood’s overall health could improve as a result of lower rates and improved access to a balanced diet, lowering the risk of disease (Larsen, K.; Gilliland, J. A, 2009). Employees of the farm will sell their goods directly to community members at reasonable rates. According to reports, these farmers are happier selling food to people with whom they have long-term relationships. The Den Bosch farm in the Netherlands, for example, was able to produce nearly three times higher yields than the typical soil-based production method while using 90% less water than a traditional farm.

Traditional outdoor farming is often depicted as an unsustainable form of farming. Vertical farming can help to ensure the long-term viability of food systems. Vertical farming is an excellent way to avoid the issues associated with traditional outdoor farming. The world is its first and foremost contribution. Academics, politicians, international agency workers, and the general public all agree that today’s outdoor soil-based farming system is unsustainable and contributes significantly to climate change. For agriculture, half of the world’s trees – the size of Brazil – have been cut down. Since trees are an important component in sequestering carbon dioxide and producing oxygen, the loss of forests for agricultural land use plays a significant role in climate change. Indoor agriculture, especially vertical farming, will enable us to reduce the amount of land required to feed the world’s growing population, which will reach 9.8 billion by 2050. Vertical farms will and do help restore 60 to 70 percent of forests (2 trillion trees), which would help to reverse global warming by sequestering enough carbon.

Indoor agriculture, admittedly, would not be able to replace the 1.87 billion hectares of land dedicated to crop production. Growing rice indoors, for example, is prohibitively costly, whereas raising beef indoors is nearly impossible. However, it has the potential to become a significant source of food, reducing the need for unnecessary farmland use. In reality, vertical farms can produce other animals such as crustaceans, fish, and poultry, as well as livestock feed – growing soybeans indoors can reduce deforestation significantly. Even if indoor farming cannot fully replace outdoor farming, it may help to supplement a food system that is under increasing pressure from population growth and land scarcity.

Vertical farming may also use circular reuse systems to achieve “zero” reuse. Not only can urban farms help with land use, but they can also help with other natural resources like water and electricity, as well as the reuse of organic waste. Furthermore, indoor food production has the potential to have a positive effect on global health. Half of the planet gets sick from vegetables polluted with human waste, making outdoor farming one of the leading causes of global disease. Growing food in a regulated environment will allow everyone to grow healthy and safe food to eat, reducing the number of diseases worldwide.

Vertical farms decentralize and democratize the food system by increasing supply, lowering costs, and thereby ensuring that food reaches all sectors of society, including the poorest. Food access that is more sustainable and widespread would help to ensure the long-term viability of urban systems.

It’s also fun to equate the benefits of vertical farms to the benefits of other forms of urban farming. For example, as we saw in La Paz, open land is a common way to grow food in an urban setting (Bolivia). Open spaces, on the other hand, are near vehicle exhaust, which penetrates the soil, is absorbed by plants, and eaten by humans. Another example is rooftop gardening, which is only possible in areas with mild winter temperatures. Although greenhouses address this problem, they are unable to meet the demands of an expanding urban population. Vertical farms are an ideal form of urban farming because they maximize land use and increase the amount of food produced per square foot of farmland.

6. Existing vertical farms

Numerous examples around the world demonstrate vertical farming is a much superior option to traditional farming. Even though there are numerous case studies available around the world, the appropriate amount of knowledge is still lacking. The paper looks at four vertical farming success stories, the descriptions of which can be found in Table 1. The “Plant Lab,” a proposed farm-in Den Bosch, the Netherlands, grows strawberries, bananas, and other fruits using artificial environmental planning. It was discovered that using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and hydroponics, plants developed three times faster than under normal conditions, which relied on pesticides and agricultural chemicals.

Table 1. The world’s existing vertical farms.

The non-governmental organization (NGO) is a term used to describe a group that does not

Location	Owner	Details	Location Type
South Korea	Authorities in charge of rural growth	Grow lights are used in a three-story experiment.	Rural
Japan	Nudge has a large number of plant factories (over 50).	Grow lights are used by half of the group, while sunlight is used by the other half (Nuvege) Many of them are financially profitable.	Peridomestic
Singapore	Greens in the Sky	Four-story commercial building that makes use of natural light	Inside the city’s boundaries
Chicago	The plant	Grow lights are used by a three-story NGO.	Inside the city limits
Chicago	Here’s Where It’s Grown	Sunlight is used commercially	Inside the city’s boundaries
Vancouver	Alterrus	A four-story structure that makes use of natural light	Inside the city’s boundaries

Hydroponics and soil-based agriculture are used inside the Pasona office building in downtown Tokyo, which is nine stories tall. Shade decreases energy usage, enhances occupant wellbeing, and increases employee comfort, among other things, in addition to farm and beauty earnings. Shade decreases energy usage, enhances occupant wellbeing, and increases employee comfort, among other things, in addition to farm and beauty profits. According to studies, using community gardens and rooftops to grow vegetables and fruits in highly populated areas has a lot of potentials. The New York Concrete Farming Project mapped and monitored plant development in all of the city’s community gardens.

