The Syfy Online NetworkSCI FI WireDVICEFidgit

We love technology. We want to know about it, write about it, and shake it till it breaks. Part of the Syfy Network, DVICE has a worldwide team of writers who constantly immerse themselves in the tech world, distilling the sometimes-excessive information out there to bring you only what you need to know.

Video
 

Related Sections: Art & Design  Buildings  Galleries

Vancouver vertical farm looks like a futuristic resort, but for plants and animals

Vancouver vertical farm looks like a futuristic resort, but for plants and animals

What is this, a center for plants? Indeed it is — it's a multi-tiered skyscraper that houses farming and livestock spaces to grow food efficiently in an urban environment. The Harvest Green Tower is a winning design by Romses Architects for Vancouver's 2030 Challenge, and it'd make it possible for cows, chickens and fish to all be raised in a city alongside fresh veggies and fruit. That, and it'd look good doing it to boot.

A vertical farm such as the Harvest Green Tower would also have other benefits beyond greening a skyline. Power generated from methane emissions, collected rainwater and wind turbines could also be given back to the grid if it produces more than it uses. Harvest could also provide space for agriculture students and scientists to study animals and seeds.






PreviousNext

Romses Architects, via Inhabitat

 
Send-A-Friend
(23) COMMENTS

Andy Paxton:
Andy, An interest reading for you. /Terrence...More »


Comments

By Norritt at 9:09 AM ON 05/12/09

LOL was that a Zoolander reference! LOLOL

By Mr. Gumsandals at 9:36 AM ON 05/12/09

Great idea but how will they get rid of the SMELL? I sure wouldn't want to be paying a huge mortgage on something downwind of the thing.

By Passingthru at 11:06 AM ON 05/12/09

Animals need more space to roam around than that tiny patch of grass. Also, I doubt that the fumes from the vehicles will do wonders to whatever is being studied/harvested. A great idea, if a 5 year old came up with it, otherwise, pretty naive approach.

By Gaius at 1:58 PM ON 05/12/09

If you put plants on a building like that wouldn't you eventually face structure issues? Like sidewalks, when grass eventually burst through the materials wouldn't this also happen to the materials used to make these buildings? Would they have to continue to update it or what?

By John Smith at 2:31 PM ON 05/12/09

It is not that hard to control the smell when you are capturing and burning the gases produced by the animals. Obviously you don't do HVAC for a living. Just so that you know charcoal filters have been used for a long time to control the smell coming from buildings. Another favorite method to control the smell is to allow vegetation to absurd it.

As far as the space requirements go. If you let any animal (humans included) run wild they will need a lot of space. However, most animals get used to sitting still when there is no space to run wild (humans included). You ever been to a lab or a farm? As far as the vehicle's fumes go, do you smell them when you are in a building? no, because you obviously don't do HVAC either.

Now for the next guy, when you grow plants indoors you would use an aeroponic or hydroponic method of growing, meaning that the vegetation is always controlled. This isn’t your sidewalk that you don’t touch for 10 years. These growing methods have been around for years and are proven.

By To mr. John Smith at 3:59 PM ON 05/12/09

Space requirements are necessary since a cow is an animal, animals need room to move, and more importantly not to stand in their own shit. Yes I have been to a farm, there's one down the road. Any good farmer divides up the land in order to circulate his cattle so they don't eat everything in one go. Now dividing a small space to an even SMALLER space is just stupid. So no, I still don't see it.

As for fumes, sure ok, when you're inside you're fine. Look at the diagram, it's open air... Now forget fumes, how about noise? The general din of traffic, honking and so forth, must be borderlining on torture for the animals. No I'm not PETA freak, I just think if you're going to farm animals then at least do it in a sound way. Growing crops are a different thing altogether.

By yellowflash at 4:01 PM ON 05/12/09

Are you kidding me. This is a wonderful design from the out dated method of farming. think of all the pollution it will stop because they wont need big rigs to hail food to the grocery stores.
The fumes from cars running?
you guys swear like all the cars are just going to be idling or running down there. and like John smith said you dont HVAC the building and parking together. they wont be connected, what do you think we engineers are amateurs.

By FPO at 5:06 PM ON 05/12/09

I have to agree this is a wonderful design. The only thing I would contend with would be the cows on a version this small. However, enlarge it to the proportions of a city block and I'd rethink it. For this size I do think that small livestock, such as pigs, goats, sheep, geese, chicken, ducks, etc. it would work very well. And even on a small scale to have this in the city the benefits would far out weigh the concerns for me, if problems arise we fix them. As for the structural concerns if they have the ability to create living roofs like in the San Francisco Academy of Science then I think they can figure out how to structurally build this.

