
Singapore Airlines is using aeroponics to upgrade in-flight meals - prostoalex
https://qz.com/1805109/aerofarms-supplies-singapore-airliness-salad-greens/
======
Shivetya
So 300% more efficient than farms in yield but there is criticism in costs
related to electricity to run it all. how about no need for traditional
pesticides plus lack of exposure to pollution or animal feces. the reduction
in water usage alone should be pay back.

The 300% number is not substantiated in the linked articles and comes with
typical qualifying comments. So reading about about the potential pitfalls
avoided by just farming indoors has always looked amazing but now with better
computers and LED lighting reducing electricity use you could play the game of
having your indoor farm solar powered without direct contact of sun and plant,
just cover your roof in panels.

Anyone with knowledge that besides fruits what else does not lend itself to
this type of farming.

~~~
eesmith
"the reduction in water usage alone should be pay back."

How?

Farmland irrigation water is cheap. Really cheap, compared to what you can get
in the city.

Prices I see are something like $5,000 per acre-foot in the city vs. $40 per
acre-foot for the Central Valley. (see
[https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-
irrigati...](https://news.berkeley.edu/berkeley_blog/the-cost-of-irrigation-
water-and-urban-farming/) )

~~~
leggomylibro
Depends on where you live. Cape Town, for example, has been experiencing
frequent and prolonged droughts recently. Parts of India like Chennai are also
having serious problems. And so on.

California also isn't a great example, because it is regularly criticized for
selling water rights far too cheaply at times when the state has been
suffering from drought; I think "Nestle" and "almond farms" are the usual
culprits.

~~~
tzs
I'm not convinced about almond farms. Yes, I've seen the claim that it takes
1.1 gallons of water to grow one almond.

But 1.1 gallons of water has about 3500 times the mass of 1 almond, so almost
none of that 1.1 gallons is actually in the almond when it is exported from
California.

So how much water is _actually_ consumed to produce that one almond, and how
much remains available to go on to be used to produce more almonds or other
crops?

~~~
idoh
Almonds come from a tree, the tree requires the water to grow the almonds. The
tree draws water from the ground, then there is transpiration where the water
moves through the tree and out, like through the leaves. None remains, all the
water goes into the air.

~~~
tzs
Are drip or micro-irrigation systems so precise that most of what they put
into the ground ends up in the plant?

Also, what happens to that water that ends up in the air? California winds are
mostly from the west or northwest. I'd expect a lot of what goes into the air
to come out as rain or snow on the windward side of the Sierra Nevada
mountains, which is the same side the almond growing regions are on.

~~~
idoh
With the water, there is transpiration, which is the water that flows through
the plant, evaporation, which is water that goes from the ground to the air
directly, and then when the water goes into the water table.

With drip irrigation, you get less loss to the water table and to evaporation,
but it doesn't impact transpiration.

For water that winds up the air, no idea there. I'd guess that irrigation
would have no impact to down wind precipitation in a given area.

------
tuna-piano
I know almost nothing about indoor farming, aeroponics, urban farming, etc -
but I get the feeling that people think its better because it appears clean.
Farming and dirt is dirty, and indoor/urban farms/aeroponics are shiny and
clean.

Of course being dirty has nothing to do with global warming or the
environment, but that type of analysis is much more complicated than "looks
clean!"

~~~
ajiang
This is an oversimplification of why aeroponics or any form of hydroponics is
great. A few of the most notable benefits:

1) Growing density - you use a lot less square footage by growing up!

2) Can grow anywhere - you control a ton of the variables due to setup indoors
away from weather conditions, indoor lights, control of water and nutrients,
etc.

3) The ability to very carefully fine tune the end product due to a large
number of controllable inputs into the growing process (rather than spreading
nutrients and water over large acres of land)

~~~
antisthenes
> 1) Growing density - you use a lot less square footage by growing up!

Yes, but all of that square footage is inside the building, which cost money
to construct and operate, in addition to capital costs of constructing the
multi-tiered farm and wiring it with LEDs

> 2) Can grow anywhere

Yes...anywhere... _inside a heated building_. Even if the LEDs used provide
some degree of heating, some sort of HVAC to regulate temperatures must still
be employed. I'd imagine you wouldn't use an unheated warehouse in Canada
during winter.

> 3) The ability to very carefully fine tune the end product due to a large
> number of controllable inputs into the growing process

Probably the only real advantage. It also makes ramping up to demand somewhat
easier, since the growth time is shorter.

However, make no mistake - so far these are low calorie greens at a luxury
price.

~~~
patall
If you built a house just for growing plants then yes. If I grow a few veggies
in a green curtain at home in the kitchen window where I am not even there 90%
of the daylight time, then no. Also, I am growing radish and salad in the
attic right now where there is no extra heating or light so point 2 is also
not necessarily true. The only thing I would agree on is that you will not
cover more than 5% of your diet that way but it enough for covering the winter
with some fresh stuff.

~~~
antisthenes
> If I grow a few veggies in a green curtain at home in the kitchen window
> where I am not even there 90% of the daylight time, then no.