The economic feasibility of vertical farming via the establishment of a farm was studied at the University of Bonn in Germany. A 37-story high-rise building was constructed on the farm, which was modeled in Berlin.

Due to the accumulation of multiple crops, the farm-raised about 3,500 vegetables and fruits, as well as 140 tons of tilapia fillets, which is 516 times more than a quarter hectare. The total cost of building, including materials, was $ 210.5 million. Since there would be no human habitat, buildings with vertical farms could be free of electricity, water, and waste, and the internal layout could be kept simple. Many programs, such as LEED (Building research Establishment environmental Assessment Design), LBC (New Urban Challenge), and others, can be used to ensure a building’s long-term sustainability and revenue generation.

Second, in the form of vertical farming, a company named SPREAD Co. Ltd. is implementing one of the world’s first large-scale fully automated plant areas. Second, SPREAD Co. Ltd. is implementing vertical farming, which is one of the world’s first large-scale fully automated plant areas. The total expenditure, which included R&D services and testing facilities, was between 1.6 and 2 billion yuan. The plant recycles 98 percent of the water used in the factory’s cultivation. By completely automating the processes from sowing to harvesting, labor costs are cut in half. The use of specially designed LED lights for SPREAD and the installation of a specific air conditioning system, which allowed the initial expenditure to be reduced by 25% of the cost of the head of lettuce, resulted in a 30% reduction in energy costs per head of lettuce.

Approximately 20% of factories are profiting, 60% are paying dividends, and 20% are losing revenue, according to estimates. Since 2009, the number and percentage of productive factories have steadily increased. Depreciation costs make up about 30% of overall costs, labor costs about 25%, and energy costs 25%. (Kozai, T.; Niu, G.; Takagaki, M.,2015). Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd. and Mirai (Kashiwa, Japan) launched a large-scale project of one of the largest factory plants in Kashiwa-no-ha, Japan, in 2014. The facility was designed to produce 15 different types of vegetables. The building has a total surface area of 1,260 m². Vertical farms have been popular in Singapore, and there are several case studies to learn from. Among them is Singapore Sky Greens. Using a hydraulically powered device that rotates and provides sunlight to farmers, a four-story rotating greenhouse produces 1 tonne of leafy greens on alternate days. The farm, which is made up of 1000 vertical towers, produces 800 kg of spinach, Chinese cabbage, and other vegetables for daily consumption in the bustling In Asia, there is a city called Metropolis of south-central. The fact that this technology is spread across the globe poses a challenge. There have been no major studies investigating the use on a broad scale, such as in universities, office gardens, apartment complexes, and so on, as well as on a city scale. The feasibility of vertical farming at various levels is investigated in this report.

7. Expand vertical farming that faces many types of challenges.

To begin with, the issue of indoor cultivation training and skills is critical. Commercial vertical farms are run in the same way as any other company, and there are a variety of reasons why they fail. It necessitates continuous monitoring of all facets of a growing climate, as well as the recruiting of professional and qualified staff capable of identifying and correcting issues in the system. I propose that agriculture schools offer specialized qualifications in urban agriculture, which can not only train city dwellers to work on urban farms but also inspire them to do so, resulting in increased sector development.

Vertical farms face a significant challenge in terms of commercial viability. However, there is a lot of optimism that it can be made to work on a wide scale. Some have said that the high energy costs of operating a vertical farm make it difficult to benefit. The profitability of vertical farms will certainly increase as the cost of electricity and LED lights to fall. Since most vertical farms today concentrate on high-yielding leafy vegetables, diversifying crop selection will help them succeed even more.

Following that, residents and politicians continued to oppose urban agriculture. Many people believe that these areas are unsuitable for growing vegetables because of the dense, crowded, and polluted city climate. However, as the industry matures and the benefits of vertical farming become more evident, it will be easier to secure approval for its development from city planners and other stakeholders, allowing vertical farms to become a permanent fixture in urban areas.

