
VCs bet on ‘indoor farming,’ lasers that monitor crops and Soylent drinks - drussell
http://www.wsj.com/articles/silicon-valley-firms-plant-roots-in-farm-belt-1428348765
======
lukeqsee
I work at a precision ag startup in the Midwest. I can speak from inside the
industry: it's an incredibly exciting time.

We have more people asking us to build tools than we could ever build, and
most of the tools are basic management level. We haven't even scratched the
surface of applying algorithms to the loads of data being created. I think
over the next few years data + machine learning will make things like
pesticide application, irrigation, fertilizer, and planting incredibly more
efficient. The cool part is the growers have the tools to apply these
algorithms as they're produced (tractors, combines, planters are almost all
able to support variable rate applications). All we need is the ability to
capture, analyze, and start applying the data.

Feel free to ask if you're more interested in what the industry looks like
from the inside.

~~~
jashmenn
Another Ag founder here and this is totally true. There's a lot of groundwork
to lay before we can start applying state of the art algorithms to ag.

For example, a few months ago my co-founders and I built a computer vision
system that could count fruit (predicting yield is important because produce
spoils quickly). The growers we've shared it with love it but most don't have
the infrastructure to use the data in their operations. It's hard to respond
quickly when everyone is emailing spreadsheets.

Adoption of tech in ag has been slow, in part, because farmers are already
_very good_ at their jobs. Many of them have been working the same crop on the
same land for decades so there has been some skepticism about what new
information can be learned from "just another sensor."

But change is in the air. The water is running out, there's a huge labor
shortage, and every farm employee now has a smartphone.

If we can spend the next year or two getting farm operational data online then
there is a huge amount of value that can be unlocked with even relatively
simple algorithms (not to mention deep learning etc.)

In fact, we don't really have any other choice. Software can bring in the next
green revolution and that makes this a really exciting time.

~~~
lukeqsee
Absolutely agree. Everything you just said I've heard or experienced in just a
few months.

> There's a lot of groundwork to lay before we can start applying state of the
> art algorithms to ag.

We have experts in algorithms, embedded systems engineering, computer vision,
software engineering, sensor technology, and robotics at our company (along
with a few other specializations). But before we can utilize that talent to
its fullest, we have to build the foundation. So that's what we, and a whole
bunch of other really talented companies, are doing: building the foundation.
Hopefully in a few growing seasons we can start to really apply what we've
learned.

~~~
jsprogrammer
Are you open-sourcing your systems so that others may benefit? Or keeping them
locked down to extract maximum profit?

~~~
rattray
I downvoted you because this strikes me as gratuitously negative, mean-
spirited, and/or uncalled-for. Asking for pointers to any open-source work
they've done would have been more appropriate.

~~~
jsprogrammer
What exactly is negative in my comment? Is extracting max profit bad? Or open-
sourcing work?

~~~
collyw
The way you worded it sounds very negative, as if the only reason for keeping
thing locked down is to extract maximum profit.

If you had said something like "fund the work" it would have sounded more
acceptable. There is a large space between "extracting maximum profit" and
"doing work for free".

~~~
jsprogrammer
What other reason is there for keeping something locked down?

~~~
collyw
Off the top of my head, scientific publishing. Keep it locked down until you
have published then open source it.

I personally wouldn't want my work code online, as its always rushed and there
is a fair bit of technical debt I would like to to refactor, rather than
having potential employers thinking that I always write shit code. Feature
requests are valued more than code quality.

~~~
jsprogrammer
I suppose wanting to hide perceived 'shoddy' workmanship is a reason.

I say, let it all hang out. Code can be continually improved.

------
gregpilling
From the article (thanks @timdoor) :

"Freight Farms’s repurposed shipping containers, packed with LED lights,
sensors and hydroponic systems and producing lettuce and herbs, are appearing
in vacant lots and alleys. The sealed containers can yield about 500 full
heads of lettuce a week, year-round—even in Minnesota and Canada, where some
of the 25 units sold so far by Freight Farms now operate. Co-founder and Chief
Executive Brad McNamara said the units sell for $76,000 each and require no
pesticides."

\- locally, a head of lettuce is $1.25 (Tucson, Arizona close to lettuce
growing areas) \- 500 a week makes $625 a week, or $32,500 a year in revenue -
average $2706.25 per month revenue. \- a 5 year lease with $1 buyout on
$76,000 would be $1580.80 a month based on terms I used to sell capital
equipment for.

$2706.25 - $ 1580.80 = $1125.45 per month, before paying employees,
electricity, and cost of location.

What does lettuce cost in other areas?

