campbell - major research paper - vertical farming in an urban environment: a toronto perspective

RUNNING HEAD: A TORONTO PERSPECTIVE FOR VERTICAL FARMING

VERTICAL FARMING IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT:

A TORONTO PERPSPECTIVE

Major Research Paper

Joshua Campbell

Ryerson University

Student Number: 500378575

Prepared for:

Professor Dale Carl

&

Professor Joseph Shaw

Monday, April 22, 2013

A TORONTO PERSPECIVE FOR VERTICAL FARMING 2

Executive Summary

It is widely accepted that the expected growth of the world’s population will continue to

have a negative impact on the availability of food to certain portions of the population. This is

primarily the result of increased demand combined with the reduction of farmland, due in large

part, to urbanization. In order to provide sustainable food security, the world requires new

methods of growing produce with sustainable infrastructure. One plausible solution is a form of

urban agriculture known commonly as vertical farming.

Dickson Despommier’s (2009) vision of filling sky scrapers with plants may seem like

something out of a futuristic movie. Although novel, this concept should be considered the next

necessary manifestation of agricultural practice. For example, major urban areas such as

Singapore and Beijing are restricted to obtaining their produce from distant suppliers. The result

of this practice leads to increased food and transportation costs to the consumer along with

negative health consequences, due to the fact that the availability of quality produce is limited.

How could vertical farming be implemented and what is required to facilitate this

approach? For the purpose of this paper, the City of Toronto is evaluated, in its current state, to

evaluate the candidacy and suitability of vertical farming. In addition, alternative technologies

of wind turbines, solar energy and water recycling are discussed as comparable initiatives along

with required human capital. Current land use planning issues and stakeholder concerns are

discussed and recommendations are provided to assist with the appropriate implementation

methodology. Further, real estate is discussed at length along with possible site locations.

Two business models are proposed that include both a commercial sales farm and a

personal allotment garden where individuals lease space for personal consumption. A financial

evaluation is discussed to better understand how funding for a vertical farm could be provided.

A detailed qualitative cost-benefit analysis is presented to provide realistic insight towards the

potential development of such a project.

There are many ongoing projects that utilize the resources and technologies discussed in

this paper but none compile them to fulfill the vision of a sustainable vertical farm. The

proposing of an accurate methodology is pivotal to its successful implementation. The definition

of success is also discussed as it does not necessarily equate to profitability. Success should be

defined by achieving long term global food security.


Table of Contents

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................5

List of Figures .................................................................................................................................5

1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................6

2.0 Background and Motivation ...................................................................................................6

3.0 Research Questions ..................................................................................................................7

4.0 Review of the Literature ..........................................................................................................8

4.1 Population and Geography .....................................................................................................8

4.2 Pollution and Land Use Planning ...........................................................................................8

4.3 Climate and Economy ............................................................................................................9

4.4 Nutrition and Contamination ..................................................................................................9

4.5 Energy and Resources ..........................................................................................................10

4.6 Modern and Traditional Farming .........................................................................................10

4.7 Technology and Current Case Studies .................................................................................11

5.0 Research Objectives ...............................................................................................................12

6.0 Research Approach and Methodology .................................................................................12

6.1 Deductive Approach .............................................................................................................12

6.2 Research Methodology .........................................................................................................13

7.0 Challenges and Limitations ...................................................................................................14

8.0 Potential Contribution ad Significance of Study.................................................................14

9.0 Business Model Propositions .................................................................................................15

10.0 Resource Capability .............................................................................................................15

10.1 Wind Energy ......................................................................................................................15

10.2 Solar Energy .......................................................................................................................17

10.3 Water Recycling .................................................................................................................20

10.4 Labour Market ....................................................................................................................23

11.0 Social and Legal ...................................................................................................................25

11.1 Land Use Planning .............................................................................................................25

11.2 Stakeholders .......................................................................................................................28

12.0 Market Research ..................................................................................................................30


12.1 Real Estate Perspective ......................................................................................................31

12.2 Product Demand .................................................................................................................33

13.0 Financial Study.....................................................................................................................35

13.1 Financial Accommodation .................................................................................................36

13.2 Cost-Benefit Analysis ........................................................................................................38

14.0 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................40

14.1 Research Questions ............................................................................................................40

14.2 Methodology ......................................................................................................................43

15.0 Reflection ..............................................................................................................................44

References .....................................................................................................................................48

Appendices ....................................................................................................................................62

Appendix 1: Location Propositions ............................................................................................62

Appendix 2: Benefits and Costs .................................................................................................63


List of Tables

Table 1: Research Studies With Key Search Terms .................................................................64

Table 2: Master Level Agriculture Programs in Canada ........................................................68

List of Figures

Figure 1: Research Methodology ................................................................................................70

Figure 2: Exhibition Place Wind Turbine .................................................................................71

Figure 3: Bahrain World Trade Center.....................................................................................72

Figure 4: San Francisco Utilities Commission ..........................................................................73

Figure 5: Guangzhou Pearl River Tower ..................................................................................74

Figure 6: Wind Tunnel at Guangzhou Pearl River Tower ......................................................75

Figure 7: Darrieus Quiet Revolution (QR) Wind Turbine ......................................................76

Figure 8: PAC-H Wind Turbine .................................................................................................77

Figure 9: Windspire Wind Turbine ...........................................................................................78

Figure 10: International Conference Centre at Dezhou, China ..............................................79

Figure 11: Conserval’s Solar Heating Systems .........................................................................80

Figure 12: Margot and Harold Schiff Residences .....................................................................81

Figure 13: Don Lands Map .........................................................................................................82

Figure 14: Financial District Map ..............................................................................................83

Figure 15: Liberty Village Map ..................................................................................................84


1.0 Introduction

The continuing growth of the world's population is a noted concern to urban planners

and professionals in related fields. One issue of particular significance is the increasingly limited

availability of land that can be devoted to sustainable agricultural production. In addition, the

price of food continues to rise in both domestic and international markets due to the rising cost of

fuel and transportation among other factors. Despommier's (2009) proposal of utilizing

skyscrapers in heavily populated urban locales is one possible solution. Considerations should

include factors specific to resource capability, legality, social, demand and financing. All of

these factors have a measurable impact on the practicality of Despommier’s idea. The purpose

of this study is to examine vertical farming and propose a methodology in the City of Toronto.

Primary research is obtained through public disclosure documentation including official

city plans, by-laws, zoning controls and case studies. Additional information is gained through

private entities and other relevant resources critical. A discussion of the research material is

conducted to examine the factors which contribute to the possible implementation of a proposed

vertical farming project in Toronto. In addition, current research is assessed to identify the

present candidacy of the subject municipality as it directly relates to the suitable implementation

of vertical farming.

2.0 Background and Motivation

This research is intended for those interested in the notion of sustainable growth,

specifically in Toronto. The impact of urban sprawl on available cropland negatively impacts

farmers and local communities that rely on food production to sustain their local economy.

Rising land values and transportation fees have contributed to increased prices for agricultural

products. Another issue that has recently arisen is the safety and sustainability of genetically


modified produce (GMF). While GM science has shown some benefit in raising crop yields, it

has also led to concerns about the impact on consumer health and the potential negative impact

on the natural environment.

Urban farming is also of interest to the business world. As reported by Industry Canada,

the agricultural sector contributed nearly $30 billion of Canada's gross domestic product in 2011

(Industry Canada, 2012). Corporations have noticed such profit trends in the industry, and as a

result, major agricultural conglomerates have grown substantially. Investors seeking

diversification are investing in agricultural land, potentially increasing the valuation of land

(Dubuis, 2011). As population grows, the need for food will increase. The workforce related to

agriculture will continue to adapt to become higher skilled. To that end, food production will

play an increasingly important role, and the related industries will gain further investment by the

private and public sectors.

3.0 Research Questions

The contribution of this paper is to answer following general question:

How could vertical farming be successfully implemented in the City of Toronto?

Additional inquires will also provide insight for the following secondary questions:

i) What role does technology serve towards the implementation and maintenance of

a vertical farming project?

ii) Does the populace of the City of Toronto possess the general skills, education and

training required for an urban agriculture project?

iii) What precautions need to be taken to ensure that detrimental impacts on public

health are minimized?

iv) What are the possible funding sources for a vertical farming project?


4.0 Review of the Literature

The practice of urban agriculture has been a milestone of our species’ development and

urban agriculture appears to be the next logical step that is yet to be realized. A review of

relevant research that discusses the issues and challenges related to the large-scale

implementation of urban agriculture follows. All research findings were conducted utilizing key

search terms listed in Table 1.

4.1 Population and Geography

The global population is rapidly advancing towards seven billion and it is projected to

reach nearly ten billion by 2050 (The World Bank, 2012). The growth in world population has

resulted with the expansion of urban settlement and increased food demand. The public concern

for sufficient food supply is of utmost importance. Historically, archaeologists attribute the fall

of major civilizations to famine (Webb, 1998). Moreover, agriculture as either a product or as a

means to providing a sustainable family income is potentially becoming fiscally unfeasible.

Much of the planet’s accessible arable land is simply becoming scarce and that which is still

available has become less affordable for the common farmer (Mowbray, 2012).

4.2 Pollution and Land Use Planning

The majority of air pollution is the result of increasing energy consumption due to rapid

metropolitan growth (Agrawal, Singh, Rajput, Marshall, & Bell, 2003; Bell, Power, Jarraud,

Agrawal, & Davies, 2011). In the last century, urbanization has expanded from an estimated

15% to 50% of world’s total population density (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000). Land use planners

have been encouraged by their empowering bodies to focus on ‘smart growth’ as an effort to curb

such adverse effects (LaCroix, 2010; Mendes, Balmer, Kaethler, & Rhoads, 2008). As a barrier,

the rapid advancement of developing countries over the past half century has limited the


capabilities of individual nations to allocate the proper resources necessary for sustainable land

use planning. One instrumental goal of responsible planning in the present context is to have

agricultural products travel shorter distances, thus reducing transportation costs along with

mitigating negative impact on the environment (Nasr & Smit, 1992; Nasr, et al., 2010).

4.3 Climate and Economy

Global warming, arguably the result of ozone depletion from greenhouse gas emissions,

is a growing public concern. The combination of deforestation as a remedy to increase farmable

land and swift industrialization of developing nations are accelerating this problem (Bell, Power,

Jarraud, Agrawal, & Davies, 2011; Despommier, 2009). This amounts to significant losses in

agricultural productoin for farmers worldwide (Agrawal, Singh, Rajput, Marshall, & Bell, 2003).

Consequently, economic theories of supply and demand suggest that limitation in supply will

lead to higher prices. Limited access to nutritous food, especially for the urban poor, has been

increasing at dramatic rates since the early 1980’s (Webb, 1998).

4.4 Nutritition and Contamination

One significant issue inherent to agricultural practice concerns the impact of toxic

chemicals on both the environment and consumer health. Some chemical fertilizers, pesticides

and herbicides contain carcinogens. Not only is the labour force that handle’s these subtances at

risk, but so is the general population, especially in densely settled areas (Brown & Jameton,

2010; Goss, 2010). For example, toxic contaminates are known to be easily transferred

geographically by wind, water run-off, and direct transfer during transportation. Vertical farmers

could be subject to short and long term risks if proper percautions are not taken during food

production. There are, however, many benefits to having farmland exist within a urban setting.

In particular, it would help with the absorption of carbon emissions. It has been estimated that


the ecological carbon footprint of major cities could be cut in half with installation of agricultural

facilities (Nasr, et al., 2010).

4.5 Energy and Resources

Nutrient rich waste water, also known as ‘brown water’ is currently being filtered and

returned to our waterways as ‘grey water’. Moreover, seventy percent of the earth’s water used

by man is currently being expended for traditional agriculture irrigation (Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations, 2007). This may negatively impact water resources in

developing countries (Despommier, 2009). Some researchers (Ehrenberg, 2008; Nasr & Smit,

1992) propose that this water should be rerouted to urban agricultural facilities for irrigation

purposes. Modern methods of irrigation reduce the amount of waste water generated and reduce

the occurrence of drought that has an adverse effect on crop yield and earning potential within

the farming industry. In addition, brown water energy in the form biogas can also be utilized to

power these facilities. These alternative energy resources, combined with caputring solar and

wind energy could enable vertical farms to be sources of power (Goulding & Whitmore, 2012).