Finally, the cost of construction, maintenance, and longevity of vertical farms remain high. These are plentiful in countries with strong buying power, such as Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States. However, reaching the poorest people with vertical farming is the current challenge. India, Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America are among the countries where urban agriculture is flourishing. Vertical farming, on the other hand, was lagging because it needed more costly technology. Large commercial farmers, as well as international organizations, should intervene to promote and make it more available to extend it to include broader segments of the population. It’ll only be a matter of time before the poor demand what the middle class already has at a fair market price, at which point vertical farming will become more affordable.

8. The spotlight on China

With a population of 1.42 billion people as of 2017, China is one of the world’s largest countries. In recent years, it has also experienced rapid urbanization. One measure of this expansion is that the total floor area of buildings built in 2013 was more than double that of 2007. According to the United Nations, China’s urban population is expected to reach 60% by 2020, and by 2025, There would have been a 350 million increase in the urban population, there are 219 cities in the United States with a million people or more population (compared to 35 European cities). Along with the demand for industry and the use of built-up land, the demand for land for urban housing has increased. As a result, non-agricultural built environments have replaced most of the agricultural land. In 2011, the Ministry of Land and Resources conducted a Land Rotation Survey, which revealed that construction usurpation was responsible for A total of 91.05 % of agricultural land has been lost. Cultivated land per person in the United States has decreased to 0.08 hectares per person, which is just 40% of the global average. For all of these reasons, China started studying and practicing vertical farming in early 2004, and it became widely available in 2011. In the meantime, the industry has drawn a large amount of investment due to lower production and labor costs relative to other developing countries. The Chinese Evergrande Group, for example, spent $1 billion in 2014 to construct 22 vertical farms. Dr. Qichang Yang, the research’s chief scientist, oversaw the program, which included funding for smart factory manufacturing technologies and national high-tech science and technology programs totaling $eight million. This money came from the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. However, even though China’s vertical farm sector is rapidly expanding, government policy and economic support remain insufficient in comparison to its full potential, resulting in project flaws in terms of operational ability as well as maintenance flaws, as consequence, there will be a drop in output. Lower energy use and economic benefits.

It is difficult to solve problems related to the life cycle cost of vertical farming projects, such as maintenance, control, marketing, and power facility, under the current national policy and legal framework. Furthermore, increasing the general public’s acceptance of vertical farming is difficult. Another disadvantage is the absence of regional scientific research institutions, except a few statewide vertical farming laboratories. As a result, the local vertical farming initiative is unable to receive adequate technical assistance. Starting at the university level, this paper focuses on creating a structure for examining the feasibility of providing vertical farms. Young people have a high desire for a university education. China had 2,596 universities as of 2016, despite its population of 1.379 billion people. This suggests that in the coming years, staff and students will be on an ever-increasing curve. We assume that educational institutions have been able to sustain consistent revenue streams for several years. Individual student fees have risen in both private and public universities, according to a 2017 study by Economic Commentary. This is a huge opportunity to incorporate vertical farming and demonstrate its advantages, as well as inspire other companies to use these technologies.

It is difficult to solve problems related to the life cycle cost of vertical farming projects, such as maintenance, control, marketing, and power facility, under the current national policy and legal framework. Furthermore, increasing the general public’s acceptance of vertical farming is difficult. Another disadvantage is the absence of regional scientific research institutions, except a few statewide vertical farming laboratories. As a result, the local vertical farming initiative is unable to receive adequate technical assistance. Starting at the university level, this paper focuses on creating a structure for examining the feasibility of providing vertical farms. Young people have a high desire for a university education. China had 2,596 universities as of 2016, despite its population of 1.379 billion people. This suggests that in the coming years, staff and students will be on an ever-increasing curve. We assume that educational institutions have been able to sustain consistent revenue streams for several years. Individual student fees have risen in both private and public universities, according to a 2017 study by Economic Commentary. This is a huge opportunity to incorporate vertical farming and demonstrate its advantages, as well as inspire other companies to use these technologies.

According to a 2017 report, the unit price of rice per kilogram is $ 0.75-$ 0.77. With two development cycles, it takes about 100 to 240 days (April – July, and August – October). The costs for 0.0667 hectares (equals one mu) are $ 22.3 for fertilizers and crops, $ 23 for pesticides, $ 46.15 for labor, and $ 46.5 for the leasing of the property, totaling $ 107.7 to $ 107.7 $138.5. Consequences In 1996, 19.51 million hectares of agricultural land were saved, but only 18.26 million hectares were usable in 2010. The average amount of agricultural land per individual is 1.38 hectares of land (just a quarter of the global average). 6.09 % of all farmland only is capable of producing more than 1000 kg per mu. Table 2 indicates, for example, China’s agricultural demand in 2012; the numbers rise in tandem with the country’s population. Farmers, as well as those who own more fertile ground, are burdened by this.

