Project 3

TEAM 40

ENGG4900
Image: (Shuliahin, 2021)
COVER LETTER

TBC

i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

TBC

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER LETTER ................................................................................................................... I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... II

NEEDS AND SOLUTION ..................................................................................................... 1

APPROACH ......................................................................................................................... 2

EXERCISE 2 (TEAM): COMPLETE AS A TEAM AND FILL IN THE TABLE. YOU WILL
ALL HAVE THE SAME ANSWERS...................................................................................... 3

FINANCES ........................................................................................................................... 3

SUSTAINABILITY ................................................................................................................ 4

NATURAL CAPITAL ................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

COMPETITOR ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 6

ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................... 6
COMPETITORS ........................................................................................................................ 7

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 8

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 9

APPENDIX A: PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TABLE ............................................................ 0

APPENDIX B: CONSIDERED IDEAS .................................................................................. 1

iii
NEEDS AND SOLUTION

Access to affordable and reliable crops is a necessity to modern cities in Australia. Vertical farming will
allow for reliable and affordable produce to be supplied to cities with lower associated resource
consumption and emissions. This allows it to fulfill population crop demands as well as meet the UN
goals of sustainable cities. By growing crops vertically, crop production/land requirement can be
increased allowing for farms to be located closer to cities and therefore reducing transport costs. The Commented [PL1]: A reduction in transport can create
service provided will design vertical farming systems to meet specified requirements by the customer other benefits that can be worth mentioning, like fewer
(farmer). The developed design will be made in conjunction with partner companies to provide a emissions, less fuel consumption, etc.
physical system which can be used by the client to grow crops closer to the city. This service will be
directed towards customers who intend to grow agriculture commercially for retail distribution.

Customer Segment

Jobs:

- Allows crops to be harvested more effectively as less distance is required to walk in

between produce
- Allows crops to be grown reliably and without impact of natural climate
- Allows crops to be easily monitored

Gains Commented [PL2]: A “sense” of contribution to a

sustainable process can also be considered as a “gain”
- More crops in less area for costumers.
- Less resource consumption
- Less logistic costs

Pains

- Change in conventional farming might be difficult for some customers Commented [PL3]: This section is good, but I would
recommend including the list in the appendix so you can
The values proposed by this service are: provide more insightful ideas and considerations in the
main body. You have to provide more clear, accurate,
- Provide suitable solutions to the customer meeting their design requirements (land size, and well-supported info to your concept. Double-check
the rubric.
produce required, captical cost etc.)
- Provide a solution that is more resource efficient in comparison to conventional farming
- Provide a system that can be effectively implemented closer to high density areas reducing the
associated transportation cost of produce to a saleable
- Has a reduced associated carbon emissions relative to conventional farming Commented [PL4]: Good, but same commnent that
one made before. Provide (to convince) more evidence
of your competitive advantage.

1
APPROACH

Company name aims to provide a service in which customers approach us with an idea that we can Commented [PL5]: An idea, but also a “need”. Focus
help bring to reality. It all starts with a phone call and a meeting with one of our consultants to gauge on satisfy customers needs (jobs)
what it is the customer wants to achieve. Company name can help customers who want to take steps
further in achieving high-density farming techniques. Commented [PL6]: Sounds very good.

We do this by providing a control-system box that helps to automate operating processes of the
business and help to implement the infrastructure required for low operating cost, high yielding, high-
density aquaponics and hydroponics systems.

Revenue types Commented [PL7]: Any revenue by “consultancy”?

• Selling technology
• Selling solutions

Key Resources Commented [PL8]: Where are you going to performs

test or make any experimental work? Prototypes?
• Intellectual property (software, implementation plan)
• Offices

Key Activities

• Consulting and delivering hardware (production and problem solving), add business model
canvas appendix (add more information 6 activities) talk about key activities in report
• We design the system using our own product designs which are manufactured externally to
meet customer requirements. Commented [PL9]: In the middle of design and
• We provide a monitoring system which works with our product to allow farmers to use our manufacture you MUST have a testing or prototyping
product more effectively stage. You are missing this critical step.
(image is from Week 10 Lecture)
• We install the system/ point you towards our installation technician partners.

Key Partnerships

• Manufacturing partners
• Transport partners
• Technicians (might be us?)
• Customers Commented [PL10]: Good, but include more activities
related to your current stage (R&D concept) and the
Technology manufacturers, existing agriculture producers, **providers do research** stage that you want to be (and you are going to Pitch).

Add names of suppliers (which companies – be specific)

Cost types

• Employee costs
• manufacturing the magic box (reword)
look up consultancy fees

2
 Customer relationships Commented [PL11]: Good, but provide more
• Customers approach us with a problem, and we help them to come to the best solution for comments about how to maintain and enhance (through
them. Their requests would need to be along the lines of: what they aim to grow, how much time) these relationships.
they aim to grow and what space they have available for use.
• When starting out we will be approaching farmers looking to implement high-density
farming methods to kickstart our customer base and reputation.

BUSINESS STRATEGY & SCALE-UP PLAN

TBC – but as a brief description:

Company name can help customers who want to take steps further in achieving high-density farming
techniques.

We do this by providing a control-system box that helps to automate operating processes of the
business and we help to implement the infrastructure required for low operating cost, high yielding,
high-density aquaponics and hydroponics farming systems.

Company name will need:

• A website
• A base of operations (office(s))
• Manufacturing partner Commented [PL12]: More focus in your R&D stage. Do
not forget the “testing” or “prototyping” stage.
Company name has:

• Control-system box
• Expertise in low operating cost, high yielding, high-density aquaponics and
hydroponics farming systems.