One addition I would like to see would be an organic recycling center. It is basically impossible for most of the city to save their organic trash for composting. These farms could collect it for either feed or composting for fertilizer. Surplus could be trucked out of the city in vehicles run on electricity created from the methane to local farms who would most likely pay for it.

By FPO at 5:16 PM ON 05/12/09

Also, regarding the 'noise issue', most city's have lots of animals already specifically dogs who I am pretty sure have better hearing than cows. Additionally I'm sure there will be insulation and sound proofing in the building and the animals would be on floors above street level.

I think PETA has bigger concerns.

By fecsx at 5:29 PM ON 05/12/09

although i don't fancy bauhaus style for such an organic concept, it is interesting... experimenting in more directions.
such ideas are a must..

By IsoTek at 5:50 PM ON 05/12/09

I don't see why it couldn't work. I like the idea of a 2 shopping berths and a dining experience being available to encourage public activity as well.

By Traveler at 1:52 AM ON 05/13/09

Dumb idea. The world has gargantuan amounts of cheap wasteland that are just waiting to be put to productive use.

By ButtCorp at 7:07 AM ON 05/13/09

I'm with Traveller - this is complete nonsense. You could plant 5 acres of grain on farmland and provide almost no input except for some fertiliser, or you could pump out tens of thousands of tons of CO2 digging up iron ore, smelting it into steel, shipping it across the ocean, grinding up concrete and aggregate, spend millions of dollars and thousands of manhours to build a multistorey building which requires coal-produced electricity to artificially light the interior, pump water, remove waste to be locked in airless landfill, provide no free range or sun or rain to the luckless animal inhabitants... sheesh, give it a rest.

By saris at 12:25 PM ON 05/13/09

The idea is great for vegetation, not so great for livestock, might be able to do chickens, but that is about it.

By Engineer at 8:22 PM ON 05/13/09

Calling yourself an engineer doesn't necessarily make you useful (or knowledgeable). There are holes all through this concept. I'd be interested in hearing the revisions, after the project is better thought out.

But I do like veal... Cram 'em in there!!

By coniks at 7:40 AM ON 05/14/09

I have to disagree with Yellowflash regarding the pollution from traffic. At least if it is in a downtown area of any major city center; strictly speaking, the traffic does idle a lot. A LOT. Think jam, bottleneck, any descriptive term. Hopefully they would have HVAC there for the animals. Otherwise, the issue would not be moot.

By ShankarBaba at 8:17 AM ON 05/14/09

Sadly, such things have to be tried, if not for the present, then for the (near) future.

By ferall at 9:56 AM ON 05/14/09

erm . . . what is a boutique dairy facility?

By jillbilly at 2:31 PM ON 05/14/09

Great discussions! Obviously, this idea could be tweaked to work in abandoned urban areas or exurban areas. There are many urban agriculture projects being tried in Chicago right now (without animals). I raised cattle in my youth, and I agree that large animals wouldn't suit this concept, but my city chickens do quite well with only a few square feet each. One more thing: how about beehives? Definitely include bees; they're perfect for the city.

By moviedemon at 3:31 PM ON 05/14/09

I disagree with the author - this is not an attractive building. It looks like a cheesy hotel from the 1970s.

More importantly, you'd have to build an awful lot of these things to create a very significant source of fresh food in a big urban area - and I don't see that happening. I mean, do you really think they'd convert a bunch of $1000-per-square-foot, New York City high rises into urban farms?

Instead, this would end up being a novelty "boutique" kind of thing - some place for celebrities and the wealthy to buy fresh fruits and vegetables and then gush on Oprah about how fabulous it is.

You could never build enough of these things to replace all the farmland we're losing each year to suburban sprawl.

Sadly, the more practical solution to that problem will probably be more high-rises for people rather than high-rises for farms...

By nubbin at 10:24 PM ON 05/14/09

If you think HVAC is the solution for the animals, the energy cost per pound would be high ( I am NATE certified). In the south we have electric bills. Of course the toxins of the city wold need to be filtered out before using as fresh air for the animals. So what do you do with that toxic waste?
I would put water storage inside walls to reduce evaporation.
But the design still has one large problem, the shade cast by the floor above would reduce the sunlight energy for the plants to grow. The cost for 'grow lights' is higher than sunlight.

By LectricActMan at 10:14 PM ON 05/15/09

No wonder it won an award. It's soooo politically correct. But I have to wonder about the supermarket being on the lower level. Everybody knows the excrement flows down hill!

By Andy Paxton at 9:06 PM ON 06/02/09

Andy, An interest reading for you. /Terrence


Leave a Comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

(Please be patient, it may take a moment for your comment to appear.)

Get the latest tech news
on your cellphone!
Text DVICE to 72434
DVICE on your iPhone
Follow DVICE on Twitter
Editor: Peter Pachal
editor@dvice.com
©2010, Syfy. All rights reserved.