Table 2. China’s average agricultural demand in 2012.

	Daily Product	Beans and Nuts	Livestock	Fish and Shrimp	Eggs	Vegetables	Fruit	Grains
Daily demand (g/person/day)	300	30–50	50–75	75–100	25–100	300–500	200–400	250–400
Conversion factor (1/edible rate)	1.00	1.30	1.00	1.75	1.19	1.15	1.39	1.19
Annual min. demand (kg/person)	100	14	18	48	11	126	101	109
Annual max. demand (kg/person)	100	24	27	64	22	210	203	174
Population 100 (million)	13.08	13.08	13.08	13.08	13.08	13.08	13.08	13.08
Annual min. demand (100 million tons)	1.432	0.186	0.238	0.626	0.142	1.647	1.327	1.420
Annual max. demand (100 million tons)	1.432	0.310	0.358	0.835	0.284	2.745	2.654	2.272

Wuhan, China’s largest city, has a population of 10.2 million people and covers an area of 8,494 kg². There is a severe scarcity of agricultural land and services, causing price inflation in the country’s economy. Just 61.3 percent of agricultural land is suitable for cultivation. Woodland, grassland, parkland, and other forms of land make up the remainder. China has a 19.4 % national land pollution record. About 4.7 million hectares of land require steep slope agriculture, which causes significant soil erosion; agricultural land provides the majority of the erosion material. Furthermore, these farmers face a significant economic challenge, and direct agricultural income is no longer their sole source of income. Wuhan is home to several colleges, including Huazhong Institute of Agriculture and Technology, China’s largest. This university was chosen to see whether vertical farming could be implemented on a large scale on campus.

9. Methodology

This research used Google Scholar and market knowledge from around the world to look at the new technology developments and best practices in vertical farming. Data on current vertical farm practices was gathered in the first phase through media and literary analysis. Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) in Wuhan, China, surveyed students, teachers, and faculty to determine the average daily nutritional requirements. HUST is a Chinese university that is one of the largest in the country. The campus has 24 canteens that carry food from all over the province to feed the 57,839 people who live there. The university had 24,599 undergraduate students, 23,140 alumni, 5,500 staff, and 4,600 retirees as of January 2018. (but who still live near the school). When calculating the demand ratios, the environment, logistics, and demand of the city were all taken into account. Food intake and demand data were obtained from all canteens and restaurants on campus borders as part of the study, which was carried out with the support of HUST’s Data Resource Center and the General Services Administration. Food types, seasonal variations, consumption amounts, and cost were then separated from the data. The feasibility and challenges of integrating vertical farming on the HUST campus, which can promote sustainable urban agriculture and be self-sustaining while being independent of outdoor farming conditions, were investigated using a mixed-method approach. A mathematical definition model was developed based on the central boundary theory to assess the financial scenario if a vertical farm was established and operated on campus to provide food to university members.

To control the benefits and challenges of modern urban agriculture in this form of the built environment, a qualitative and quantitative study was performed using this model following previous case studies. The data was divided into two categories. The first is the current global vertical farm’s production capability, which includes annual production value, productivity, crop varieties, and economic benefits. This is the environment in which vertical farming methods can be used. The next move was to choose Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) as a representative sample for collecting detailed information on the procurement chain and supply quantity for all twenty-four canteens. In 2016, data on total fruit and vegetable consumption was gathered. The total volume of fruits and vegetables consumed was 2,639,720.40 kg and 108,164 kg, respectively, according to the annual report, resulting in a total expense of $ 2,477,247.38. These plants’ breakdowns and related costs were gathered and analyzed. The following assumptions were made for the model used to perform this study:

1. The vertical farm building is 5000 m² in size and has a plain square shape.

2. Using multi-layer agriculture, the building will save more than 6.67 hectares of cultivation area.

3. The cost per m² of the building is approximately 1450 CNY (227 USD) (in Wuhan, China).

4. Unexpected variables, such as the materials used in construction, are temporarily overlooked. The average construction cost per floor was 5.25 million RMB.

5. Each floor had a total farm area of 0.0667 hectares, or one mu (unit of Chinese standard farmland area).

6. The costs included 145 yuan of fertilizer and 150 yuan of corresponding fertilizer under normal conditions.

7. Electricity and power, besides, 300 yuan of labor and 300 yuan of ground, bring the total rental cost to 900 yuan.

8. The annual running expense for the first year is 5,000 RMB (775.20 US dollars).

9. We propose two types of annual cost-cutting changes. One is that this year’s annual cost is 500 times higher than last year’s, and the other is that this year’s annual cost is 1.1 times higher than last year’s.