4.6 Modern and Traditional Farming

On a smaller and more local scale, household vegetable gardens which have been widely

popular since the end of the second world war, have been suggested as a necessity for low

income familly units (Brown & Jameton, 2010). Recent research suggests that there are nearly

one in six (i.e., approximately 50 million) individual produce gardeners in the United States.

These gardeners typically reside in urban areas and grow fruits and vegetables for personal

consumption (Brown & Jameton, 2010).

There is s consensus that the same phenomena exists throughout most of the developed

world (Mougeot, 2005). This supports the notion that urban agriculture is a widely accepted


practice conducted privately, only in smaller settings. Growing food indoors is also becoming

common practice with the use of small irrigation systems. The process is known as hydroponics.

This form of growing often does not require the use of soil and thus reduces the likelihood of

produce becoming contaminated. Besides requiring soil, traditional farming methods cultivate

fields using crop rotation in cycles as the soil deteriorates to the point that it is no longer arable

(Francis, et al., 2012). Growing produce indoors enables year round growth with the ability to

locate agricultural business near its consumer base. Given this, large scale urban agriculture is

certainly worth consideration.

4.7 Technology and Current Case Studies

Advances in science have enabled researchers to refine the technological feasibility of

vertical farming. City planners and architects have embraced incorporating the natural

environment into urban development (Ehrenberg, 2008). Urban gardens increase a city’s

biodiversity which further enhances the ecosystems functionality with the attraction of animals,

insects and microorganisms (Brown & Jameton, 2010). Moreover, municipalities are revising

their plans to incorporate urban agriculture into their official plans as a means to achieve local

food sustainability. Some cities are developing inventory systems of properties that would be

more suitable as a modern agricultural farm as compared to its current designated use (Mendes,

Balmer, Kaethler, & Rhoads, 2008). For example, case studies of New York, Toronto,

Kamloops, Vancouver and Portland have now been completed (City of Kamloops, 2007;

Mendes, Balmer, Kaethler, & Rhoads, 2008; Nasr, et al., 2010; Sorkin, 2012). The

environmental consequences of this research extend beyond the geographical boundaries of

urban centres (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000).


5.0 Research Objectives

What strategies will provide a sustainable solution for agricultural demand as the world

becomes increasingly urbanized? This question is of utmost importance given that global

demand for food has already reached a point of instability and will continue to destabilize if a

solution is not discovered (Despommier, 2009). A number of researchers have contributed

towards possible solutions that would support eco-friendly development and organic growth

alternatives (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Despommier, 2009; Ehrenberg, 2008; Goss, 2010).

Many researchers have stated how such projects are beneficial in more ways than just supporting

hunger associated problems. Vertical farming could also contribute solutions towards a number

of concerns: usage of energy saving technologies; reduction in the use of harmful pesticides and

herbicides; decreased costs to the consumer; improved gains in organic produce output; and

improved water management to address limited supplies and reduction in farmland drought.

Previous alternative energy research has contributed to the realization of rooftop gardens,

solar power and wind energy solutions. These accomplishments have led municipal planners to

reconsider their official plans and incorporate sustainable green energy alternatives within their

respective communities. Previously mentioned case studies have also furthered the practical

knowledge of the subject topic. There is however a lack of research that references a proposed

vertical farming project for the City of Toronto.

6.0 Research Approach and Methodology

Figure 1 (on page 72) illustrates the framework utilized for this paper.

6.1 Deductive Approach

A deductive approach was used. That is, by outlining a theoretical situation that directly

relies on current information, laws and models with a pre-determined outcome proved the


success of this study and its potential for future application. The consideration of significant

factors such as resource capability, legal, social and product demand are necessary to create an

efficient and effective business methodology. Furthermore, a funding analysis was outlined to

understand the proposed feasibility of such a project (Brent, 1996; Boardman, 2006; Adler,

2006). If the proposal did not yield a favourable outcome, there would be little reason to

dedicate capital and resources to such a project at this time.

6.2 Research Methodology

In order to accurately outline the methodology, the following are discussed:

Resource Capability

o Wind Energy

o Solar Energy

o Water Recycling

o Labour Market

Legal & Social

o Land Use Planning

o Stakeholders

Market Research

o Real Estate Perspective

o Product Demand

Financial Study

o Financial Accomodation

o Cost-Benefit Analysis


7.0 Challenges and Limitations

There are many potential challenges to completing the proposed study of vertical

farming. The challenges commence with the initial collection of data. If the data is not accurate,

relevant or interpreted correctly, the study will be flawed from the onset. The risk of bias that is

inherent in individual correspondence was addressed by adopting the multiple observation

approach. Moreover, the variables analyzed must be sufficient to support the case. These include

property values, weather predictability, continual pollution degeneration and technological

capabilities. The property values in the City of Toronto can be considered among some of the

highest in the world depending on location. As a result, financial requirements may render a

negative outcome regarding the feasibility of this project. Changes in wind patterns could also

limit the projective outcomes of the selected site as it will require a degree of consistency for

wind energy. The degree to which pollution continues to have an effect on a crops yield is also a

considerable factor. Lastly, assumptions regarding the degree of technological capability that the

proposed site must encompass to ultimately be successful, must be made.

8.0 Potential Contribution and Significance of Study

Furthering the knowledge of sustainable agriculture is the overall goal of this paper. By

advancing current research, one could examine the possibility and practicality of a proposed

vertical farm in the City of Toronto. Given the infancy of vertical farming and its

implementation, describing new methods and improving upon those from previous case studies

will advance the opportunities that municipalities and sustainable real estate developers can

utilize in order to achieve mutually beneficial goals.


9.0 Business Model Propositions

Two possible business models of vertical farming will be considered. The models include a

community garden approach in which individuals may rent space within an established facility to

plant and grow their own produce for personal consumption. Consumers would essentially lease

a portion of space on a per square foot basis. Costs could be reduced if the consumer was willing

to maintain the garden independently. If however, the consumer sought to have additional

services supplied such as irrigation, temperature adjustment, pest/insect control, and other

maintenance-related functions for the subject garden, premiums could be charged.

Alternatively, the entire vertical farming facility could be developed for the purpose of mass

production and commercial sales. This proposition would include a business entity managing the

entire produce operation with the intent to sell direct or supply distributors with produce to be

sold at the retail level. While both models vary slightly in their purpose, they are viable

alternatives that should be considered for a vertical farming project. They both compliment

sustainable growth and could possibly coincide together to form a hybrid approach.

10.0 Resource Capability

Similar to all commercial real estate projects, a vertical farm will require substantial

resources to construct and maintain such a facility. In order to operate a vertical farm in an urban

setting, multiple resources are required. In order to narrow the scope of this study however, only

the variables of wind energy, solar energy, water recycling and labour markets will be examined.

10.1 Wind Energy

In 2003, the City of Toronto built the first wind turbine in a North American urban

setting. The collaborative efforts of the municipality, Toronto Hydro and Windshare (a

community-based cooperative) erected a 750 kilowatt wind turbine (see Figure 2). The project


provides 1400 megawatt hours of power per year, which is enough energy to power 250 homes

(City of Toronto, 2013). Initiatives such as these demonstrate the unique ability for Toronto to

host a sustainable project such as a vertical farm.

The country of Bahrain has taken wind energy one step further and integrated wind

turbines directly into the design of skyscraper buildings (Inhabitat, 2007). For example, the

Bahrain World Trade Center has three wind turbines tying together two 50 story buildings,

supported by three 30 metre bridges (see Figure 3). This project is pivotal to the realization of

developing a sustainable zero-net energy building. The proximity of the City of Toronto to Lake

Ontario is similar to that of the Bahrain World Trade Center’s waterfront location making it an

possible site for wind power technology.

Another initiative worth mentioning is the University of California Davis Wind Energy

Collaborative (Price, 2013). Their first project is the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

building (see Figure 4). This building is curved in shape, directing the wind towards a column of

wind turbines which are covered by a glass facade to hide the disturbing presence of large wind

turbines in the city core. It is noted by Price (2013) that the proposed wind component of the

building will provide 7% of the necessary energy to power the building. Moreover, the building

has additional capabilities including a ‘solar chimney’ ventilation system and solar panels that

collectively provide an additional 32% towards energy needs.

One of the most intriguing forms of wind energy has been demonstrated at the

Guangzhou Pearl River Tower in China which involves collaboration with Windside

Technologies (see Figure 5). The 309 metre tall building has four pass-through, wind tunnels

that reportedly contribute towards 5% of the building’s energy needs (Windside, 2013) (see

Figure 6). The marvel of the building’s design eliminates the displeasing view and sound of


traditional wind turbines. A vertical farm designed utilizing a similarly innovative concept

would be ideal for an urban location.

All of the wind turbine examples described work most effectively with a one direction

wind shear (Cochran & Damiani, 2008). If the wind direction is less predictable, the following

wind turbines should be considered: Darrieus Quiet Revolution (QR), PAC-H wind turbines

(Cochran & Damiani, 2008) or the Windspire turbine (Windpsire, 2013) (see Figure 7, 8, 9). All

three turbines are used in various locations and climates. Such turbines are constructed to allow

wind from any direction to continue movement. There is one notable limitation attributed to the

Darrieus design, that being its inability to self-start (Turbines Info, 2013).

Incorporating wind energy into a vertical farm is an important consideration for its

financial feasibility. All potential energy saving technologies should be utilized to meet the

approval of financiers and maintain stakeholder support. There still remain common complaints

for wind turbines including audible noise, physical vibration and public safety that all need to be

minimized. The lack of data for actual performance of such technologies also contributes to the

questionable success of wind energy (Wilson, 2009). Wilson (2009) opines that the operators

and/or developers of such technologies either do not have the data or do not wish to share the

data publicly, which may lead one to believe that the benefits may not outweigh the negative

features. If a vertical farm in Toronto is to maintain public support, full disclosure is vital

regardless of the perceived cost-benefit relationship.

10.2 Solar Energy

Toronto’s Exhibition Place is also host to Canada’s largest solar installation. The 100

kilowatt project generates approximately 120,000 kilowatt hours of energy per year, enough to

power 35 homes (City of Toronto, 2013). Moreover, the City of Toronto offers financial


incentives for solar hot water installations and promotes the use of solar energy equipment for

community-owned buildings (City of Toronto, 2013). As such, the municipality has clearly

demonstrated its support and acceptance of solar energy production.

The Federal Government of Canada has also demonstrated support for solar energy with

the creation of the Solar Buildings Research Network (2005-2010) (SBRN), an initiative of the

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) (Natural Sciences and

Engineering Research Council of Canada, 2012). The SBRN was Canada’s initial research effort

with its vision focused on developing solar-optimal buildings that strive for zero-net energy

consumption. These solar initiatives incorporate technology that allows for the independent

regulation of temperature within the entirety of commercial buildings (Natural Sciences and

Engineering Research Council of Canada, 2012). In 2011, the SBRN transformed into the Smart

Net-Zero Energy Buildings Strategic Research Network (2011-2016) (SNEBRN) to form a

collaboration of fifteeen universities across Canada to collectively improve upon the

development of zero-net homes and commercial buildings. Their vision is to facilitate the

widespread adoption of zero-net technology in the commercial building sector across Canada by

2030 (Smart Net-Zero Energy Buildings Strategic Research Network, 2013).

Examples of solar technology with high potential include: window glazing, hot-water

rooftop collection, solar air collectors, rooftop/building integrated photovoltaic systems (PV),

and day lighting technologies (Anthientis & Robertson, 1997). Many of these solar technologies

are found in the largest solar building in the world which is located in Dezhou, China (see Figure

10). This 75,000 square meter fan shaped structure is host to a conference centre, hotel, and

meeting and training facilities, all of which is powered by self-sustaining solar technologies

(Yoneda, 2011).


An international organization based out of Toronto, Conserval Engineering, offers a

product line of high efficiency solar technologies (see Figure 11). Conserval’s trademark

SolarWall has been sold internationally since 1977 (Conserval, 2013). In order to achieve public

support, working with a local supplier such as Conserval could be viewed as a valuable strategy,

as the local labour economy would stand to benefit. The SolarWall technologies have been

utilized by large corporate entities such as Enbridge Gas, FedEx and Walmart, all in conjunction

with the Federal Government’s renewable energy incentive program (CanMetEnergy, 2013).

