We’re going to run out of water well before we run out of fossil fuels.

This is a declaration I’ve heard put forth by more than one industry professional this past summer. I certainly am not qualified to say whether or not that’s true, or which one will run out first, but I think it’s safe to say when you overexploit any natural resource — without considering how to replace it — you’re going to eventually get yourself in real trouble. I’d say with some of the major water cuts hitting the U.S., we are probably already there.

The U.S. federal government handed down its first federal mandatory water cut in August to the Colorado River, with farmers in Arizona taking the biggest hit. Lake Mead, the reservoir created by the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River, hit a record low water level in August of 1067.57 feet above sea level (August 18th, 2021, according to lakelevels.info). This is not to say a water crisis is a new phenomenon: property owners across many states, especially Texas and California, have long been under irrigation and other water-use restrictions on a seasonal basis. But those restrictions have fallen under state or local authorities. Now that the feds are getting involved, perhaps the general public will start to pay closer attention to the seriousness of the issue, especially when it becomes more obvious that our food supply is in peril.

If you’re familiar with the “peak oil” theory, then you may have also heard of the parallel “peak water” theory. Just like we rely on fuels generated from fossils, much of modern agriculture also primarily relies on “fossil water,” which comes from naturally occurring underground reservoirs, or aquifers, which may or may not be naturally replenished. Either way, if you’re taking water out of aquifers faster than it can be replenished (if it can be replenished), you’re still in trouble. Sure, unlike fossil fuels, some sources of freshwater are renewable in terms of ecological availability. But our growing populations and their need and demands for water continue to increase non-renewable use, which inevitably leads to non-renewable use of water resources. Not to mention the increasing threat of corporatization of water ownership and rights.

So, can hydroponics save the world’s water? We know that growing food hydroponically already saves anywhere from 70-90% of water use from the get-go. Some growers claim they are managing an impressive 95% reduction in closed recirculating systems, versus water use in field crops. Others claim retention of 97% of their wastewater using closed-circuit desalination (CCD) and reverse osmosis (RO) systems. It’s impressive technology, but it does require a substantial investment and patience on ROI for the cost.

“...we are already struggling to water agricultural crops now, how do we expect to do so for billions more in the near future?”

If you are growing in container culture in your greenhouse, then water reclamation and recycling obviously gets more complex and the infrastructure needs become more challenging, especially if you are trying to retrofit existing structures. If you’re a large operation, tail water recovery systems may work better for you, while smaller greenhouses can potentially use flood and filter floors. Unfortunately, there is no one-size-fits-all solution given the individual dynamics of any given greenhouse structure. Every job is a custom job.

Nevertheless, water shortages will force the entire industry to innovate and adapt. Given the U.S. has about 5% of the world’s population, but uses as much water as China or India, mostly to grow food for export to the rest of the world, greenhouse food growers have both a unique ability — and responsibility — to lead the country in water recycling and conservation efforts … complexity and costs aside, it’s the direction in which we all need to move.

Feeding people is, of course, the main driver of agriculture. Yet, the more of us there are, the harder that gets. The human population is expected to hit 9.2 billion by 2050, with water demands expected to be up by 55% by that year. If we are already struggling to water agricultural crops now, how do we expect to do so for billions more in the near future? Personally, I don’t think we have any business populating the world to that degree. Making sure women have equal rights and domain over their own lives is ultimately the place to start on that issue. But as it stands, there doesn’t seem to be any slowing the population growth any time soon.

Projections of “peak population” have evolved over the years, from the 2004 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs report that predicted world population would peak at 9.22 billion in 2075 then settle out to about 9 billion. In 2014, the United Nations Population Division projected a less optimistic number of 11 billion by 2100 with no declining trend thereafter. Fast forward to 2020, and the Global Burden of Disease Study offered a population peak of 9.7 billion in 2064, with a decline to 8.8 billion in 2100; but that potential decline is directly tied to the advancement of women’s rights, globally.

So, we can talk about water shortages and conservation, as well as reclamation and recycling technology all day long. But unless we’re also willing to couple those conversations with action to ensure women’s rights — and basic human (non-corporate) rights to water access — we aren’t addressing a major root issue of the population, and water consumption, problem.

Photo courtesy of Local Bounti;

Local Bounti close $200 million in financing

Per a press release, Local Bounti announced that is has closed a previously announced $200 million debt financing facility with Cargill Financial Services International, which is also a recent strategic investor in Local Bounti. Cargil, per the release, “is demonstrating significant support in the future of Local Bounti by investing as both a lender and an investor in the PIPE financing contemplated in connection with Local Bounti’s proposed business combination.”

In addition to closing on the debt financing facility to cover the cost of several planned greenhouse facilities, Cargill has also expressed interest in financing the construction of all of Local Bounti’s planned future indoor farming facilities in the United States through 2025.