10. Every year, the prices of vegetables in the canteen are set.

11. The canteen pays more for crops than the wholesale market price (five times).

12. Once a year, a cucumber yields 30,000 kg / 0.0667 ha.

13. Tomatoes are harvested twice a year, yielding 20,000 kg per 0.0667 ha. 40,000 kilograms per 0.0667 hectares per year

14. Pepper is harvested once a year at a rate of 5,000 kg per 0.0667 hectares.

15. Carrots are harvested twice a year, yielding 10,000 kg / 0.0667 ha.

16. Once a year, 10,000 kg / 0.0667 ha of Chinese cabbage was harvested.

17. Chinese cabbage is harvested eight times a year, yielding 10,000 kg / 0.0667 ha.

18. Kale is harvested twice a year: 3000 kg per 0.0667 ha and 6000 kg per 0.0667 ha.

19. Lotus root is harvested once a year at a rate of 2000 kg per 0.0667 hectares.

20. We can estimate the cost of the building to be about $15 million if it only has one story. If the building has three floors, we can estimate the cost to be about 15 + 10 + 10 = 35 million dollars.

The best high-yielding vegetables are chosen based on their yield value to strike a balance between faster yield and a guaranteed variety of dishes served in the canteens. We use statistical modeling to assess the study’s goals, which include calculating the break-even point for constructing a vertical farm, calculating its economic and environmental benefits, and determining whether the technology is feasible on a university scale.

10. The Central limit theorem

The central limit theory is the probability theory limit theory’s expression of the distribution of random variables. When the sample size is high, the number and average of random variables will approach, and then obey, the normal distribution, according to the theory. The random variable here stands for yield per hectare; an individual is a unit of cultivation area for a specific crop, and population (the statistical term for all individuals) refers to the total area of land on which the crop is grown near Wuhan. The average yield per hectare is assumed to follow a normal distribution. We can see from the characteristics of the distribution that we have 95.4 percent confidence that the real value of the average yield would not fluctuate in different years if we set the standard deviation of a typical distribution to 1/10 of the average yield per hectare. In a vertical farm setting, after reaching 20% of the average calculated yield, there is a 68.3 percent trust that the real value of the average yield will not exceed 10% of the average yield calculated annually in different years. This assumption is rational since the average yield per hectare would be more stable. The performance is set for nine vegetables to be random variables with a normal distribution, based on central limit theory. The standard deviation, the coefficient is set to 1/10 of the yield per 0.0667 ha per year, as shown in the formula, and the mean value is the previously stated annual production for mu (1)

The formula displays the annual yield for each of the nine vegetable forms that satisfy the normal distribution expression. The processing of different vegetables has no impact on one another (assuming climatic conditions are preserved). The letter W stands for “silent costs,” which refers to a vertical farm’s initial investment. NUM unit I, which is 0.0667 hectares of vegetables, represents annual operating costs. For example, NUM unit 1 = 2 and NUM unit 9 = 1 indicate that cucumbers are grown [2 0.0667] hectares and cabbage is grown on [0.0667 ha]. Every vegetable’s price is represented by the letter I Years ‘rec’ denotes that the recycling cost recovery/break-even years can be calculated by dividing the total cost by annual benefit, as shown in formula (2):

The value of output for each of the nine types of vegetables per 0.0667 ha was calculated using random variable coefficients. As a result, the standard deviation coefficient is set at 1/10 of the annual yield per 0.0667 ha, and the average value per mu is given annually. First, 2,0667 hectares are planted with cucumbers, tomatoes, potatoes, cabbage, and five varieties of vegetables, while the rest is uncultivated. Formula (3) can be used to express it:

Table 3 shows the break-even and benefits results. The above-mentioned vegetables were chosen for the calculations because, in comparison to nature, we can better guarantee that the yield can be sustained at a constant pace, or even increased in later years, in a vertical farm setting. In certain situations, we prefer to draw conservative but more reliable conclusions, such as measuring the break-even time, from a statistical standpoint. The situation is very likely to be more positive in practice. Plant growth environment indicators can have higher annual yields and a shorter payback period if the indoor environment of vertical planters is strictly regulated.

Table 3 shows the break-even and benefits results. The above-mentioned vegetables were chosen for the calculations because, in comparison to nature, we can better guarantee that the yield can be sustained at a constant pace, or even increased in later years, in a vertical farm setting. In certain situations, we prefer to draw conservative but more reliable conclusions, such as measuring the break-even time, from a statistical standpoint. The situation is very likely to be more positive in practice. Plant growth environment indicators can have higher annual yields and a shorter payback period if the indoor environment of vertical planters is strictly regulated.