The SolarWall systems incorporate energy conservation technologies with an aesthetic finish,

which may be more publicly accepted.

Two major studies conducted in the United States discuss the proposition of passive solar

heating. Fosdick (2012) along with Haglund and Rathmann (1996) discuss the concept of heat

collection through solar collectors which is then transferred into a thermal mass (i.e. concrete

floor) which is then distributed to the end user through conduction, convection or radiation. The

substantial benefit of passive solar technologies is that no mechanical resources are required for

collection or distribution of energy, which require minimal maintenance. Moreover, an example

of passive cooling would be a green roof or a trellis with vines growing on the side of a building

to reduce the head absorption (Fosdick, 2012). Both of these technologies would be a large

benefit to a vertical farm’s financial feasibility through the reduction of heating and cooling

costs.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture has created a dedicated website entitled

Integration of Renewable Energy on Farms (IREF) as a resource to facilitate and support farmers

who are considering the usage of solar energy. The site discusses forms of technologies, energy

storage, process design and financing opportunities (Integration of Renewable Energy on Farms,


2013). The website also allows farmers to discuss the benefits and costs of various products

through the incorporation of blog communication. The average payback of solar energy is

considered very reasonable once 5 to 15 years have passed (Integration of Renewable Energy on

Farms , 2013).

10.3 Water Recycling

Rainwater collection and grey water reuse is an intriguing form of sustainability

technology. Having water recycling capability within an urban agricultural project would reduce

water consumption and sewage charges while reducing the load placed on regional water

treatment facilities. Several European countries already practice rainwater harvesting and grey

water recycling on a large scale (Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2002). Canada

increased its initiative to better understand North America’s current practices and the future

opportunities by establishing the Canadian Water and Wastewater Association (CWWA). Its

purpose was to understand the regulations and standards that are currently implemented by

governing agencies (Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2002). This study concluded

that Canada lags behind relative to the rest of the world in this respect. This is widely due to the

lack of government rebates and incentives offered for installing such technologies. It is also

noteworthy that nine percent of Canada’s total land equivalent to nearly one million square

kilometres is covered by freshwater (Environment Canada, 2013). This has contributed to the

perceived lack of need for advancing such technologies.

The consideration of grey water recycling must be further examined to understand its

suitability for an urban farm. Grey water is defined as the liquid waste produced from washroom

sinks, showers and laundry machines. It is not to be confused with black water, which is the

waste water, generated from toilets, dishwashers and kitchen sinks (Sustainable Sources, 2013).


In order to reuse grey water within a facility, proper independent plumbing systems must be

constructed. While this may be relatively simple during the building and design phase, it is

much more difficult to complete on an existing building through retrofit. To be clear, the

purpose of the project discussed in this paper is specific to new buildings wherein retrofitting

would not apply.

Rainwater harvesting is similar to grey water recycling in its application towards the end

user but differs by its collection method. In the commercial setting, it is collected through roof

top cisterns and holding troughs. The water is then distributed to the toilets and irrigation

systems. This method has only recently become popular in North American commercial

developments (Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2002). In the residential setting,

the use of rain water barrels allows individuals to water lawns, gardens and fill swimming pools.

This has long been practiced in other regions around the globe (Canadian Mortgage and Housing

Corporation, 2002).

There are two recent commercial projects worthy of discussion. Helmut Jahn, an

architect based out of Chicago designed a supportive housing facility, namely the Margot and

Harold Schiff Residences (see Figure 12) (Dwell, 2013). In addition to the integration of solar

panels that are used to heat the facilities’ water supply, rain water is also collected to hydrate the

property’s vegetable gardens. Grey water is also collected, filtered and redistributed to the

showers, sinks and toilets. The Quayside Village (QV) housing complex in Vancouver, British

Columbia was originally designed to filter both grey water and black water, however municipal

restrictions led to last minute design changes to eliminate the black water recycling (Simon

Fraser University, 2006). The system included a septic tank to remove coarse solids, a bio-filter

to recirculate, sand filters to remove further solids and ozone generators are to complete the


overall process (Simon Fraser University, 2006). The capital cost for the equipment was

approximately $115,000 with as little as $100 being required as a monthly maintenance fee

(Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2013). Ideally, a similar system could be utilized

in an urban farm to assist with irrigation.

The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is home to multiple suppliers for the above mentioned

technologies such as Clean Flush Systems and Zenon Environmental (Sustainabile Building,

2013). Water Recycling Systems (WRS), a company operating out of California has introduced

water recycling in schools, hotels and commercial properties to help them achieve Leadership in

Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification (Water Recycling Systems, 2013).

Waterfront Toronto, a public advocacy group, is working closely with public and private

organizations to ensure the waterfront and local wetlands remain safe and sustainable.

Furthermore, Waterfront Toronto supports the recycling of grey and black water so long as they

are restricted to irrigation objectives (Waterfront Toronto, 2013). One of their primary goals is to

maintain a pleasing landscape for Toronto’s waterfront.

Toronto has an opportunity to reduce water filtration management requirements with the

construction of a vertical farm. A great example of a modern water treatment facility combined

with an urban farm is taking place in Shenzhen, China. The Organica Greenhouse project has

taken a typical water treatment facility and turned it into a beautiful intercity garden (Greywater

Action, 2013). The black water from the town is filtered and utilized for irrigation purposes.

This is an ideal design for an inter-city farming project.

Hauber-Davidson of the Water Conservation Group (2006) from Australia states that

large office buildings can consume between 15,000 and 50,000 litres per year and that close to

75% of this can be reused. According to a study at Stanford University by Leggett and


colleagues (2001), recycling of grey water must still be conducted cautiously to ensure public

health is ultimately protected. The report also suggests that the paybacks of such technologies

are projected to occur by the 20 year mark with a minimal functional lifetime of approximately

15 years. It is also mentioned that service efficiency levels are rapidly depleted during down

times (Leggett, Brown, Stanfield, Brewer, & Holiday, 2001). Alternatively, several schools and

private Ontario-based organizations use Quebec-based Brac Systems which offers water

recycling technologies that calculate their payback by considering projections in both energy and

water consumption. Brac Systems yield a maximum payback by the 7 to 10 year mark (Monster

Commercial, 2013). These limitations and the associated hesitancies of municipal governments

need to be addressed in order to proceed with such proposals.

10.4 Labour Market

The agriculture industry demands a specialized set of skills and knowledge. In the past,

these skills could be acquired through simply working on the family farm. Although this still

may be the case today, expansive advances in technology and business skills have led to post-

secondary education as a valuable asset for agriculture professionals. Universities from Canada

have consequently implemented agricultural components in their program offerings. For

example, there are currently fifty-five domestic master level agricultural associated programs in

Canada (Grad School Finder, 2013) (see Table 2), eight of which are offered within in the

Province of Ontario.

The University of Guelph offers a wide variety of agriculture-based learning programs.

One of Guelph’s undergraduate economics degree programs (i.e., Food, Agriculture and

Resource Economics) gives students the opportunity to study the global economics of agriculture

(University of Guelph, 2013). Their Bachelor of Commerce program (i.e., Food and Agricultural


Business) offers students the necessary training and management skills required to run

commercial agricultural operations (University of Guelph, 2013). In addition to these and other

undergraduate programs opportunities at the University of Guelph, they offer all eight of

Ontario’s master-level degree programs.

In Toronto, Ryerson University has also increased its course offerings related to the

agricultural industry. Ryerson has a dedicated Centre for Studies in Food Security that provides

a higher education for those interested in pursuing a career in urban agriculture (Ryerson

University, 2013). Established in 1994, the focus of the centre is to promote food security,

environmental sustainability and public health through education and cooperation with public

and private organizations at the international level. Moreover, students can earn a certification in

“food security” while completing their degree. Many of the centre’s founding organizers have

contributed to research for the subject topic, namely Dr. Fiona Yeudall and Dr. Joe Nasr (Ryerson

University, 2013).

Two other relevant projects at Ryerson University include the Urban Agriculture Summit

and Carrot City. In 2012, Toronto hosted a four day international event that was sponsored by

Ryerson University that enabled developers, planners, social advocates, educators, homeowners,

growers and other members of the community to meet and discuss the future of agriculture in an

urban setting (Urban Agriculture Summit, 2013). Carrot City is a research initiative created in

2008 by Ryerson University’s Department of Architecture Design. Initially organized as a one-

time symposium, the project has grown to be exhibited all over the world across three different

languages (Ryerson University, 2013). Its purpose is to continually strive towards best practices

in urban agriculture through idea generation and knowledge dispersion to those interested in the

field.


Outside of Ontario, three other schools in Canada have dedicated substantial resources to

the study of agriculture. The University of Saskatchewan offers both undergraduate and graduate

programs in agriculture economics that allows students to specialize in bio-resource policy,

business and economics. They also offer post graduate diplomas in agri-business (University of

Saskatchewan, 2013). In 1940, the University of British Columbia established the Faculty of

Agriculture to provide education and foster research specific to the economic and social issues

related to the agriculture industry (University of British Columbia, 2013). Lastly, Concordia

University’s undergraduate and graduate students collaborated to organize a group called ‘City

Farm School’ (Concordia University, 2013). The City Farm School facilitates knowledge in crop

planning, marketing and medicinal training with a strong focus on sustainable urban farming.

11.0 Legal & Social

Within the scope of sustainable food production lies the decision making of two

important groups: policy makers and stakeholders. In order to achieve an ideal outcome, there

needs to be a balance of powers between these two entities. The following discussion will

outline current land use planning strategies and implications for vertical farming in Toronto.

Additionally, the position of stakeholders will discussed as in pertains to establishing such a

project.

11.1 Land Use Planning

The City of Toronto’s Planning Department is made up of five sections: community

planning; policy & research; urban design; transportation planning; and zoning, bylaw &

environmental planning (City of Toronto, 2013). It is further separated into four districts:

Etobicoke York District, North York District, Scarborough District and Toronto & East York


District. This study will focus on the ‘Toronto & East York District’ due to its inclusion of the

downtown urban core.

A recent research paper from the office of Toronto city councillor Peter Milczyn, suggests

that the city should identify underutilized lots for neighbourhood gateway projects, urban

agriculture and/or energy farms (Faria, 2011). Although urban agriculture is discussed, there is

no mention of vertical farming within the paper. An additional article by Werkele (2002),

although written approximately ten years ago, indicates a level of disappointment for Toronto’s

lagging attitude towards supportive policy and regulation supporting urban agriculture (Werkele,

2002). Although it may be expected that these particular position papers lack an innovative idea

such as vertical farming, it should still be noted how far Toronto is from other major cities such

as Vancouver or Montreal. Furthermore, it is not that City of Toronto policy makers did not have

any such proposals submitted for future land use planning regulations. In fact, in 1999, the

Toronto Food Policy Council submitted a detailed recommendation that aimed to lay the

foundation for carrying the City of Toronto well into the millennium with regard to urban

agricultural planning (Toronto Food Policy Council, 1999). All of which have still failed to be

written into policy and subsequently implemented.

With the density of the downtown core growing, the proposal of vertical farming should

be considered by policy makers working for the City of Toronto. A recent paper prepared by the

Metcalf Foundation (2010) continues this voice of concern regarding the lack of policy support

towards urban agriculture stating that it virtually does not exist. Moreover, to further the

progress of land use regulations, there needs to be further education to improve our collective

understanding of this potential initiative which would presumably mobilize legislative bodies.

This would hopefully lead to greater access to production space for urban growers, creating


physical infrastructure, strengthening supply chains, sharing knowledge and creating new models

of governance to assist with attracting financial investments (Nasr, et al., 2010). The Metcalf

Foundation has also provided an entire growth plan for the Golden Horseshoe Area that proposes

how all respective regions and municipalities should be working together to achieve a unified

goal (Metcalf Foundation, 2010).