Smaller scales make the math worse, not better.

> Also, I am growing radish and salad in the attic right now where there is no
> extra heating or light so point 2 is also not necessarily true.

I'm assuming the attic is attached to a heated building of some sort? Not sure
why you're trying so hard to come up with arguments for this hydroponic stuff.

People are well aware of the advantages and it's mostly going to be used to
grow high-value cash crops like spices (saffron?) and cannabis.

------
wenc
Singapore Airlines is known for their cabin experience, so I'm guessing the
vegetables taste pretty good?

I've heard the opposite of greenhouse produce from the Netherlands (Europeans
complain that the tomatoes from greenhouses don't taste very tomatoey).

Now the Dutch are extremely advanced at the greenhouse game (probably best in
the world), so I wonder why the difference? Is it merely a perception issue?

(would love to hear thoughts from Europeans)

~~~
chopin
Dutch tomatoes are said to be a fourth aggregate state of water.

This however applies to any vegetable that can be purchased in Germany. Almost
independent of price.

~~~
brnt
> Dutch tomatoes are said to be a fourth aggregate state of water.

Actually... 'Dutch tomatoes' are the perfect example of an industrialized
variety: looks and handles well, dirt cheap. There are delicious tomatoes
produced in the Netherlands, but your friendly local grocer (Aldi, Lidl sounds
like) doesn't actually want to sell them because they are not what the market
wants, nor worth the extra handling costs.

See a local farm for tasty produce, not your local Aldi or Lidl.

The Netherlands in particular exports all it's best in class agricultural
products in certain markets abroad that care and pay for quality, but most of
roughly northern Europe does not. As a Dutchman this frustrates me to no end,
because I can't get the good stuff produced next-door unless I go there and
find a friendly farmer who is interested in selling small quantities to
individuals (and due to the level of industrialization they often don't!)

~~~
chopin
Sourcing high quality vegetables is very difficult in Germany. Even with local
farmers it is very hard to come by. It is quite easy to find sources for
organic food but most of it tastes equally bad compared to non-organic,
sometimes even worse.

------
alach11
I wonder what precautions they take to avoid pests?

With no use of pesticides, I imagine an outbreak of pests could be very
costly. In the images we can see gloves and what looks like a blue
uniform/coat they're wearing.

------
nimbix
I gotta give it to Signapore Airlines PR machine - they sure manage to get
them some good press. Too bad the actual experience flying them is not that
exceptional. And don't get me started about their food... Out of 20+ airlines
I've flown in the past 5 years, SA's food was by far the worst. I really
regretted paying extra to fly with them instead of Qatar (who have excellent
food).

~~~
jessaustin
I take it you don't fly coach? There are lots of big airlines whose coach food
options are pretty bad.

------
ragebol
I was expecting the article to be about having aeroponics on the airplanes
themselves. Would make the term 'aeroponics' even more apt.

~~~
knodi123
lol, there's a long list of reasons why that doesn't make sense, but I admit I
had the same first thought

------
animalnewbie
Unlike bill g (who thinks it's energy production and storage) I think food
growing and delivery would be the next big thing. Imagine if we can make
kitchens redundant. Nobody has a gym in their house. Kitchens should be
equally rare.

~~~
Shivetya
Sorry, doesn't make sense. Removing kitchens is just an odd idea. Food
preparation is so varied who would want to pass the duty off to others. For
many it is as much artistic expression as need.

If anything what technology like this offers is growing food closer to the
areas where it is currently transported which in turn would remove those costs
from the process plus lots of related effects on traffic and pollution.

~~~
BoorishBears
Removing kitchens is already happening:

[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/24/homes-
withou...](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/24/homes-without-
kitchens-ubs-report)

Plenty of people in major cities no longer cook.

> Food preparation is so varied who would want to pass the duty off to others.

Are you joking? You don't see why people would want to spend the time they use
to prepare food to do other things just because it's varied?

There are over 700 restaurants on doordash delivering to my location right
now, by dinner I've seen that number go as high as 1,500.

How many lifetimes would it take to be able to recreate even 10% of those
menus?

-

I can cook, but to me it's like changing my oil or cleaning my apartment. Some
people love to make a face and go "you don't cook?!?!?!"

Yeah... not everyone considers cooking "artistic expression", imagine not
understanding that.

~~~
markus92
This is very much a cultural thing. I only know one person who doesn't cook,
and that's an American. All of my European friends/family/acquaintances can't
imagine not cooking. Even I had ask a few times if what my American friend was
saying, was for real.

~~~
SEJeff
For what it's worth, plenty of Americans (myself and wife both included)
really enjoy cooking.

~~~
stevenwoo
There's two other benefits - get out of tipping culture and being able source
ingredients for moral/ethical/health reasons (lots prepackaged food have many
questionable ingredients/packaging and prepackaged/restaurant food has more
sugar/salt/grease)

~~~
magduf
>There's two other benefits - get out of tipping culture

This is only a real problem in America.