Table 3. Vegetable types and corresponding planting indicators.

Vegetable Type	Total Demand (kg)	Total Value ($)	Unit Price ($)	Harvest Per mu (kg)	Harvest Per 0.0667 Hectare (Value)
Straight cucumber	83,195.45	50,971	0.612308	30000	531.2425
Tomato	156,396.1	106,263	0.68	40000	785.532
Paprika	127,100.1	95,116.12	0.747692	5000	108.15
Lotus root	75,351.15	116,168.2	1.538462	2000	88.93333
Carrot	81,530.15	51,019.56	0.626154	10000	180.8699
Big potato fresh	295,895.9	251,485.2	0.849231	11000	270.2179
Chinese cabbage	105,107.7	56,234.68	0.535385	10000	154.6385
Pak choi	86,014.5	53,960.81	0.627692	10000	181.3238
Cabbage plants	85,700.4	66,504.91	0.775385	15000	336.4419
Cabbage	157,831	77,881.81	0.493846	6000	85.57423

Payback By dividing the fixed cost by the annual net profit, you can get the duration. (Total Revenue – Operating Cost). Profits are maximized because purchasing costs are higher than wholesaling costs. If the real operating cost differs from the proposed cost, the break-even point may be measured in the same way. (Table 4)

Table 4. Cost recovery period with changes in crop yields.

Average farm cost per floor (three floors total) $1,794,872	+sigma	-sigma	+2sigma	-2sigma
	40,435.94 59,791.39 20,567.85 13,801.6 25,608.54	33,083.95 48,920.23 16,828.24 11,292.22 20,952.44	44,111.93 65,226.97 22,437.66 15,056.29 27,936.59	29,407.96 43,484.65 14,958.44 10,037.53 18,624.39
Total profit	160,205.3	131,077.1	174,769.4	116,513
Fastest breakeven (years)	11.25	13.76	10.31	15.49
Slowest breakeven	11.29	13.82	10.34	15.57

+ sigma, sigma, + 2sigma, and 2sigma are the standard deviations of crop yields per hectare. When all crop yields change due to different causes, (+ Sigma) represents a 10% rise in yield, and (2 sigma) represents a 20% decrease in average yield. It’s important to remember that the results (breakeven periods) we estimated were based on operating expenses in Wuhan as well as the cost of some canteens. It is only a reference to a university cafeteria in the Wuhan area. This modeling approach is applicable and translatable in other contexts. To put it another way, crop yields are still subject to a normal distribution, but local operating costs, fixed costs, crop yields, and sale prices must be substituted for the data.

3. Results

If a building has just one floor, the average years of recycling, regardless of how annual operating costs change, is 11.5 years, according to the distribution law of the usual distribution of random variables. Between 10.5 and 12.9 years, there is a 68.3 percent chance of recovering the cost; between 9.6 and 14.5 years, there is a 95.4 percent chance of recovering the cost. The expense can be recovered in ten years if the economy is favorable and the technical management is reasonable. If the technology management and environment situation are both poor, the cost will be recouped in 15 years.

The value of the parameters in the model can be modified and recalculated if the average value and fluctuation range of the output are changed in the actual situation.

After recouping the costs, we can choose to grow cucumbers, tomatoes, potatoes, bok choy, and cabbage consistently (2 hectares of 0.0667). The estimated annual income is approximately 947,000 CNY (148,000 USD). The annual income is estimated to be between 825,000 and 1,041,000 yuan ($ 129,000 and $ 163,000) with a 68.3 percent confidence level. There is a 95.4 percent chance that annual earnings will range from 757,000 to 1,136,000 CNY ($ 118,000 to $ 177,500).

Cucumbers, onions, peppers, carrots, potatoes, and Chinese cabbage are also options. Each of the nine high-yielding and high-demand vegetables grows on 0.0667 hectares, and the remaining land can be distributed separately, resulting in a steady annual average profit of 592,000 CNY ($ 925,000). Even if the remaining land is not cultivated, there is a certainty of 68.3 percent earning 533,000-651,000 yuan ($ 83,000 – $ 102,000) per year, with 95.4 percent expected to earn 474,000-710,000 yuan ($ 74,000 – $ 110, 000) per year.