The City of Toronto in collaboration with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

established an urban farm at the southeast corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue in the area of

Black Creek Pioneer Village (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 2013). The objectives

of the project are very similar to the ones proposed in this paper regarding a vertical farm in the

downtown core. This urban farm in particular offers youth employment, locally grown produce,

promotion of healthy lifestyles, education, community involvement and tourism. There are also

similar initiatives in neighbouring municipalities, particularly those involved with the Greater

Toronto Area Agriculture Action Committee (GTAAAC). The GTAAAC is a conglomerate

organization consisting of Halton, York, Durham, Toronto, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and

Rural Affairs, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and the private food sector (Greater Toronto

Area Agriculture Action Committee , 2013). Furthermore, the Ontario Government is

contributing its part through the Ministry of Agriculture and Food (OMAFRA) that mandates the

protection of current agricultural land along with future planning for sustainability (Ontario

Ministry of Food and Agriculture, 2013).

Through the evidence discussed here, it appears that the downtown core requires a more

precise plan for vertical farming to be fully realized. As per Lovell (2010), the challenge is to

design multifunctional urban agriculture spaces that meet the needs of its residents while also

protecting the environment. Official plans and zoning bylaws need to be updated to incorporate


the local agriculture industry. This is pivotal for the future generations of an ever growing urban

community. The collaborative efforts of participating parties need to identify themselves and

unify their language so that policy makers will listen. Moreover, the introduction of directly

involving the local community through public meetings, learning seminars and open summits

will enable the growth of this important sustainable growth strategy.

11.2 Stakeholders

The support of stakeholders is important for the establishment of a vertical farm in the

City of Toronto. Although the city may have multiple groups in support of sustainable food-

growth, there is little enthusiasm from the municipality towards having current policies amended

(Toronto Food Policy Council, 2012). This may be the case due to the unpleasing visualisations

and odours that urban farming can bring. Those in support of such initiatives need to speak with

a cohesive voice in order to create change. Recently, in October 2012, a large group of

stakeholders presented an action plan to the city titled the GrowTO Action Plan (Toronto Food

Policy Council, 2012). This plan described the potential framework for urban agriculture to

strive in Toronto. It discusses commercial farming, market gardens, edible landscaping for city

owned land, schools, institutions and private land. Such initiatives are of great importance to

inform and gain the support of the public.

Many of the public’s concerns are also shared by the government and corporate entities.

The most significant is public health. Given the movement towards organic produce, the public

has truly shown resistance towards genetically modified products and the use of chemicals for

improved crop yield. This is especially important with the potential implementation of urban

farming. This non-traditional form of growing produce will require modern technological

methods which will likely raise public concern. Although pesticides can be necessary to ensure


sufficient crop yield, growers must understand effects of overuse as related to air and water

pollution (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013). Further consideration and

research regarding the resources mentioned in this paper (i.e., wind energy, solar energy and

water management) is required to fully understand the health implications associated each

technology. For example, minimal research exists regarding the health effects of utilizing human

waste for the purposes of fertilization (Koc, MacRae, Mougeot, & Welsh, 1999).

The Urban Agriculture Summit hosted by Toronto in 2012 created the opportunity for

international stakeholders to meet and discuss the relevant issues. Ordinary citizens in Toronto

had a first-hand glimpse through media coverage for the potential of growing produce within the

city. The summit was largely the collaborative efforts of Ryerson University and the Metcalf

Foundation. Speakers presented current projects such as the Toronto Urban Farm and the

Everdale Organic Farm, both located just outside downtown Toronto. There was also discussion

of the devastating need for help in cities such as Detroit, where scarcity is rampant due to

minimal produce supply (Concordia University, 2012).

In addition to public learning events, mass media promotion can be of tremendous aid.

One well-known environmentalist, David Suzuki, is a very large supporter of such initiatives. In

a recent television episode of “The Nature of Things”, David Suzuki explored the Lufa Farms

project in Montreal (City Farmer, 2012). Lufa Farms is a private organization whose vision is to

cover many of the rooftops in downtown Montreal with urban farms (Lufa Farms, 2013). Lufa’s

approach to operating rooftop greenhouses begins with a seeding process which then progresses

to plant growth in coordinated sub climate areas within the facility. Suzuki also toured the

Community Gardens of Detroit and Inner City Farms of Vancouver (Canadian Broadcasting

Council, 2012). To augment the dissemination of knowledge, David Suzuki added Sarah Elton’s


book ‘Locavore’ to his foundations book club (David Suzuki Foundation, 2013). Locavore

discusses the passion of individuals striving to consume locally grown produce.

In order for municipalities to adopt urban agriculture into official plans, they need the

direction and support of government at both the provincial and federal level. A recent proposal

paper written by a collaboration of non-governmental organizations called the Lifestyles Project

Society, discusses multiple case studies from across Canada (Lifecycles Project Society, 2013).

The paper identifies the successes and failures of current projects in Canada, from the required

support networks, distribution channels, education to health objectives (Lifecycles Project

Society, 2013). Initiatives such as these should be considered the building blocks for top down

support from upper levels of government. It is not an issue as to whether the federal government

mandates a collective legislative proposal but more so the recognition of urban agriculture as the

next logical step towards sustainability. In order to move forward with urban agriculture,

education and training need to increase as per the GrowTO paper (2012). Moreover, value needs

to be promoted and policies need to be written. An example of provincial support is documented

in a British Columbia’s Real Estate Foundation – Urban Farming Guidebook: Planning for the

Business of Growing Food in BC’s Towns and Cities (Real Estate Foundation of British

Columbia, 2013). This guidebook provides municipal governments insights into setting up

supportive policy for urban farming.

12.0 Market Research

The practicability of a proposed vertical farm needs to be evaluated with a discussion of

location and product demand. The proximity to populated areas is key for the funcationality of

the vertical farm. The demand for urban agricultural products must be realistic and attainable to


justify a project at this time. The following will outline three possible vertical farm locations for

the city of Toronto and discuss the demand for its produce.

12.1 Real Estate Perspective

The commercial real estate market in Toronto has become a sought after location for

international business (Dmitrieva, 2013). Toronto is home to some of the world’s most

expensive real estate prices (TD Economics, 2012). Moreover, the City is also attracting an

extensive number of immigrants, leading to expansive growth in population and property

demand (Moloney, 2013). A large amount of the City’s population is housed in downtown

condominium dwellings. These fore mentioned factors previously cited drive the demand for

organic produce and locally grown foods. With the City’s and surrounding regional population

expected to rise to nearly 9 million by 2036 (Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2012), Toronto is an

optimal location for a vertical farm. For the purpose of this study, we will examine three areas in

Toronto that may be suitable sites for the development of a vertical farm. This was determined

through the evaluation of proposed locations for the City of Toronto (see Appendix 1). They are

the Don Lands, the Financial District and Liberty Village.

The Don Lands are comprised of 125 hectares in the city’s downtown southern east side

(see Figure 13) (Waterfront Toronto, 2013). This area has been and continues to undergo an

evaluation by the city to revitalized water front that will feature innovative building with mixed

use communities. This could be an optimal location to implement the city’s first vertical farm.

This location will experience noteworthy redevelopment as Toronto prepares to host the Pan Am

Games in 2015. Fortunately, there still remains a substantial portion of available raw land that

could be utilized for the purpose of a vertical farm. Although the location may not be currently

ideal to operate a retail market, it will definitely become a part of the city’s future residential


growth plans. This parcel of land is also host to a natural river system, ideal for irrigation and

drainage. The excellent supply routes for the Don Lands include the Don Valley Parkway

highway, Gardiner Expressway and Lakeshore municipal roads. Given that this land has faced

controversy in the past with regards to its environmental cleanliness, a vertical farm would be a

welcome choice to contribute to its revitalization. This project could potentially assist with

building stakeholder support and hence, further develop other vertical farming opportunities.

Moreover, the raw parcel could obtain its own zoning by-laws that would encourage the building

of a vertical farm.

The Financial District in the City of Toronto roughly encompasses the area between

Queen Street to the north, Front Street to the south, Yonge Street to the east and University

Avenue to West (see Figure 14) (City of Toronto, 2011). This area is host to Canada’s major

financial, legal and corporate headquarters. Additionally, it has some of the tallest buildings in

the city’s landscape. The area is connected through the world’s largest underground walkway,

which combines over 28kms of pathway (City of Toronto, 2013). This financial district in

Toronto is considered the twelfth most influential financial centre of the world by the Global

Financial Centre Index (City of Toronto, 2013). The increased disposable income of such

individuals creates a perfect opportunity for a vertical farm’s market to prosper. Of the two

business models proposed, a commercial farm and allotment farm, the financial district may be a

more ideal location for the latter. To this end, individuals would have access to their personal

farms which they could tend during lunch or after work. They then transport the food home to

their families. The cost of land in the financial district would be more costly and the amount of

potential space is limited relative to the other two areas being discussed. Alternatively, a retail


grocery store within the area may be a more suitable alternative for distribution where profit

margins could be lucrative.

Liberty Village is home to a large portion of Toronto’s most recent downtown condo

boom. This unique district is also a known for its modern urban infrastructure and a high tech

boutique industry. The area is roughly bound by King Street to the north, the Gardiner

Expressway to the south, Dufferin Street to the west and east to Strachan Avenue (see Figure 15)

(City of Toronto, 2013). With the downtown core mostly built out, outward development has

naturally progressed to areas like Liberty Village. Exhibition Place is also home to the city’s first

wind turbine, a common destination for Liberty Village residents. Expansion of wind technology

in this location could potentially assist the start-up of a vertical farm along with solar technology

where suitable. The area residents are largely young urbanites believed to be more concerned

about environmental issues and progressive activities within their local community (Liberty

Village Toronto, 2013). The availability of produce from a local vertical farm would be

appealing to this community. Consequently, Liberty Village may serve as the home of

downtown Toronto’s first vertical farm.

12.2 Product Demand

The demand for urban agriculture is only continuing to grow with the rapid expansion of

urbanization worldwide. By 2020, developing countries in the regions of Africa, Asia and Latin

America will host 75% of their respective populations in an urban setting (Resource Centres on

Urban Agriculture & Food Security, 2012). The geographic sprawl of cities is eliminating

farmland that is within local proximity of the consumer. The world’s cities are going to have

difficulty sustaining viable food and nutrition options for their people. Unless the consumer base


is able and willing to spend more on produce due to transportation costs, the only other

opportunity currently available is to bring the produce production back to the city.

The ability to offer sustainable food security to a region or city’s population is a strong

driver of demand for urban agriculture. Urban agriculture is not just about offering commercial

forms of production, it is about changing the way people think about how produce is grown and

distributed as per GrowTO (2012). The traditional thought of growing vegetables in fields

outside the city and transported by truck, train or boat to feed urban residents needs to be revised.

Urbanites need to embrace the idea of the development of private urban-commercial farms, city

owned farms, community gardens, school gardens and personal gardens.

A recent organic food conference hosted at the University of Toronto in February 2013

demonstrated the growing demand of organically grown produce. This is the sixth year in a row

that the Canadian Organic Growers – Toronto Chapter (COG) has organized such an event

(Canadian Organic Growers, 2013). The conference attracted a large number of participants who

attended to seek knowledge about sustainable food systems that enhance the well-being of the

public and health of the environment. Similar events have been occurring in other locations in

Ontario such as Guelph Organic Conference & Expo which just hosted its 32nd

annual event in

January of this year (Guelph Organic Conference, 2013). A recent article remarked that organic

food sales were up nearly 20% per year since the turn of the millennium with projections for the

trend to continue well into the future (Canadian Broadcasting Council, 2009). This is largely

demonstrated by the expansion of local municipal farmer’s markets across the country. The

growth of organic food demand has clearly been demonstrated in Ontario. Accordingly, it is

vitally important to ensure that organic produce is grown and offered to consumers as a proposed

vertical farm.


The detrimental effect of growing produce on rural land has also contributed to the

growing demand for alternate produce growth. With the pressure of growing cities and their

respective populations, land is being over cultivated to the point that soil erosion is becoming a

major problem which is decreasing the land’s productivity and ability to continually grow

produce (Metcalf Foundation, 2010). This problem will only lead to further depletion of

available arable land.

The total effects of urban agriculture are still to be determined through the evaluation of

future projects and their outcome, both negative and positive. It should be noted, however, that

in addition to the possible decrease in costs and more readily available produce, municipalities

can also gain from the creation of employment opportunities and less pollution. This added

benefit would help to alleviate the burden of poverty in city centres and potentially increase the

integration of cultures (Resource Centres on Urban Agriculture & Food Security, 2012). Local

universities stand to benefit from increased international exposure and higher learning

opportunities in this new field. Major metropolitan areas are always looking for ways to

integrate green space into their city planning. The implementation of a responsible and

economically productive venture such as vertical farming would support this goal. A

comprehensive urban agricultural initiative may lead to increased tourism for the City of

Toronto.

