The Walrus Blog

Graff and the Beanstalk

A vertical farming architect explains why his towering SkyFarm will never happen
SkyFarmGordon Graff’s planned SkyFarm

Gordon Graff’s SkyFarm, a fifty-eight-floor behemoth priced at $1.5 billion, was to be Toronto’s ticket to the future of urban agriculture. In 2007, the vertical farm was envisioned to occupy a block of downtown Toronto that has since become home to the Toronto International Film Festival. Even before the global food crisis hit in 2008 and the locavore movement picked up steam, the idea of urban farming was a provocative one. Science fiction and environmental geeks gushed. For green-aholics, the idea appealed to both the inner consumer (“raspberries in February!”) and the environmental conscience (“local, organic raspberries in February!”). The media ate it up. ”Sometimes,” the Huffington Post wrote, “the answer to a complex problem is so simple, so elegant that you wonder why you didn’t think of it yourself.” But four years later, Graff, who is now an intern architect at Toronto’s DIALOG, admits that his SkyFarm will never be built, and many in the media have begun rubbing the stars out of their eyes. The apparent retreat of the ivory-green tower raises the question: is vertical farming still the promised evolution of agriculture, or a case of the life and death of an idea?

Graff became interested in vertical farming at the University of Waterloo, where he wrote a master’s thesis on sustainable urban architecture. He began communicating with Dickson Despommier, a Columbia University professor of environmental health sciences and microbiology who is vertical farming’s biggest cheerleader. With urban population densities and a slew of attendant environmental problems increasing around the globe, the answer, Despommier and his students thought, was to grow farms up, instead of out. “All the water is recycled,” Despommier raves in this publicity video for his 2010 book, The Vertical Farm: Feeding the World in the 21st Century. “All the nutrients are recycled. And the only thing that actually leaves the building is the produce.” 

I arranged to meet Graff in early September, half expecting to be greeted by a Birkenstock-clad eco-savant or would-be prophet. Instead, he was neither. We met at a busy Yorkville Starbucks, where he arrived straight from work at DIALOG. And he was wearing a well-tailored suit. Gracious and humble, Graff explained how he accidentally became a poster boy for the media’s vertical farming mania.

“When I designed SkyFarm, I did it in a week and a half,” he said. “I gave it to Dickson because he wanted to see it, but I told him not to post it on his website — it was just a quick sketch. Six months later I got an email from a friend of mine, someone I hadn’t talked to in years, and they sent me a link to a TreeHugger article about SkyFarm. [The message] was like, ‘Is this you?’”

When the media picked up on the leak, Graff’s designs unwittingly gained major attention. As reporters and well-known developers began calling him up, Graff had to get serious about the prospect of vertical farming. He ran detailed cost analyses and drew plans for different models.

It’s been pointed out that there are some serious kinks in the plans for vertical farming as it has been presented so far. Where will all the waste go, and how would a giant like SkyFarm affect city traffic? How will sufficient sunlight reach crops in the middle of the building, or, if artificial light is used, how will it be possible for anyone but the super-wealthy to afford such premium goods? These were, and remain, important questions for Graff, who places economic and practical concerns on par with the environmental and the aesthetic.

Graff’s thesis was motivated by the belief that society ought to behave in ways that are less harmful to the environment. His theory on how to achieve this goal is quite radical: he believes that sustainable cities should aim to become divorced from nature, depending on technological, rather than ecological, systems. But he admits that to an extent, architects work in an “ideas field” which tends to produce pie-in-the-sky plans. “I’m not interested in making fiction,” he says. “I want to contribute to the real world in a meaningful way, not the theoretical.”