Furthermore, if the building has three floors, the average years of recycling costs would be nine years, regardless of how the annual operating costs shift, and the replacement measure will have 68.3 percent certainty of cost recovery between 8.2-10 years, and 95.4 percent certainty of cost recovery between 7.5-11.3 years. Since the building only has one floor, the annual income from vegetable growing is three times that of the original strategy. We may estimate the total cost of the building to be about 120 million RMB ($ 18.75 million) if it has ten floors. Following that, the whole structure will save more than (10 * 10 * 0.0667) hectares of cropland. To meet the university’s needs, the building will plant a variety of plants. The measurement system is the same as before.

1. Discussion

Universities earn money from a variety of sources, including science, business collaboration, funding, government grants, and more. One of the key reasons why universities can use emerging technology like vertical farming to benefit their students and employees is because of this. The supply and demand chain of food systems would be impacted by an increasing population. Installing vertical planting will help with this.

The installation of vertical farms on campus would not only save money and energy but will also allow for multiple sources of income. In these farm buildings, research facilities can be set up, and people from national and foreign organizations can be brought in to work on new inventions and technologies. These farms will be able to provide particular foods at specific times of the year. Universities may also track development and usage in real-time, allowing them to make decisions that favor society. This will kick off a massive wave of cutting-edge research and development in fields such as sustainability, technology, social sciences, industry, materials, agriculture, mathematics, and other interdisciplinary fields. Universities may set an example by taking bold steps that will gain them notoriety and enable them to receive funding. Profits in the educational sector should not have to be focused on short-term gains; instead, the aim may be to push boundaries for students and teachers, resulting in long-term financial benefits for universities.

Vertical farming will help you save money on labor, packaging, and logistics. The world is impacted by logistics in both direct and indirect ways. Plastic panels, Styrofoam, and other packaging materials are often non-biodegradable. The use of fossil fuels in automobiles has a direct effect on air pollution and natural resource depletion. Vertical farming products are free of toxic chemicals, making them healthier than conventional farming. Furthermore, since the used area is vertical, the natural land area can be protected, lowering the agricultural industry’s burden. Furthermore, this method produces the least amount of waste, which is a significant advantage. The vertical farming structure can be used as an educational space for students from all over the world, as well as an inspiration for other institutions to engage in advanced urban agriculture. Students may be considered a crucial factor in the overall output of plants. They may be motivated to engage in the process by training and part-time/full-time jobs. They will be able to develop a good sense of community as a result of this. Plants may be donated or sold when there is a surplus of demand.

Vertical farming will help you save money on labor, packaging, and logistics. The world is impacted by logistics in both direct and indirect ways. Plastic panels, Styrofoam, and other packaging materials are often non-biodegradable. The use of fossil fuels in vehicles also has a direct impact on air pollution and the depletion of natural resources. Vertical farming products are free of toxic chemicals, making them healthier than conventional farming. Furthermore, since the used area is vertical, natural land areas may be protected, reducing the agricultural industry’s burden. Furthermore, this device produces the least amount of waste, which is a huge plus. The vertical farming structure can be used as an educational space for students from all over the world, as well as an inspiration for other institutions to engage in advanced urban agriculture. Students may be considered a crucial factor in the overall output of plants. They may be motivated to engage in the process by training and part-time/full-time jobs. They will be able to develop a good sense of community as a result of this. Plants may be donated or sold at a fair price to people outside the university when there is a surplus of demand. The structure can be constructed using environmentally friendly methods, and operating energy can be obtained from renewable sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. Finally, there could be a variety of ways to bring in financial resources from research labs, technological advances, government capital, and other sources.

2. Conclusion

The idea of integrating vertical farming into the built environment can be a powerful tool for combating food insecurity and protecting the environment. Vertical farms, according to a study based on various scenarios, will achieve economic parity within 10-20 years and alleviate current environmental stress. According to our calculations, the break-even point for vertical farm investments would be reached in around 11.5 years, after which the annual profit will hit $92,000. (592,000 CNY). The authors’ models and equations are universal for universities of similar size in central China. The method can be estimated based on real crop production, unit price, and vertical farm cost when applied to other areas. Furthermore, as factories become self-sustaining, the burden on fertile lands across the world can be significantly reduced. Furthermore, as factories become self-sustaining, the burden on fertile lands across the world can be significantly reduced. Furthermore, the companies that pioneered vertical farming were not fully open, resulting in a drop in industry awareness; as a result, the widespread use of vertical farms is still unknown. The quality of all aspects of vertical farm technologies is also critical, as it relates to their ability to achieve long-term growth, cost recovery, and profitability. Technology enables a circular economy in its activities, improving society’s socioeconomic status. However, yields and crop variability in a vertical farm setting are still unknown, and more realistic experiences and conclusions are required. More industry-focused studies, location-based climate analysis, financial models with lower break-even times, and higher profit margins are all needed to use vertical farming in a realistic project. There could be federal and state incentives to encourage people to support this proposal. Vertical farming and sustainable urban agriculture, we conclude, have tremendous potential for resolving social and environmental issues.