13.0 Financial Study

Funding for such projects needs to be sufficiently allocated or earmarked in advance.

The business community will become involved if the perceived risk can be lowered and

reasonable returns can be projected. Governments should demonstrate commitment through

offering grants and tax incentives (Toronto Food Policy Council, 2012). This would further


contribute to promotion by encouraging competition and crowd sourcing. Options include

coordinating local funding conferences and fundraisers informing interested groups of this

modern sustainable approach. The following is a discussion of possible sources of capital for

vertical farming along with a qualitative cost-benefit analysis.

13.1 Financial Accommodation

There are multiple ways to raise capital for what is now known as ‘green funding’. The

first two that will be discussed are offered through two large Canadian financial institutions,

namely, Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) and Toronto Dominion Bank (TD). RBC Blue Water is a

funding project aimed to help provide communal access to fresh clean drinking water. They

recognize how dramatic increases in the world’s population have negatively impacted on the

availability of safe water. Although a vertical farm may not directly provide clean drinking

water, the storm water contributions are in-line with Blue Water’s mission. RBC Blue Water is

seeking to fund projects that improve the control and management of storm water along with

raising awareness to create more efficient uses of water (Royal Bank of Canada, 2013). Finally,

it should be noted that Blue Water offers grants that amount to nearly $100,000 within their

leadership program.

TD Friends of the Environment Foundation is a similar funding project but with a wider

array of project investments. These projects range from community gardens, tree planting,

habitat restoration, wildlife protection, energy conservation and environmental education and

research funding (TD Financial Group, 2013). The supported projects are more limited in

eligibility as organizations must be registered charities, education institutions, municipalities and

aboriginal groups. A vertical farming project could only have access to these funds if they

worked in collaboration with one of these groups which is not a significant barrier. Relative to


Blue Water, however, TD’s grants are less lucrative as they amount to an average of $2,500 per

annum.

There are further funding possibilities from local, provincial and federal governments.

One of the major funding resources is from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM).

The Canadian government endowed $550 million to the FCM for the purpose of creating the

Green Municipal Fund (GMF) (Federation of Canadian Municipalities, 2013). Farm Credit

Canada (FCC), a Crown Corporation, primarily a funding resource for rural farms could also

serve as a potential source of funding. The FCC has provided nearly $100 million in venture

capital to attract private investors to collaboratively assist with further financing opportunities

(Farm Credit Canada, 2013). The federal government has also set up additional funding

resources through the Province of Ontario that pertain to the great lakes, eco-sustainability,

climate change and schools to name a few (Environment Canada, 2013). Lastly, the City of

Toronto created the Live Green Toronto Community Investment Program (CIP) to assist local

neighbourhoods and organizations with projects that support the reduction of greenhouse gases

and air quality improvement (City of Toronto, 2013). In collaboration with the Toronto and

Region Conversation Authority, the CIP would be a suitable fund particularly because it serves to

improve public relations (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 2013).

Private companies have only recently started developing urban agricultural businesses as

profit centres. Businesses are looking to partner with other forward thinking organizations

throughout Canada and internationally. One particular company is Lufa Farms, which was

mentioned earlier in this paper. Lufa Farms, a Montreal based firm will work with likeminded

organizations to help them achieve funding to develop urban farms (Lufa Farms, 2013). An

American example is Bright Farms from New York City that has been involved in urban farming


since 2006. The company has developed distribution networks between grocers throughout

North America with a steady flow of continual and incoming investors (Bright Farms, 2013).

Additional funding sources for Ontario based, urban agriculture businesses can be found on the

Toronto Live Green website including the Metcalf Foundation, Home Depot Canada Foundation,

Ontario Trillium Foundation and The Weston Family Parks Challenge, amongst others (Live

Green Toronto, 2013).

There are significant opportunitie to work with planning firms and educational

institutions. For example, the Knafo Klimor Architects helped design the Agro-Housing facility

in Wuhan, China (Knafo Klimor Architects, 2013). This organization worked with the

municipality at a reduced cost in order to complete the project. Ryerson University’s Carrot City

is a non-profit research initiative established by the Architecture Department. Carrot City has

long been involved with public and private organizations interested in agricultural sustainability

(Ryerson University, 2013). One organization of particular local importance is the Toronto based

‘Green Roofs for Healthy Cities’. Green Roofs is non-for-profit industry association dedicated

to promote the urban farming industry. Many of their members are lawyers, architects, planners

and developers who are stepping forward to see such projects come to fruition (Green Roofs,

2013).

13.2 Cost-Benefit Analysis

A financial feasibility study of a vertical farm is outside the scope of this paper. The

purpose of this cost-benefit analysis is to provide a qualitative point of view. The demand for

locally grown produce only continues to grow. That is largely due to the benefits which urban

agriculture offers (see Appendix 2). As per GrowTO (2012), urban agriculture offers unique

economic opportunities for the surrounding neighbourhoods, including employment growth,


community enrichment and cost reductions for organically grown produce. Moreover, it creates

a balanced community with green growth, education and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle

with increased consumption of fruits and vegetables. In addition to nutrition benefits, the

allotment garden model would encourage the physical activity of community participants.

The environmental benefits of vertical farming include a reduction in air pollution

through carbon dioxide elimination. The water recycling opportunities for grey and brown water

will lead to cleaner waterways for swimming, storm water management and water treatment

efficiencies. The most important benefit would be that of food security and the nurturing of local

bio-diversity (Urban Farmer, 2013). This creates a self-sustainable environment for which the

municipality and its people take pride in enhancing and maintaining.

Along with the benefits, there also remains some hesitation from individuals embracing

the practice of urban agriculture. There are arguments of theft and violence due to the open

concept required for some portions of vertical farming. There still remains little infrastructure

with regards to composting at a retail level. In addition, natural aquifers could disappear with the

creation of an urban farm especially if water management is not properly coordinated (Metcalf

Foundation, 2010). Further, health concerns remain important with the use of fertilizers and

pesticides which are almost unavoidable if sufficient crop yield is to be met.

The monetary costs also remain a major detriment to moving forward. A University of

Waterloo master’s student in architecture proposed that a large vertical farm in the City of

Toronto could incur initial building costs in excess of a billion dollars (Metzger, 2013).

Significant investment is essential at the outset including infrastructure demands such as concrete

requirements. One of the major drawbacks of trying to retrofit rooftops as urban farms is the

cost of installing weight baring components. Alternatively, real estate developers could be


mandated to include areas of urban farming into their planning, however, these costs would

presumably be largely offloaded to the consumer.

The growth of urban populations all over the globe will undoubtedly lead to the need for

more locally grown food. The support for such initiatives is becoming more common among

public stakeholders and legislative bodies. The pivotal lack of endorsement remains with the

business community. In the eyes of private enterprise, the profitability of such a proposal is still

unknown. The fact is that the financial feasibility of a vertical farm needs to be evaluated and

presented to businesses. Moreover, the additional benefits of philanthropy and goodwill need to

be promoted to encourage businesses to support such costly initiatives.

14.0 Conclusion

There is significant opportunity for current and future generations to harness sustainable

urban farming projects to assist with the growth of produce. This is particularly true in wealthy

urban areas of the world where most produce is consumed. The greatest challenge to date is

combining the necessary resources in an optimal way to sustain profitability. At least that is the

perspective of the business world. Perhaps the governments of the major urbanized nations need

to recognize that the benefits of vertical farming may only be realized with their support. For

example, if the founding government of Canada elected not to pursue the enormous cost of

building the railway, the confederation of our great nation may not have occurred. Moreover, the

business perspective of feasibility needs to transform from narrow minded profitability to the

creation of something more powerful, a legacy for future generations.

14.1 Research Questions

As noted at the outset of this paper, four initial questions were to be addressed:


i) What role does technology serve towards the implementation and maintenance of

a vertical farming project?

The two models for vertical farming proposed in this paper were commercial growing for

mass sales and an allotment farm for personal gardens. Both could demand the same scales of

technology depending on consumer demand. An ideal vertical farm would include all of the

resources presented in this paper. Wind turbines and solar panels to reduce energy requirements

and waste water recycling to reduce water consumption. Both wind turbines and solar panels are

relatively straightforward by way of acquiring the technology and installation. Water recycling

requires a lot more infrastructure to achieve adequate integration. In order to utilize grey and

brown municipal water, there is a need to establish the proper infrastructure to tap into the city’s

existing storm water runoff. Additionally, a union of sewage and water treatment facilities would

be necessary to harvest brown water for fertilization. At the very least, the waste created by

employees or customers of a vertical farm could be utilized. In summary, technological

advancements in sustainable energy are continually changing the way buildings are constructed.

With a vertical farm, technologically advanced and innovative components will be a key

requirement to building and supporting the daily operations for this form of urban agriculture.

ii) Does the City of Toronto possess the general skills, education and training

required for an urban agriculture project?

The geographic proximity of City of Toronto to one of the most renowned agricultural

universities in the world, Guelph University gives the city a great advantage towards the

development of such a project. Encouraging the growth of undergraduate and master level

programs across the country, specifically in the Toronto area will give rise to the demand of this

forward thinking industry. Moreover, collaboration between Ryerson University and the


University of Toronto would provide a vertical farming project ample opportunity to conduct

primary research. Both schools have already set up specialized post graduate certifications,

extracurricular activities and hosted international events with the collective aim to address urban

malnutrition.

Toronto is one of the largest populated municipalities in the world and the largest in

Canada. This would suggest that there is enormous opportunity to access low, mid and high

skilled labourers. Moreover, the growth of downtown Toronto in the form of high rise

commercial and residential towers would suggest that the city also has copious amounts of a

labour force in the construction industry which would be required for this project. The

dedication of well renowned professors and seasoned professionals through their active roles

with private organizations such as the Metcalf Foundation or municipal initiatives such as the

Toronto Food Policy Council would also suggest that the city has the necessary resources to plan

and facilitate such an operation.

iii) What precautions need to be taken to preserve the public health and nutritious

value of the produce?

The rationale behind urban agriculture is to have it occur directly within major city

centres. For the purpose of this paper, the areas of the Toronto Don Lands, Financial District and

Liberty Village were evaluated. For these proposed locations or any other for that matter, the

same precautions would need to be taken to ensure the public’s health is not placed at undue risk.

This would include the reduction, if not elimination, of pesticide and fertilizer use. Both could

be detrimental to the health and lifestyles of the city’s residents. Toxins could be dispersed

through by-products of the vertical farm’s emissions and water. Moreover, the detrimental


effects of wind turbines should also be studied further to ensure that the noise pollution created

would not harm residents’ wellbeing.

As discussed throughout this paper, the demand for organically grown food is continually

rising. This trend will likely not reverse in the future. It is thus vitally important for the vertical

farm to offer such organic products. Further, one potential issue that will need to be addressed in

advance is the concern for safety from theft and violence. Due to the exposed nature of vertical

farming, there may be opportunity for crime to occur. A further study into this topic is needed to

understand the security required for such a facility.

iv) What are the possible funding avenues for a vertical farming project?

The financial requirements for a vertical farm could be prohibitive in certain scenarios.

One study discussed in this paper suggested a price tag over one billion dollars (Metzger, 2013).

That being said, all possible venues for financing, from the financial institutions to local and

federal governmental programs should be approached for funding. Additionally, there are private

companies looking for partnerships and universities looking to expand research capabilities. It

appears that the answer will not lie with just one or two financing solutions. It will take a large

collaborative financial effort in order to successfully implement a vertical farm. Once again, it

cannot be stressed enough that financially sustainability may be too short sighted for a proposal

such as this. This project is going to require a long term commitment from all investors as the

importance of establishing an inaugural farm in the City of Toronto is crucial to the development

of sustainable urban agriculture and serve as model for other suitable locations around the world.

14.2 Methodology

In order to facilitate a large vertical farming project for the City of Toronto, stakeholder

groups need to organize and speak with a unified voice. Local, provincial and federal


governments need to work together to establish the proper guidelines and planning policies.

