Quill7513 comments on After 15 years, GoodLeaf proves there’s profit in vertical farming

After 15 years, GoodLeaf proves there’s profit in vertical farming | BetaKit (betakit.com)

submitted 2 months ago by supersquirrel@lemmy.ca to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Guelph, Ontario-based GoodLeaf Farms has become profitable across its vertical farming operations for the first time. > > The context: GoodLeaf, which was founded in 2011 in Halifax, has spent over a decade developing recipes and proprietary tech that helps the firm maximize the yield and quality of its produce by monitoring and controlling light, air, and water delivery to its plants. The company, which counts McCain Foods, Farm Credit Canada, and Power Sustainable Lios among its backers, attributes its success to “years of innovation, disciplined growth, and strategic investment.” It also comes on the back of fivefold revenue growth over the past three years, as GoodLeaf’s total sales soared from $6.4 million in 2023 to $34 million in 2025. GoodLeaf said its revenue is up another 31 percent this year, thanks to rising consumer demand and expanded retail distribution.

[–] Jarme@jlai.lu 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (15 children)

Edit : I was wrong, vertical farming is as ground-surface efficient as horizontal.

"Proof" with a quick calculation for those interested

I compared numbers using batavia lettuce as an example. Those are yearly outputs in kg per square meter of sunlight, assuming central Europe.

For vertical hydroponics, I'm assuming a solar irradiation of 1'000 kWh/m²/year, a panel yield of 20%, and no other loss, that is 200 kWh/year of electric power per m² of solar panel.

1 kg of vertical lettuce needs about 8 kWh to power the lights (https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2026.1783548/full)

So a square meter of solar panel should produce about 25kg of lettuce a year. This compares to 20-50kg/m²/year in horizontal non-light-supplemented hydroponics.

My numbers and assumptions could be quite a bit off, but clearly I was wrong with the 30x comment.

My old comment :

~~Vertical farming isn't very solarpunk though, it takes about 30m² of solar pannels to grow what could be grown on 1m² using direct sunlight. And I have not mentioned accumulators yet.~~

~~In my opinion this is the exact opposite of low-tech energy efficient developpement that solarpunk aims.~~

I do strongly support urban agriculture, if on roofs, using direct sunlight as energy source, and heated with the lost heat of the building below because that is simple and efficient (I would even call it elegant).

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] Sadbutdru@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 months ago (6 children)

I don't know all the details of vertical farming, but there is more to it than energy efficiency. The controlled environment is supposed to remove the need for pesticides, bring fertiliser use right down to the minimum possible, and then there's the efficiency in logistics of growing food closer to point of consumption, especially when temperature/humidity/ light control lets you grow exotic stuff locally year round.

Whether it is worth it overall is unclear. Probably the answer is "sometimes, it depends on the situation".

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Also growing food in areas that wouldn’t support growing food, like deserts

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 months ago

one adjustment to this, it's actually usaully more useful in urban food deserts rather than desert deserts, the idea being that the energy waste expended by growing crops in a tall building that would have done better in direct sunlight low to the ground is offset by reduced transport costs where most of the environmental harm of factory farming is done