~~~
cloudwalking
$1.25 isn't wholesale though. I wonder what the supermarket is paying.

~~~
chiph
And then there's spoilage, and returns by customers (some people will return
anything to a store..)

------
nether
I drink Soylent regularly but I think you'd be insane to make it more than 30%
of your daily calories. As Michael Pollan said, we've got decades of research
behind baby formula but it is still inferior to breast milk. Soylent also
still naively follows FDA daily reference intakes. Not saying that they're
totally off the wall, just that they contain many deficiencies as pointed out
by the MealSquares team: [http://www.mealsquares.com/nutrition-
facts.html](http://www.mealsquares.com/nutrition-facts.html)

~~~
sowhatquestion
> I think you'd be insane to make [Soylent] more than 30% of your daily
> calories

You can't make claims like this without context. There's 85th-percentile
health, and then there's 99th-percentile health. Plenty of foods, including
Soylent, can help people attain or maintain that more modest level of health.
Now, if you were an Olympic athlete requiring 99th-percentile health, I agree
you'd be insane to make Soylent more than 30% of your daily calories. But if
you're an average person eating the Standard American Diet, _you are currently
insane_ from a health standpoint, and switching to Soylent would make you a
lot less so. And among all the options you might have for improving your diet,
it is among the cheapest and lowest-effort.

It amazes me how people can fail to recognize that nutrition is a part of a
larger economic problem of time and resource allocation. There are real
tradeoffs to be made! Perfection is rarely attainable or even desirable except
in special cases!

Rob Rhinehart, for his part, has always been honest about this. The Soylent
team has looked at including things like antioxidants and digestive enzymes--
things you'd get from whole foods but not from Soylent's processed ingredients
--but they concluded that there's just not enough information to determine the
types and quantities of these substances that are necessary to improve health.
I think this lack of information is no accident. It's easier to research core
nutrients whose deficiency will cause clear symptoms than it is to research
nice-to-haves like antioxidants whose presence may cause slight performance
improvements at the margin. Soylent is designed to reflect the state of
nutritional knowledge. As that knowledge improves, so will Soylent. While I
have bought MealSquares and enjoy their product, I prefer Soylent's approach
to one that pretends our knowledge is more complete than it really is.

~~~
bmj
* But if you're an average person eating the Standard American Diet, you are currently insane from a health standpoint, and switching to Soylent would make you a lot less so. And among all the options you might have for improving your diet, it is among the cheapest and lowest-effort.*

I have been skeptical of Soylent's claims, and I'm often troubled by the
concept that we need to somehow "fix" food, but this comment makes quite a bit
of sense. I would rather a person suck down Soylent instead of Twinkies,
Doritos, and other highly-processed, barely-food stuff that is sold these
days.

~~~
sowhatquestion
Wow--I don't think I've ever (knowingly) helped change someone's mind by
writing an online comment before! It's a nice feeling, thanks. :)

------
timdorr
Non paywall link:
[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fsilicon-
valley-firms-plant-roots-in-farm-
belt-1428348765&ei=sDEjVayzCoq8sAWizoDoDQ&usg=AFQjCNFsmD4843njn2h84mUn76k6U5c-Zg&sig2=kwhwn01DwYpC05D2TE6p_A)

~~~
thangalin
Still pay-walled.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=Silicon+Valley+Firms+Plant+R...](https://www.google.com/search?q=Silicon+Valley+Firms+Plant+Roots+in+Farm+Belt)

Click the first link.

------
eyeareque
Can we have a no paywall link rule?

~~~
xeromal
It's a bit of a quandry because WSJ is a good publication and not a pay wall
in some cases. If you google the article title and click the link, it works!

------
rdlecler1
The Dow Jones data they site is way off. We calculated a _lower bound_ of
$2.36B from a compilation of 264 financings in 2014. You can access the (free)
report here: [http://agfunder.com/reports/agtech-investing-
report-2014](http://agfunder.com/reports/agtech-investing-report-2014)

AGERPoint was also one of the companies mentioned in the article. Their
campaign is also currently listed on our site.