Graff still hopes that vertical farms will become possible within the next fifty years. But, he admits, the likelihood that anyone will be willing to invest $1.5 billion dollars in building SkyFarm is “extremely unlikely.” Instead, he’s redesigned much smaller models that he believes will be productive enough to be profitable. Today, there is economic incentive for big grocery store chains to import produce from all across the globe. Graff believes that for vertical farming to happen, there will have to be a stronger economic incentive to support locally grown produce. And it will have to become cheap enough to feed all city dwellers – not just elite foodies. “I think it’s very unlikely that arable land would ever be electively given up,” he says. “It would have to get to the point where vertical farming is so economically efficient… It would have to get to the point where arable land was too expensive to farm – like if oil cost $300 a barrel. Then we might see farmland return to forests.”

There is plenty of existing technology designed for “controlled environment agriculture”, and it will only continue to advance. A company called Valcent, for instance, has helped a zoo in England become a pioneer of small-scale vertical farming. In a single-level greenhouse, Valcent’s VertiCrop system grows veggies hydroponically on a spiraling shelving unit, with rotating rows to allow sunlight to reach each plant. Crucial to the success of future vertical farms, Graff believes, is their ability to produce their own electricity. A new waste disposal technology called plasma arc gasification would allow vertical farms to recycle solid waste into usable energy without producing harmful emissions. These, and many other new pieces of technology, will provide the building blocks to help create efficient and economically viable vertical farms.

In the October 2011 issue of The Walrus, Chris Turner wrote, “Food is a perpetual hot topic — it is, after all, one of the few consumer products that become part of our bodies. But even as food security, safety, and health have risen on the public agenda, the conversation has focused entirely too much on the contradictory lines of what we want — more local, fewer chemicals, more options, greater convenience — and far too little on how to get it.”

In Toronto and elsewhere in the country, there is a burgeoning community of advocates for urban agriculture and more sustainable practices. And there are those who put forward the urgent need for vertical farms to emerge on our city skylines. But as Graff points out, laying the groundwork and designing the plethora of technology needed will take a collective effort. As progressives like Despommier, Graff, and many others continue to dream up ways of getting what we want, eventually their plans might land in the real world, too.


Julie Baldassi is an editorial intern at The Walrus.

Tags • , , , , ,
Posted in Food  • 

  • Anonymous

    “He believes that sustainable cities should aim to become divorced from nature, depending on technological, rather than ecological, systems.”

    That’s outrageously hubristic. Any time any idea-man has aimed to divorce a human-made system from nature it’s been a horrendous failure–for the simple reason that humans are part of nature. 

    Anyway, there’s no need to abandon traditional farming anyway, at least not in a country as blessed with arable farmland as Canada. A vertical farm is not an “urgent need.” Rather, we should be concerned with ensuring ethical and sustainable farming practices and decent incomes for farmers. New forms of agriculture will certainly play a role in our food future, and urban and indoor farming will be part of it. But a skyscraper farm and all its attendant complications is simply not needed, nor desirable.

  • Anonymous

    Happy to hear he is still developing plans for scaled down versions.  Even though this one did not succeed, it brought a lot of attention to the importance of local, sustainable food sources, which is one of the keys to the future of human survival on the planet.

    Michael KuenhertSave The Farm Movie http://www.cinemalibrestudio.com/savethefarm/In the 11th hour and in the middle of south central L.A., they fought to save the farm.

  • Btgraff

    Uh – sunlight – ya, lack of sunlight is an obvious flaw that doomed this idea from the start. That was my first thought. And the cost saving from growing food in the city versus a few miles away are hardly a major benefit to offset the high cost of building such a structure.

  • westislander

    Canada, which has more land than most any oither country, an unparalleled richness of fresh water should be about the last place on earth needing vertical farming. And, imagine the idea for a city with some of the highest priced real estate on the continent. Canada is about the last place on the planet where vertical farming makes sense. But if it does go ahead, it will NOT be about feeding the starving, it will be about overpriced high margin exotic treats for the rich and famous.

    We should devote more of our attention to keeping our rivers and lakes clean, and having a railway network that can move food efficiently from producer to consumer.


Canada & its place in the world. Published by
the non-profit charitable Walrus Foundation
TwitterFacebookTumblr
The Walrus SoapBox
The Walrus Laughs
Walrus TV
Archived Blog Posts
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007