Chapter Nine: Everybody Eats

Farming More Than Food

Indoor farming would significantly reduce stress on the American breadbasket, requiring outdoor farmers to grow significantly less food than they do today to meet demand. At first glance, this might seem like a trouble spot for farmers, because growing less food means making less money. So should indoor farms give them cause to worry? No – because growing less produce gives them an opportunity to grow other crops – crops that have both a higher density and commercial value than the kind that generally makes their way to supermarkets.

For example, instead of growing corn or soy, farmers could instead grow:

Algae for biofuel or plastics. The rising price of petroleum over the past 15 years – at least until the discovery of easier shale oil extraction – has led to a surge of investment in biofuels.[23] Biofuels are hydrocarbons that come from living plants, as opposed to oil that comes from fossilized plant remains. Even though Scarcity Zero would promote hydrogen as the nationwide fuel standard, biofuels and existing petroleum reserves can be devoted to a more appropriate purpose: advanced materials. Today, we use corn ethanol to make plastics, but corn is not the most effective crop we have at our disposal.

That honor goes to algae.

Several forms of algae have properties that allow for hydrocarbon production. The biofuel company Algenol claims that with today’s technology it can produce thousands of gallons of ethanol per acre of growing space, and we could increase that output with Scarcity Zero.[25] As algae has a higher land-use density than corn, a given farm that produces algae would generate more revenue than a farm dedicated to growing corn. Further, since the energy and materials industries tend to be more profitable than the food industry, what money might be lost from a move to indoor food production could then be replaced – with profits gained – from the shift to growing hydrocarbon-producing algae.

For comparison, the Department of Energy estimates that if we were to use algae to replace petroleum in all respects in the United States, we would need an area of about 15,000 square miles (roughly the size of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined).[26] That’s less than 1/7th of the space we use for corn, meaning if we were to move much of our food production indoors, we would have ample space to grow algae – and plenty of economic dividends for farmers to go along with it.

Algae for supplemental nutrition. Beyond uses in plastics and materials, algae can also be grown for added nutritional value in food products. The species chlorella, in particular, is among the most promising candidates.
By all definitions a “superfood,” dried chlorella is comprised of 45% protein, 20% lipids (fats), 20% carbohydrates, 10% vitamins/minerals and 5% fiber.[27] This composition, combined with a high photosynthetic efficiency (how well something grows in sunlight), gives chlorella one of the highest protein yields of any crop.[28] That’s why, after World War II, chlorella was considered as a solution to the then-global food crisis.[29] At the time, chlorella was difficult to grow outside of laboratories, but with advances in technology post-1950 – and the added benefits Scarcity Zero provides – we have the ability to grow a potent nutritional supplement that can be used to enhance any segment of the food supply. One that, just as importantly, can also provide supplemental nutrition in remote or isolated locations.

Alternative use of genetically modified organisms. One benefit to indoor farming is its ability to grow heirloom crops with yields that are similar to genetically modified crops in outdoor environments. However, this is not to say that genetic modification of plants is a negative thing in and of itself, but rather that its benefits can also be realized in other applications, something that bears special mention in this context.

Much of the anti-GMO movement[30] has focused on opposing any manipulation of crops at the genetic level, rather than genetic engineering that allows a plant to survive otherwise lethal pesticides and herbicides.[31] While this writing does not maintain a skeptical position on the current state of genetic engineering in our food supply, it suggests a moment of pause as to the wisdom of disavowing an entire scientific discipline because a corporation engineered plants with a genetic immunity to a relative of organophosphate nerve agents.[32]

People have been genetically engineering plants for millennia through splicing, cross breeding, and human (as opposed to natural) selection. We were modifying genomes then, we just weren’t doing it under a microscope. It’s what we do to a plant, and our guiding ethical standards when we do it, that ultimately matters. So, what if we instead extended the genetic modification of plants to a different focus? For example:

Efficiency of hydrocarbon production. Potential yields of hydrocarbon-producing algae for plastics and chemical stabilizers are already high.[33] However, we could configure the plant at a genetic level to produce even greater amounts of hydrocarbons or specific chains of hydrocarbons that can induce a higher-percent yield when producing plastics,[34] that are geared for more advanced polymerization[35] and that recycle more effectively (or biodegrade faster) than plastics today. We’ll go through this in more detail on these concepts in the next chapter.

Inclusion of bacteria. Algae isn’t the only organism that can produce hydrocarbons. Scientists in several countries have successfully modified the genetics of E. coli bacteria to produce diesel fuel that is nearly identical to the diesel derived from petroleum[36] – and, in theory, genetic modification could help us produce other hydrocarbons synthetically,[37] as well as accelerate the disposal of their plastic derivatives.[38]

Maximum growth. Beyond genetic engineering for industrial applications, food crops can be genetically modified in ways that do not raise as many concerns as the genetically modified crops of today. This might include engineering plants to maximize growth within indoor farms, produce larger and/or more nutritious products, or be able to optimally operate under a longer daylight-to-night ratio.

What’s Next?

As a system, indoor farming delivers indefinitely abundant supplies of food. Backed by the auspices of Scarcity Zero and an effectively unlimited supply of both water, electricity and fuel, it can grow enough food to feed the entire planet. This can eradicate the concept of famine as we know it and greatly improve global stability and economic growth – saying nothing of the cascading humanitarian benefits. That, by itself, is a transformational goal to reach.

Yet the tools that make it possible have a secondary, vital function through the provision of the building blocks of next-generation synthetic materials. And that, once delivered, is the final piece we need to evolve beyond a zero-sum resource paradigm, and the final piece we need to build our civilization upward to ever-greater heights.