Developers and construction firms need to work closely with the city to discover the most

economical approach to integrating wind power, solar energy and water recycling for use with

vertical farms. Both private and public organizations need to travel the globe to understand

projects currently underway or completed and understand how to translate this knowledge into

an optimal approach for the City of Toronto. Financing needs to be socially unified and provided

as a long term commitment to demonstrate that such a project is for the betterment of the people

and not for access to profits. Universities should continue to develop agricultural based

programs to ensure sufficient labour force is available for this expanding industry. Proposed

locations should be studied further to identify an optimal site. Lastly, distribution networks need

to be evaluated to determine the best business model for the vertical farm.

At this time, the City of Toronto does not have the same issues as other cities in smaller

more densely populated areas such as Southeast Asia. Toronto is ideally located near plenty of

natural resources to meet infrastructure demands. Additionally, Ontario is host to some of the

world’s most nutrient based soil and unused lands that make it seem illogical to build a vertical

farm at this point in time. A vertical farming project in the City of Toronto would be more of a

symbol as to where the world’s urban centres need to advance in order to build the infrastructure

required for the ever growing global population.

15.0 Reflection

By completing this research paper, I have developed tremendous respect for those who

engage in scholarly research. I believe that I have developed a level of patience in trying to

understand published research. That is, you may not be able to find exactly what you are looking

for with your individual sources, but this forces you to see how all of this information can be


synthesized into a unique position that one hopes will be informative to the intended audience.

While the internet has made it possible for one to conduct an entire research project without

leaving their personal computer, there is, however, great benefit to speaking and meeting with

those who are directly involved with the research topic. For the present paper, I made an effort

to communicate directly with professors, relevant professionals and other students. I have found

that a brief but meaningful conversation with an individual provides the opportunity to

appreciate other points of view that guided the development of this work.

This is the first time that I have written a paper of such length. I would never have

imagined that I would be writing a paper upwards of fifty pages while completing a business

degree. As far as I know, this is the only MBA program in the country that demands such a

project of its graduating students. I believe that writing this paper gives me more confidence in

terms of conducting comprehensive research in the future whether it be for academic or

professional purposes. I also believe, through the feedback of my mentors, that my writing skills

have notably improved since entering the MBA program and for that I am grateful.

In terms of recommendations for the MRP, I believe it would be beneficial to provide

early orientation at the onset of the program so that students can start to consider topics which

they may be interested in researching for the purpose of this paper. Additionally, sample papers

provided to all students early on in the program would also be very helpful with communicating

the expectations for the MRP during their last term.

The idea of conducting research for vertical farming first entered my mind while I was in

Chicago during the summer of 2012. The Museum of Science and Industry had an exhibit on

display illustrating the vertical farm proposal of Dickson Despommier. The image of a vertical

farm with multiple forms of reusable energy really intrigued me. If we as a people have learned


how to populate cities by locating them in the air through condo buildings and commercial

towers, why not incorporate the same train of thought into how we conduct farming. I

understand that there could be a lot of controversy with such a project including sights and

smells. Moreover, large monetary costs would be incurred and planning policies would need to

change, but it may be worth it. As previously mentioned in this paper, Toronto may not be in a

current position required to build such a facility due to its geographic location and the resources

Canada has to offer. There are however countries and cities around the world where produce is

only available by shipments from foreign countries. Sooner or later, these foreign countries may

only be able to provide food for their own people, which is detrimental to other consumer

nations. I believe it is very important for nations to provide food security for its people. This

leads me back to one of the main points of my paper. Even though a project such as this may not

be profitable today, it could be the only answer to solving global food issues for the future.

As for my future, I would love to consider moving forward with a project such as this.

My current employment as a Real Estate Broker has given me a true inside view of how real

estate values are determined along with how development and construction occurs. I have also

acquired a network of individuals within the field of urban agriculture that express the same

passion that I have for the subject. Once my MBA is completed, I intend to contact many of the

individuals referenced and discussed in this paper to discover whether this career path is

possible. On a smaller scale, I intend to plant an entire vegetable garden in my back yard this

spring.

To conclude, I am extremely proud that I completed my MBA degree at Ryerson

University’s Ted Rogers School of Management (TRSM). Their location and ingrained culture

within the City of Toronto is admirable. The ability to take specialized courses in a particular


field of one’s interest is the major reason why I considered TRSM in the first place. Every one

of my instructors had real life experience which was a benefit to my learning experience. I also

felt that all of my professors took great pride in teaching the MBA students. They have all

become friends of mine whom I know I can contact in the future for anything. Ryerson, I

commend you for implementing the MBA program. I only wish the program will continue to

build in terms of size and notoriety. I for one will always encourage students to consider TRSM

and proudly state that I am a graduate of the program.


References

Adler, M. D. (2006). New Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Agrawal, M., Singh, B., Rajput, M., Marshall, F., & Bell, J. (2003). Effect of Air Pollution on

Peri-Urban Agriculture: A Case Study. Environmental Pollution, 126(3), 323-329.

Agri Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore. (2012, November 22). Statistics. Retrieved from

Agri Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore:

http://www.ava.gov.sg/Publications/Statistics/

Anthientis, A., & Robertson, K. (1997). Solar Energy for Buildings. CMHC.

Bell, J., Power, S., Jarraud, N., Agrawal, M., & Davies, C. (2011). The Effects of Air Pollution

on Urban Ecosystems and Agriculture. International Journal of Sustainable Development

& World Ecology, 18(3), 226-235.

Boardman, A. E. (2006). Cost Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice. Upper Saddle River,

N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Brent, R. J. (1996). Applied Cost-Benefit Analysis. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar Publishing.

Bright Farms. (2013, March 13). About Us. Retrieved from Bright Farms:

http://brightfarms.com/s/#!/our_story

Brown, K. H., & Jameton, A. L. (2010). Public Health Implications of Urban Agriculture.

Journal of Public Health Policy, 21(1), 20-39.

Canadian Broadcasting Council. (2009, July 29). Going Organic: Growing Demand, Tougher

Regulations. Retrieved from CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2008/05/07/f-food-

organic.html

Canadian Broadcasting Council. (2012, September 6). Suzuki Diaries: Future City. Retrieved


from Canadian Broadcasting Council: http://www.cbc.ca/natureofthings/episode/suzuki-

diaries-future-city.html

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2002). Report on Rainwater Harvesting and

Grey Water Reuse for Potable and Non-Potable Uses, 2002. Retrieved from CMHC:

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publications/en/rh-pr/tech/03-100-e.htm

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (2013, March 1). Water Conservation Case

Studies: Quayside Village. Retrieved from CMHC: http://www.cmhc-

schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/su/waho/waho_007.cfm

Canadian Organic Growers. (2013, March 14). 2013 Organic Consumer Conference. Retrieved

from Canadian Organic Growers:

http://www.cogtoronto.org/COG_Toronto/About_Us.html

CanMetEnergy. (2013, Februar 28). CanMetEnergy. Retrieved from Natrual Resources Canada:

http://canmetenergy.nrcan.gc.ca/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013, March 9). Land Use Planning and

Urban/Peri-Urban Agriculture. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/healthtopics/healthyfood/landuse.htm

Central Intelligence Agency. (2012). The World Factbook. Retrieved from CIA:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

City Farmer. (2012, February 16). A Look at Urban Agriculture in Montreal. Retrieved from City

Farmer: http://www.cityfarmer.info/2012/02/22/a-look-at-urban-agriculture-in-montreal-

on-cbcs-the-nature-of-things-with-david-and-sarika-suzuki/

City of Kamloops. (2007). Best Practices in Urban Agriculture. Kamloops, British Columbia,

Canada: City of Kamloops.


City of Toronto. (2011). City of Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles. Retrieved from City of

Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/cns_profiles/2011/pdf1/alltoronto.pdf

City of Toronto. (2013, March 11). Bloor-Yorkville BIA. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/toronto/content?vgnextoid=e9f71c8ab77da310VgnVC

M10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=10eb7f43c001b310VgnVCM10000071d60f8

9RCRD&vgnextfmt=default

City of Toronto. (2013, March 11). Financial District BIA. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/toronto/content?vgnextoid=2d52ad51a40ea310VgnV

CM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=10eb7f43c001b310VgnVCM10000071d60f


City of Toronto. (2013, March 11). Liberty Village BIA. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/toronto/content?vgnextoid=6ad746aa794fa310VgnVC

M10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=10eb7f43c001b310VgnVCM10000071d60f8


City of Toronto. (2013, March 13). Live Green Community Investment Program. Retrieved from

City of Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/livegreen/greenneighbourhood_rebates_cip.htm

City of Toronto. (2013, March 11). PATH Facts. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www.toronto.ca/path/

City of Toronto. (2013, March 7). Planning Department. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/

City of Toronto. (2013, March 1). Renewable Energy. Retrieved from City of Toronto:

http://www.toronto.ca/environment/energy.htm#wind_ex

Cochran, B., & Damiani, R. (2008). Integrating Wind Energy into the Design of Tall Buildings -


A Case Study of the Houston Discovery Tower. Fort Collins, CO: Wind Power.

Concordia University. (2012, August 29). City Farm School presents at Toronto Urban

Agriculture Summit. Retrieved from Concordia University:

http://www.concordia.ca/now/campus-beat/blogs/20120829/city-farm-school-presents-at-

toronto-urban-agriculture-summit-1.php

Concordia University. (2013, March 7). City Farm School. Retrieved from Concordia University:

http://concordialoyolacityfarm.wordpress.com/

Conserval. (2013, February 28). SolarWall Products. Retrieved from SolarWall:

http://solarwall.com/en/products.php

David Suzuki Foundation. (2013, March 9). Reading Guide. Retrieved from David Suzuki

Foundation: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/downloads/Reading_Guide-

Locavore.pdf

Deelstra, T., & Girardet, H. (2000). Urban Agriculture and Sustinable Cities. Thematic Paper.

Resource Center on Urban Agriculture. Leusden.

Despommier, D. (2009). The Rise of Vertical Farms. Scientific American, 301(5), 80-87.

Dmitrieva, K. (2013, February 1). Toronto to Pass New York in Commercial Property Boom.

Retrieved from Financial Post: http://business.financialpost.com/2013/02/01/toronto-to-

pass-new-york-in-commercial-property-boom/?__lsa=ed50-35e6

Dubuis, E. (2011, October 27). Le Temps. Retrieved from Le Temps:

http://www.worldcrunch.com/twenty-first-century-land-grab-rich-buy-farm-land-

developing-world/world-affairs/twenty-first-century-land-grab-as-rich-buy-farm-land-in-

developing-world-/c1s3971/

Dvorsky, G. (2012, October 25). i09. Retrieved from World's First Commercial Vertical Farm


Opens in Singapore: http://io9.com/5954847/worlds-first-commercial-vertical-farm-

opens-in-singapore

Dwell. (2013, March 1). All Aboard. Retrieved from Dwell: http://www.dwell.com/house-

tours/article/all-aboard

Ehrenberg, R. (2008). Let's Get Vertical. Science News, 174(8), 16-20.

Environment Canada. (2013, March 13). Funding Programs. Retrieved from Environment

Canada: http://www.on.ec.gc.ca/funding_e.html

Environment Canada. (2013, April 9). Water Publications. Retrieved from Environment Canada:

http://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=51E3DE0C-1

Faria, K. (2011). Balanced and Bolder: Recommendations for Strengthening Toronto's Official

Plan. Toronto: Office of Councillor Peter Milczyn.

Farm Credit Canada. (2013, March 15). FCC Ventures. Retrieved from Farm Credit Canada:

http://www.fccfinancing.ca/en/VentureCapital/index.asp

Federation of Canadian Municipalities. (2013, March 13). Green Municipal Fund. Retrieved

from Federation of Canadian Municipalities: http://www.fcm.ca/home/programs/green-

municipal-fund.htm

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2007, March 27). FAO Urges Action

to Cope with Increasing Water Scarcity. Retrieved from Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations:

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2007/1000520/

Fosdick, J. (2012, August 24). Passive Solar Heating. Retrieved from Whole Building Design

Guide: http://www.wbdg.org/resources/psheating.php

Francis, C. A., Hansen, T. E., Fox, A. A., Hesje, P. J., Nelson, H. E., Lawseth, A. E., & English,


A. (2012). Farmland Conversion to Non-Agricultural Uses in the US and Canada:

Current Impacts and Concerns for the Future. International Journal of Agricultural

Sustainability, 10(1), 8-24.