4. References

About SkyGreens. Available online: https://www.skygreens.com/about-skygreens/.

An, R.; Ji, M.; Zhang, S. Global warming and obesity: A systematic review. Obes. Rev. 2018, 19, 150–163. View at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/obr.12624.

Andrews, K. Pasona Urban Farm by Kono Designs. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2013/09/12/pasona-urban-farm-by-kono-designs/. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

Banerjee, C.; Adenauer, L. Up, up, and away! the economics of vertical farming. J. Agric. Stud. 2014, 2, 40–60. http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/4526.

Connor, R. The United Nations world water development report 2015. In Water for a Sustainable World; UNESCO Publishing: Paris, France, 2015; Volume 1.

Chen, Y. Prospect and strategies of the development of vertical farm in Chinese cities. Mod. Bus. Trade Ind. 2013, 23 Despommier, D. D. (2010). The vertical farm: feeding the world in the 21st century. In Open WorldCat. Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin’s Press. https://www.worldcat.org/title/verticalfarmfeedingtheworldinthe21stcentury/oclc/653476308, 1672–3198. (In Chinese).

Fischetti, M. Growing vertical. Sci. Am. 2008, 18, 74–79. View at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-vertical-skyscraper-farming/. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

Hooke, R.L.; Martín-Duque, J.F.; Pedraza, J. Land transformation by humans: A review. GSA. View at: https://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/22/12/abstract/i1052-5173-22-12-4.htm. (accessed on 17 April 20).

Japan’s Largest Plant Factory Producing 10,000 Vegetables Daily Starts Full-Scale Operation at Kashiwa-No-Ha Smart City Plant Factory. 2014. Available online: http://www.mitsuifudosan.co.jp/english/corporate/news/2014/0605_01/index.html. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

Land Matters for Climate. Reducing the Gap and Approaching the Target. Available online: https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/documents/2015Nov_Land_matters_For_Climate_ENG_0.pdf.

Larsen, K.; Gilliland, J. A farmers’ market in a food desert: Evaluating impacts on the price and availability of healthy food. Health Place 2009, 15, 1158–1162. View at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1353829209000641?via%3Dihub.

Long, H.; Liu, Y.; Wu, X.; Dong, G. Spatio-temporal dynamic patterns of farmland and rural settlements in Su–Xi–Chang region: Implications for building a new countryside in coastal China. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 322–333. View at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264837708000574?via%3Dihub.

Li, Y.; Chen, C.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y. Urban-rural transformation and farmland conversion in China: The application of the environmental Kuznets Curve. J. Rural Stud. 2014, 36, 311–317. View-at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0743016714001132?via%3Dihub.

Ministry of Land and Resource of China (MLR). The Publication of Land Use Change Survey Data of China in 2011. 2011. View at: http://www.mlr.gov.cn/mlrenglish/communique/. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

Santos, J.D.D.; Silva, A.L.L.D.; Costa, J.D.L.; Scheidt, G.N.; Novak, A.C.; Sydney, E.B.; Soccol, C.R. Development of a vinasse nutritive solution for hydroponics. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 114, 8–12. View at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23201600/

Schmidhuber, J.; Tubiello, F.N. Global food security under climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 19703–19708. View at: https://www.pnas.org/content/104/50/19703, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18077404/. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

SPREAD to Construct World’s First Fully Automated, Large-Scale Vegetable Factory. 2015. Available online: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/spread-to-construct-worlds-first-fully-automatedlarge-scale-vegetable-factory-300122974.html. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2017. Available online: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/foodsecurity/state-food-security-nutrition-2017/en. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

The application of the environmental Kuznets Curve. J. Rural Stud. 2014, 36, 311–317. View at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0743016714001132?via%3Dihub.

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (UNPD). World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision, Highlights, Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.210. 2009.View-at: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2008/wpp2008_highlights.pdf. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

USA 2007, 104, 19703–19708. View at: https://www.pnas.org/content/104/50/19703, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18077404/. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

World Hunger Rise. How Close Are We to #ZeroHunger? Available online: http://www.fao.org/hunger/en. (accessed on 17 April 2021).

World Energy Outlook 2015—Executive Summary—English Version. View at: https://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/WEO2015SUM.pdf.

Ziegler, R. The Vertical Aeroponic Growing System; Patent Pending; Synergy International Inc.: Sausalito, CA, USA, 2015.