-
164 feet wide and 16 feet deep, for roughly 2600 sqft of greenhouse space per floor. number of floors is still flexible.
The specified length is approaching the limits of evaporative cooling, particularly in that climate. I assume that a 16-foot depth may not be suitable for volume exchange (intake/exhaust). It is likely necessary to develop a vertical circulation system, with each level operating independently if multiple levels are implemented. Additionally, it is important to note that sand is quite heavy, which raises significant structural concerns when considering vertical designs. While vertical cropping from the bed surface can enhance spatial productivity, the concept of ‘vertical gardens’—based on those I have encountered—seems less practical unless they are utilized for growing micro-greens under LED lights. Even in that case, the overall practicality and economic viability remain questionable.
is there a rule of thumb for volumetric requirements for fish tanks given x sqft of greenhouse?
At a volume-to-volume ratio of 1:2 (+/-), the volume-to-area ratio is 1:6 when the sand depth measures 33 cm. This equates to 6 square meters of ‘grow bed’ for each cubic meter of tank, based on the recommended stocking density and feed rate for tilapia. However, I have reservations about whether Georgia permits the cultivation of tilapia, unless there are specific exceptions for secure indoor facilities, which would likely involve bureaucratic processes and legal considerations.
should the fishtanks be removed from the sunlight or exposed?
Indirect light, aka shade.
are these long, thin dimensions of the greenhouse realistic given the ventilation systems?
Georgia’s climate is characterized by high humidity, which makes psychometric (evaporative) and misting cooling methods relatively ineffective. While automated multi-level shading can help limit heat accumulation, it also adversely affects photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). This reduction in PAR may be acceptable for low-light tolerance species, but it would inhibit the effective production of tropical species, such as those in the Solanaceae and Cucurbitaceae families.
There is a more effective and somewhat costly cooling technology known as “positive pressure cooling.” This system first dehumidifies the humid outside air before pushing the drier air through psychometric pads to lower the temperature. The cooled air is then injected at ground level, where it rises through the plant canopy, increasing in temperature as it moves upward and exiting at the highest point.
While the initial capital and operating expenses for such a system can be substantial, they can be offset by efficient production strategies, seasonal cultivar selection, and effective cultivation practices. However, it is important to note that profit margins may be reduced due to ongoing energy costs.
Implementing a sizable photovoltaic (PV) system would be advantageous, as increased solar intensity aligns with higher energy demands for cooling. While some energy storage solutions, such as batteries, may be necessary, a significant portion of daytime energy needs could be met directly, provided that the circulation equipment is appropriately selected.
In summary, while the approach to greenhouse design, management, and energy capture/usage presents complexities, it is certainly feasible. However, extensive training on these topics is beyond the scope of iAVs.