Goss, L. (2010, December 5). Eco-Friendly Alternatives for Feeding 9 Billion People. St. Louis:

Washington University. Retrieved from

http://ucollege.wustl.edu/files/ucollege/iap_goss.pdf

Goulding, K., & Whitmore, A. (2012). Commentary: Developing Sustainable Farming Systems

By Valuing Ecosystem Services. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability,

10(1), 5-7.

Grad School Finder. (2013, March 7). Master Level Agriculture Programs. Retrieved from Grad

School Finder:

http://www.gradschoolfinder.com/schools/result.asp?FOSKeywords=&SearchType=&CI

PFamilyCode=01&degreetype=Master

Greater Toronto Area Agriculture Action Committee . (2013, March 9). About Us. Retrieved

from GTAAAC: http://www.gtaaac.ca/about/

Green Roofs. (2013, March 13). About Us. Retrieved from Green Roofs:

http://www.greenroofs.org/index.php/about

Greywater Action. (2013, March 1). Commercial Scale Greywater Applications. Retrieved from

Greywater Action: http://greywateraction.org/content/commercial-scale-greywater-

applications

Guelph Organic Conference. (2013, March 14). 32nd Annual Guelph Organic Conference &

Expo. Retrieved from Guelph Organic Conference:

http://www.guelphorganicconf.ca/tag/toronto/


Haglund, B., & Rathmann, K. (1996). Thermal Mass in Passive Solar and Energy-Conserving

Buildings. Vital Signs, 1-71.

Haider, D., Helbling, E., Williamson, C., & Worrest, R. (2011). Effects of UV Radiation on

Aquatic Ecosystems and Interactions with Climate Change. Official Journal of European

Photochemistry, 10(2), 242-260.

Hantz Farms Group. (2012, November 21). Hantz Farms Group. Retrieved from Hantz Farms

Group: http://www.hantzfarmsdetroit.com/

Hauber-Davidson, G. (2006). Towards a Greater Sustainable Water Supply for our Office

Buildings through Grey Water Recycling. Retrieved from Water Group:

http://www.watergroup.com.au/download/P_GreyWatrOficBldgGHD07.pdf

Heerkens, G. R. (2012). The Social Cost-Benefit Analysis. PM Network, 26(4). 24-25.

Industry Canada. (2012, September 12). Industry Canada. Retrieved from Canadian Industry

Statistics: http://www.ic.gc.ca/cis-sic/cis-sic.nsf/IDE/cis-sic11vlae.html

Inhabitat. (2007, March 28). Inhabitat. Retrieved from Architecure: http://inhabitat.com/bahrain-

world-trade-center-has-wind-turbines/

Integration of Renewable Energy on Farms . (2013, February 27). IREF. Retrieved from

Integration of Renewable Energy on Farms: http://www.farm-energy.ca/IReF/

Knafo Klimor Architects. (2013, March 13). Projects. Retrieved from Knafo Klimor Architects:

http://www.kkarc.com/projects.aspx

Koc, M., MacRae, R., Mougeot, L. J., & Welsh, J. (1999). For Hunger Proof Cities - Sustainable

Urban Food Systems. Toronto: IDRC.

LaCroix, C. J. (2010). Urban Agriculture and Other Green Uses: The Shrinkin City. The Urban

Lawyer, 42(2), 225.


Leggett, D., Brown, R., Stanfield, G., Brewer, D., & Holiday, E. (2001). Rainwater and

Greywater Use in Buildings: Decision Making for Water Conservation. Ciria, 1-13.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues, 34-46.

Liberty Village Toronto. (2013, March 11). Residents of Liberty Village. Retrieved from Liberty

Villlage Toronto: http://www.libertyvillagetoronto.com/category/residents/

Lifecycles Project Society. (2013, March 10). Urban Agriculture and Food Security Initiatives in

Canada: A Survey of Canadian Non-Governmental Organizations. Retrieved from

Lifecycles Project Soceity:

http://lifecyclesproject.ca/resources/downloads/food_security_survey.pdf

Live Green Toronto. (2013, March 13). Grants & Incentives. Retrieved from Live Green

Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/livegreen/greenneighbourhood_rebates.htm

Lovell, S. T. (2010). Multifunctional Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Land Use Planning in the

United States. Sustainability, 2 (8), 2499-2522.

Lufa Farms. (2013, March 9). About Us. Retrieved from Lufa Farms: https://lufa.com/en

Mann, M. E., Bradley, R. S., & Hughes, M. K. (1998). Global-Scale Temperature Patterns and

Climate Forcing Over the Past Six Centuries. Nature, 392, 779-787.

Mendes, W., Balmer, K., Kaethler, T., & Rhoads, A. (2008). Using Land Inventories to Plan for

Urban Agriculture. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(4), 435-449.

Metcalf Foundation. (2010). Planning Regional Food Systems. Retrieved from Metcalf

Foundation:

http://www.growourregion.ca/images/file/Planning_Regional_Food_Systems_FinalJanua

ry25.pdf

Metzger, P. (2013, Janaury 7). Public Works: Vertical Farming. Retrieved from Torontoist:


http://torontoist.com/2013/01/public-works-urban-greenhousing/

Milly, P. C., Dunne, K. A., & Vecchia, A. V. (2005). Global Pattern Trends in Streamflow and

Water Availability in a Changing Climate. Nature, 438(7066). 347-351.

Moloney, P. (2013, March 5). Toronto’s Population Overtakes Chicago. Retrieved from Toronto

Star:

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2013/03/05/torontos_population_overtakes_chica

go.html

Monster Commercial. (2013, March 1). Reclaimed Water Improves Cashflow. Retrieved from

Monster Commercial: http://www.monstercommercial.com/reclaimed-water-improves-

cash-flow/

Mougeot, L. J. (2005). Agropolis: The Social, Political and Environmental Dimensions of Urban

Agriculture. London, England, United Kingdom: Earthscan.

Mowbray, M. (2012, February 4). Muck and Brass. Retrieved from The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/node/21546032

Nasr, J., & Smit, J. (1992). Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Cities: Using Wastes and Idle Land

and Water Bodies as Resources. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 141-152.

Nasr, J., MacRae, R., Kuhms, J., Danyluk, M., Kaill-Vinish, P., Michalak, M., & Snider, A.

(2010). Scaling up Urban Agriculture in Toronto. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Metcalf

Foundation.

Nasr, J., MacRae, R., Kuhns, J., Danyluk, M., Kaill-Vinish, P., Michalak, M., & Snider, A. (2010,

June). Agriculture in Toronto: Building The Infrastructure. Toronto.

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. (2012, January 19). NSERC

Solar Buildings Research Network. Retrieved from NSERC Partnerships:


http://www.nsercpartnerships.ca/How-Comment/Networks-Reseaux/Solar-Solaire-

eng.asp

Ontario Ministry of Finance. (2012). Ontario Population Projections Update . Retrieved from

Ontario Ministry of Finance:

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/economy/demographics/projections/

Ontario Ministry of Food and Agriculture. (2013, March 9). Agriculture Landuse. Retrieved from

OMFRA: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/landuse/index.html

Price, A. (2013, March 1). Windy City: Putting Turbines Inside Buildings. Retrieved from Fast

Company: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1678877/windy-city-putting-turbines-inside-

buildings

Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia. (2013, March 9). Urban Farming Guidebook.

Retrieved from Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia:

http://69.89.31.205/~refbccom/userfiles/Urban-Farming-Guidebook-2013.pdf

Resource Centres on Urban Agriculture & Food Security. (2012, March 14). Why is Urban

Agriculture Important. Retrieved from RUAF: http://www.ruaf.org/node/513

Royal Bank of Canada. (2013, March 11). RBC Blue Water Project. Retrieved from Royal Bank

of : http://www.rbc.com/community-sustainability/environment/rbc-blue-

water/index.html

Ryerson University. (2013, March 7). Carrot City. Retrieved from Ryerson University:

http://www.ryerson.ca/carrotcity/

Ryerson University. (2013, March 7). Centre for Studies in Food Security. Retrieved from

Ryerson University: http://www.ryerson.ca/foodsecurity/index.html

Ryerson University. (2013, March 7). Our People. Retrieved from Ryerson University:


http://www.ryerson.ca/foodsecurity/who/people/index.html

Score, M. (2012, January 8). Hantz Farms: Detroit's Saving Grace. Retrieved from Hantz Farms:

http://www.hantzfarmsdetroit.com/introduction.html

Simon Fraser University. (2006, June 14). Quayside Village. Retrieved from Simon Fraser

University: http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science/resources/water&cities/NS_FT.pdf

Sky Greens Farms. (2012, November 25). Sky Greens Farms. Retrieved from Sky Greens Farms:

http://skygreens.appsfly.com/

Smart Net-Zero Energy Buildings Strategic Research Network. (2013, February 27). NSERC

Smart Net-Zero Energy Buildings Strategic Research Network. Retrieved from Solar

Buildings: http://www.solarbuildings.ca/index.php/en/

Sorkin, M. (2012). New York City (Steady) State. Architectural Design, 82(4), 102-109.

Sustainabile Building. (2013, March 1). Greywater Recycling. Retrieved from Sustianable

Building:

http://www.sustainablebuilding.com/Advanced%20Buildings/Greywater%20Recycling.ht

m

Sustainable Sources. (2013, March 1). Water Irrigation. Retrieved from Sustainable Sources:

http://greywater.sustainablesources.com/

TD Economics. (2012, July 12). Canada's Commercial Real Estate. Retrieved from TD

Economics:

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/sg0712_commercial.pdf

TD Financial Group. (2013, March 11). TD Friends of the Environment Foundation. Retrieved

from TD Financial Group: http://www.fef.td.com/funding.jsp

The World Bank. (2012, October 12). The World Bank - Data, Population. Retrieved from The


World Bank: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL

Thoft-Christensen, P. (2012). Infrastructures and Life Cycle Cost Benefit Analysis. Structure and

Infrastructure Engineering, 8(5). 507-517.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. (2013, March 13). The Living City. Retrieved from

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: http://trca.on.ca/

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. (2013, March 9). Toronto Urban Farm. Retrieved

from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: http://www.trca.on.ca/the-living-

city/programs-of-the-living-city/near-urban-agriculture/toronto-urban-farm.dot

Toronto Food Policy Council. (1999, November 1). Feeding the City from the Back 40: A

Commercial Food Production Plan for the City of Toronto. Retrieved from Toronto Food

Policy Council: http://www.toronto.ca/health/tfpc_feeding.pdf

Toronto Food Policy Council. (2012, August 15). Grow TO Urban Agriculture Action Plan

Launched. Retrieved from Toronto Food Policy Council: http://tfpc.to/news/growto-

action-plan

Toronto Food Policy Council. (2012, October). GrowTO Action Plan. Retrieved from Toronto

Food Policy Council: http://tfpc.to/wordpress/wp-

content/uploads/2012/08/GrowTO_ActionPlan_Oct161.pdf

Turbines Info. (2013, March 1). Darrieus Wind Turbines. Retrieved from Turbines Info:

http://www.turbinesinfo.com/darrieus-wind-turbines/

University of British Columbia. (2013, March 7). Department of Agricultural Economics.

Retrieved from University of British Columbia: http://www.landfood.ubc.ca/department-

agricultural-economics

University of Guelph. (2013, March 7). Food and Agriculural Business. Retrieved from


University of Guelph: https://admission.uoguelph.ca/template.aspx?SiteID=e5a07449-

2864-421d-8504-7866ab28b258

University of Guelph. (2013, March 7). Food, Agriculture and Resource Economics. Retrieved

from University of Guelph:

https://admission.uoguelph.ca/template.aspx?SiteID=0d83b8f3-3da6-4eb9-9d3a-

6e5395e44a26

University of Saskatchewan. (2013, March 7). College of Agriculture and Bioresources.

Retrieved from University of Saskatchewan:

http://agbio.usask.ca/index.php?page=bioresource-policy

Urban Agriculture Summit. (2013, March 7). 2012 Urban Agriculture Summit: Toronto.