>>Read more at bit.ly/local-bounti-funding

Graphic courtesy of Taylor Farms;

Taylor Farms invests in Pure Green Farms

Per a press release, Taylor Farms has entered the greenhouse growing market with an investment in Pure Green Farms. This expansion into greenhouse grown fresh offerings will complement Taylor Farms’ existing 122,200 crop acre field grown program and 16 salad producing facilities across North America.

“We’re excited to venture into the industry of indoor growing with this investment,” said Bruce Taylor, founder and CEO of Taylor Farms. “Our customer partners have asked for a national solution and this is our first step.”

Pure Green Farms’ already established facility located in South Bend, Indiana, is a climate-controlled environment equipped with high-tech machinery that grows, packs and ships leafy greens year-round.

>>Read more at bit.ly/pure-green-farms-taylor-farms

Photo courtesy of BrightFarms

Cox Enterprises acquires majority stake in BrightFarms

Per a press release, indoor farming company BrightFarms has raised more than $100 million in debt with a Series E round of funding led by Cox Enterprises. Per the release, Cox now owns a majority stake in BrightFarms and, as it moves forwards, BrightFarms “will use the funds to invest in its current farms and retail programs and expand its network of regional indoor farms across the U.S.”

Currently, BrightFarms has farms in Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia, with new farms being developed in North Carolina, Massachusetts and Texas. To date, it has raised more than $200 million in funding and has retail partnerships with Ahold Delhaize, Kroger and Walmart.

>>Read more at bit.ly/brightfarms-cox-enterprises

As the last 18 months have laid bare for us all, the ability to pivot, or change course quickly to outmaneuver a market development that is rapidly baring down on you like a runaway freight train, is incredibly important.

Take for example this month’s cover story subject, Rocket Farms (https://bit.ly/blasting-off-again) out on the West Coast. The nearly 40-year-old indoor grower’s backstory is littered with successful pivots and audibles, and I would guess that many of you have experienced the same in your businesses as well.

After focusing on its ornamental division for years and years, Rocket made the (some would say no-brainer) decision in 2020 to go all-in on potted edible veggie and herb transplants after seeing the segment explode in interest during the pandemic.

That pivot, while both a gigantic risk and opportunity at the same time, paid off big time. The operation saw a 38% increase year-over-year on its edible crops business, while demand for its potted ornamental offerings mostly remained flat over the same period.

Unfold, whose CEO talked with editor Chris Markham this month (https://bit.ly/unfold-developing-genetics), is a new startup that is working hard to pivot the industry itself away from the field grown varieties that many indoor and vertical farms have been forced to shoehorn into their production systems. The West Coast innovator is 100% focused on breeding seeds and varieties with “quality traits” for both indoor farmers and end-consumers alike. Think short and compact and still bursting with flavor and color.

And it’s not just about new traits or varieties at Unfold. The startup is hoping to unlock a new wave of crops that indoor growers who have mastered lettuce and microgreens and things like that can pivot to, if need be. Crops like strawberries and peppers and cucumbers, all of which could be considered “hot crops” with robust demand from consumers, foodies and chefs.

So, as the fall season gives way to winter, and you’re looking at what you should do at your indoor farm for 2022 and beyond, don’t let the opportunity to pivot pass you by. Keep an open mind when that fork in the road appears.

Photo: boophuket, Adobe Stock

Produce Grower: What are some mistakes CEA operations can make that leave them at risk for a food safety issue?

Sanja Ilic: There are sometimes controlled environment growers that operate under the assumption that a controlled environment always offers a lesser risk for contamination. But the conditions that make a controlled environment more sustainable and better for growth of produce also make it more conducive for proliferation of bacteria. Just because produce is not known in the field, does not mean that there is no risk of contamination with pathogens. We have seen in the past from previous studies that contamination can be tracked in the greenhouse and that once it’s contaminated, it can be difficult to clean out ... because a greenhouse or controlled environment is so heavily reliant on water, water becomes one of the most common ways produce can become contaminated. With lettuce, for instance, the contact with water is constant and consistent. That can be a risk.

PG: In terms of standards, are there well-established food safety best practices for a controlled environment setting?

SI: There are two things to think about. One is asking what the standards are and what is available as mitigation measures. The Food Safety Modernization Act actually prescribes a set of standards that apply to any produce grown in a field or a greenhouse; the best practices that can prevent contamination are mostly known for field production, because your CEA industry is still blooming. But food safety measures are just now being studied. So, for instance, in our lab, myself and Dr. Melanie Lewis Ivey, who studies plant pathology, are performing experiments that are supposed to determine the parameters that are going to be optimal for reduction of risks and elimination of contaminants in a controlled environment. So there is still work to be done.

PG: What steps can growers take to actually develop a plan?

SI: In any environment, depending on how your production is set up, your controls are going to be different. It is important that producers actually do have a food safety plan and that plan has to include everything from quality of the irrigation water, to sanitation of the environment, to worker health and hygiene, to post-harvest handling. It’s a great start if a producer can develop a flow of product and know exactly what steps are involved in production, and then they must ensure that there are preventive measures at every step.

Note: This interview has been edited for space and clarity.