Retrieved from Urban Agriculture Summit: http://urbanagsummit.org/

Urban Farmer. (2013, March 11). About. Retrieved from Urban Farmer:

http://theurbanfarmer.ca/about-2/

Water Recycling Systems. (2013, March 1). Commercial Systems. Retrieved from Water

Recycling Systems: http://reusegraywater.com/commercial-system/

Waterfront Toronto. (2013, March 9). Lower Don Lands. Retrieved from Waterfront Toronto:

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/lowerdonlands

Waterfront Toronto. (2013, March 1). Our Future is Green: Healthy Environment. Retrieved

from Waterfront Toronto:

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/our_waterfront_vision/our_future_is_green/healthy_envi

ronment

Webb, N. (1998). Urban Agriculture - Environment, Ecology and the Urban Poor. Urban Forum,

9(1), 95-107.


Werkele, G. R. (2002). Presentation to the Regional Agriculture Subcommitee. Ontario Planning

Journal, 17 (4).

Williams, B. (2008). Cost-Benefit Analysis Methods Explained. Economic & Labour Market

Review, 2(12). 67-72.

Wilson, A. (2009). The Folly of Building Integrated Wind. Environmental Building News, Vol

18, No 5. Retrieved from http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2009/4/29/The-

Folly-of-Building-Integrated-Wind

Windpsire. (2013, March 1). Retrieved from Windspire Energy:

http://www.windspireenergy.com/

Windside. (2013, February 27). Green Buildings. Retrieved from Windside:

http://www.windside.com/customers_markets/green_buildings

World Atlas. (2010). Countries of the World. Retrieved from World Atlas:

http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/ctypopls.htm

Yoneda, Y. (2011, August 15). The World's Largest Solar Energy Office Building Shines in

China. Retrieved from Inhabitat: http://inhabitat.com/worlds-largest-solar-energy-office-

building-opens-in-china/


Appendix 1: Location Propositions

Location Favourability

Liberty Village 1

Don Lands 2

Financial District 3

St. Lawrence 4

Yorkville 5

Harbourfront 6

Garden 7

Queen West 8

Scale: 1 Best, 8 Worst

Rated: Building Height, Density, Land Cost, Population, Redevelopment Potential,

Proximity to Water, Market Demand, Employment and Lifestyle.


Appendix 2: Benefits and Costs

Benefits Costs

Economic

Employment

Tourism

Community Enrichment

Cost Reduction

Food Security

Health

Organic Produce

Lifestyle

Education

Physical Activity

Reduction of Air Pollution

Community

Green Space

Bio-Diversity

Storm Water Management

Water Recycling

Economic

Funding Challenges

Energy Consumption

Lack of Business Support

Cost of Land

Cost of Employment

Safety

Theft

Violence

Health

Fertilizers

Pesticides/Herbicides

Construction

Increased Load Requirements

Expensive Technology

Infrastructure Upgrades


Table 1: Research Studies with Key Search Terms

i) Vertical Farming

ii) Urban Agriculture

iii) Agricultural Sustainability

iv) Urban Ecosystems

v) Urban Ecosystems

Research Study Objective Key Concepts/Claims

Adler, 2006

Agrawal, Singh, Rajput,

Marshall & Bell, 2003

Bell, Power, Jarraud, Agrawal

& Davis, 2011

Boardman, 2006

Brown & Jameton, 2010

Central Intelligence Agency,

The World Fact Book, 2012

City of Kamloops, 2007

Cost-benefit (CBA) as it

relates to government bodies

The effect of air pollution on

peri-urban agriculture

The effect of air pollution on

urban ecosystems

Cost-benefit framework

Public health implications

related to urban agriculture

Updated information

regarding countries of the

world

A background report prepared

for the City of Kamloops

regarding best practices of

urban agriculture

Welfare-enhancing policies

and its practicality related to

equal treatment

Air pollution as a result of

rapid metropolitan growth

The pollution effects on urban

ecosystems in developed and

developing regions

The importance of urban

ecosystems as it relates to

nutrition and filtration

A thorough study as it relates

to common cost-benefit

analysis

Information about chemical

fertilizers, pesticides,

herbicides and other

carcinogenic properties

Provides information on

history, geography, economy,

climate, politics,

transportation etc.

Outlines infrastructural needs,

department coordination, land

use planning, policy

framework and community


Deelstra & Girardet, 2000

Despommier, 2009

Dvorsky, 2012

Ehrenberg, 2008

Francis, Hansen, Fox, Hesje,

Nelson, Lawseth & English

Goss, 2010

Goulding, Whitmore, 2012

Haider, Helbling, Williamson

& Worrest

Heerkens, 2012

Industry Canada, 2012

LaCroix, 2010

Geographic development and

its impact on urban agriculture

Vertical farming ideology

Recent article explaining

vertical farming in Singapore

Further exploration into

Despommier’s ideology

Insight into farmland erosion

in Canada

General overview of

urbanization and the effects of

rapid population growth

Developing sustainable

farming systems

Effects of UV radiation on

ecosystems and climate

change

Cost-benefit framework in a

social setting

Current statistics related to the

Country of Canada

Challenges of land use

support

Provides information on urban

agriculture demand, soil

preparation, climatic issues,

water management,

biodiversity and global

warming

Provides the vision of vertical

farms in an urban environment

Provides observational

opportunities for real life

examples of vertical farming

Provides financial and

sustainability benefits of urban

agriculture

Conversion of farmland to

non-agricultural uses presents

challenges to future food

production

Discusses the costs/benefits of

genetically altered production

of agricultural products

Discusses the compromises

current civilizations take at the

expense of future life

General discussion of the

impact and potential stress

factors of UV radiation

Outlines the social cost-

benefit analysis of urban

expansion

Current information related to

population density, economic

and other relative information

An overview of land use


Mann, Bradley & Hughes,

1998

Mendes, Balmer, Kaethler &

Rhoads, 2008

Milly, Dunne & Vecchia,

2005

Mougeot, 2005

Mowbray, 2012

Nasr & Smit, 1992

Nasr, MacRae, Kuhms,

Danyluk, KaillVinish,

Michalak & Snider, 2010

Score, 2012

Sorkin, 2012

The World Bank, 2012

planning for redevelopment of

municipalities

Temperature patterns and

global warming

The largely overlooked

benefits of urban agriculture

Global patterns of stream flow

and water availability

The social, political and

environmental dimensions of

urban agriculture

The rising cost of farmland

Using waste water and idle

land to contribute to urban

expansion

Urban agriculture in Toronto

Detroit’s urban agricultural

project

Concept design of New York

City engulfed with vertical

farming

Updated information

regarding countries of the

planning and the tactics

employable to assist with

rezoning and community

support

Reconstruction of surface

temperature patterns over the

past six centuries

Outlines experiences in

Portland and Vancouver for

urban agriculture

The importance of water

availability as it relates to

economic activity, ecosystem

function and geophysical

processes

Seminal research findings on

city farming in various case

studies

A detailed description of

variables effecting the cost of

agricultural land

Overview of waste water

filtration systems and

community involvement

An in-depth look into the

infrastructure requirements for

sustainable agricultural

development in the City of

Toronto

Discussion about the Hantz

Farms Group

Depiction of New York City

with vertical farms

Provides information on

history, geography, economy,


Thoft-Christensen, 2012

Webb, 1998

Williams, 2008

world

Design and maintenance of

infrastructures using life-cycle

cost benefit analysis

Benefits of urban agriculture

Cost-benefit analysis with

labour market implications

climate, politics,

transportation etc.

Emphasis on society (user’s

costs)

Soil improvement, promotion

of self-reliance, general

environmental improvement

and heightened awareness

Further research into cost-

benefit analysis taking into

account labour markets


Table 2: Master Level Agriculture Programs in Canada

Program Level School Province

Agricultural Biotechnology Master Lethbridge Alberta

Agricultural Studies Master Lethbridge Alberta

Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics Master Winnipeg Manitoba

Agricultural Economics Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Agricultural Economics (M.Sc.) Master Montréal Québec

Agricultural Economics (MSc) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science Master Edmonton Alberta

Agriculture Master Halifax Nova Scotia

Agroéconomie (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Agroéconomie - consommation (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Animal and Poultry Science Master Guelph Ontario

Animal and Poultry Science Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Animal Science Master Winnipeg Manitoba

Animal Science (M.Sc.) Master Montréal Québec

Animal Science (MSc) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Aquaculture Master St. John's Newfoundland and

Labrador

Biologie végétale Master Québec Québec

Biologie végétale (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Business Administration for a Better Planet Master Guelph Ontario

Business Administration in Food and

Agribusiness Management

Master Guelph Ontario

Business Administration in Food and

Agribusiness Management

Master Guelph Ontario

Business/Agriculture (MBA/MAg) Master Edmonton Alberta

Canadian Plains Studies Master Regina Saskatchewan

Économie rurale (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Food Safety and Quality Assurance Master Guelph Ontario

Food Science Master Guelph Ontario

Food Science Master St. John's Newfoundland and

Labrador

Food Science Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Food Science Master Winnipeg Manitoba

Food Science (MFS) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Food Science (MSc) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Food Science and Agricultural Chemistry

(M.Sc.)

Master Montréal Québec

Food Science Technology Master Halifax Nova Scotia

http://www.gradschoolfinder.com/schools/programdetail.asp?FOSKeywords=&SearchType=&CIPFamilyCode=01&degreetype=Master&PageNo=1&PerPage=50&SortBy=ProgramName&ProgramID=10320&URL=programresults





































Large Animal Clinical Sciences Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Master of Technology Management

(Aquaculture)

Master St. John's Newfoundland and

Labrador

MBA / Master of Agriculture Master Edmonton Alberta

MBA Gestion agroalimentaire Master Québec Québec

Microbiologie agroalimentaire (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Pest Management Master Burnaby British Columbia

Plant Agriculture Master Guelph Ontario

Plant Science (M.Sc.) Master Montréal Québec

Plant Science (MSc) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Plant Sciences Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Population Medicine Master Guelph Ontario

Resource Economics and Environmental

Sociology (Formerly Rural Economy)

Master Edmonton Alberta

Resource Economics/Business Administration

(MAg/MBA)

Master Edmonton Alberta

Sciences animales (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Sciences et technologie des aliments Master Québec Québec

Sciences et technologie des aliments (avec

mémoire)

Master Québec Québec

Small Animal Clinical Sciences Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Soil Science Master Saskatoon Saskatchewan

Soil Science Master Winnipeg Manitoba

Soil Science (MSc) Master Vancouver British Columbia

Sols et environnement Master Québec Québec

Sols et environnement (avec mémoire) Master Québec Québec

Source: www.gradschoolfinder.com




























Figure 1: Research Methodology

Research Methodology

Resource Capability

Legal Social Market

Research Financial

Study


Figure 2: Exhibition Place Wind Turbine

Source: www.toronto.ca


Figure 3: Bahrain World Trade Center

Source: www.inhabitat.com

http://inhabitat.com/2007/03/28/bahrain-world-trade-center-has-wind-turbines/


Figure 4: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

Source: www.fastcoexist.com


Figure 5: Guangzhou Pearl River Tower

Source: www.windside.com


Figure 6: Wind Tunnel at Guangzhou Pearl River Tower

Source: www.buildinggreen.com

http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/image.cfm?imageName=images/1805/Inlet.jpg&fileName=180501a.xml


Figure 7: Darrieus Quiet Revolution (QR) Wind Turbine

Source: www.windspireenergy.com


Figure 8: PAC-H Wind Turbine



Figure 9: Windspire Wind Turbine



Figure 10: International Conference Center at Dezhou, China

Source: www.inhabitat.com

http://inhabitat.com/worlds-largest-solar-energy-office-building-opens-in-china/worlds-largest-solar-array-2/?extend=1


Figure 10: Converval’s Solar Heating Systems

Source: www.solarwall.com


Figure 11: Margot and Harold Schiff Residences

Source: www.dwell.com


Figure 12: Don Lands Map

Source: www.waterfrontoronto.ca


Figure 13: Financial District Map



Figure 14: Liberty Village Map


campbell - major research paper - vertical farming in an urban environment: a toronto perspective

Documents

sustainable vertical

toronto perspecive

toronto perspective

city of toronto

availability of food

increased food

sustainable food security

urban environment