As Company name grows and improves we can manufacture as many control-system boxes
as demand requires (because our manufacturing is external). We will then begin to expand
our offices and our services (research to be done as to what services we will provide as we
expand).

EXERCISE 2 (TEAM): COMPLETE AS A TEAM AND FILL IN THE TABLE. YOU

WILL ALL HAVE THE SAME ANSWERS.

Competitors (3 important competitors):

• Existing farmers
• Existing hydroponic companies and consultancies including Agrilution GmbH
(Germany)
• Other high-density technology that makes provided consultancy obsolete

FINANCES

3
SUSTAINABILITY

This section outlines the social benefits and costs of the project by identifying positive and negative
impacts through the Five Capitals model as seen in Appendix XXX.

3.1 UN ALIGNMENT Commented [PL13]: Very good.

The proposed project aligns with the following UN sustainable development goals:

• 11.3 - By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for
participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in
all countries
• 11a - Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, per-urban Commented [PL14]: Don’t forget to use the same
and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning formatting style.
o The proportion of the population living in cities that implement urban and regional
development plans integrating population projections and resource needs, by the
size of the city
o The proportion of cities with a direct participation structure of civil society in urban
planning and management that operate regularly and democratically

The first goal, 11.3, is supported by reducing land consumption through high-density farming,
requiring significantly less land for the same quantity of produce. Also, this project allows urban
communities to be closer to farming allowing for more seamless integration for food production
and planning creating an overall more efficient system.

The second goal, 11.a, is supported by building closer to urban areas, reducing travelling
emissions and improving the environmental impact of farming. This creates trust between rural
and urban communities, spreading the wealth more fairly and integrating more efficient and eco-
innovative solutions.

3.2 SOCIAL BENEFITS Commented [PL15]: Veery good. Just don’t forget to
provide evidence in some of your statements. Think that
you have to convince an investor based on evidence,
This project provides a solution to several key problems facing Australia, high travel emissions and
not opinions.
large mass area required making it difficult for farmers to move closer to urban areas. Stakeholders
who were identified in Section XXX should be aware of how this project will impact the broader
community, as well as how to enhance/mitigate them. Sustainability is the focus of the general
impacts and further analysis into other impacts should be considered in a later proposal.

Using more efficient ways to produce vegetables, reduces required resources thus having
a positive effect on natural capital. Strive towards a more sustainable future, reducing waste
and resources such as water and nutrients can help support population growth and reduce process
emissions. This can be enhanced by continuing research into high-density farming and creating
implementation plans that allow room for scale-up and specific requirements that improve
efficiency for different vegetables.

Secondly, this creates opportunities for a variance of work and versatile farming
opportunities, thus having a positive effect on human capital. High-density farming, although
requiring a high capital cost, requires a fraction of the land and approximately XXX% less capital
cost to begin the system with an XXX% increase in operation. This allows investors or potential
farmers who in the past were unable to afford this initial capital a possible option. The median age
of farmers is 54 with only 13% under 35. The creation of jobs closer to the urban communities may
have the effect of drawing more people to this profession as well. Furthermore, the creation of jobs

4
with an in-depth understanding of this innovation will have a positive effect as this knowledge will
further provide.

Finally, a key concept to this project is to reduce emissions by allowing farms to be closer to
urban communities improving Natural Capital. In Australia, 17% of GHG emissions are from
transportation, growing nearly 60% since 1990. Australia is a large company, however, 86.12% of
the population choose to live in our Coastal cities. Thus, the current spread of farms creates a
significant portion of wasted energy by transporting produce from rural to urban communities. By
using high-density farming, farms can be a lot closer to the urban communities that are requiring
the produce because of the reduced land area required.

However, some negative impacts need to be mitigated to ensure that a social licence to operate is
maintained. Firstly, this project could cause discontent with farmers and farming communities
harming Social Capital. Australia has great pride in their agricultural sector and is known to have
a key interest in the fairness of money. This has been seen in 2019 where Australian’s decided on
increasing milk prices to support the community (REF, ABC news 2019). Therefore, creating
opportunities that will compete with current farming methods may lead to outrage and a negative
impact on companies that use Our Name. To mitigate this, care should be taken to advertise the
innovation as an unconventional way of farming, that is supporting the farming community by
creating opportunities rather than competition.

Finally, possible inefficiency due to difficult plants to grow makes versatility narrower could
have a negative financial impact. Plants and vegetables that have the greatest success in high-
density farming are corn, brussel sprouts and greens such as spinach. However, many plants are
unsuitable for high-density farming, requiring more soil or other factors. Therefore, high-density
farming is not the complete solution and other kinds of farming can still compete. This impact can
be mitigated by focusing on other high-quality products that can be maximised.

Add mitigration strategies, maybe enhancement

Major Stakeholders

• Consumers
• Local government
• Farmers
• Partner companies (where clients will buy products off required)
• Media (high interest) top 3
• Whoever we sell the products to (supermarkets)
• IN appendix add interest vs influence Commented [PL16]: Yes, and focus your writing base
on this.

Social Benefits of the Project

- Australia's economic growth

- Connection between rural and urban communities
- Reducing emissions and creating a more efficient method of food production
- Capital to Australia
- Stabilising food growth reducing land requirements
- Maximise key positive impacts
- Negative impacts that will be mitigated
o Taking jobs away from farmers (negative social impact)
o Requiring community support
o Cooperation with government and supermarkets

5
COMPETITOR ANALYSIS

The following section will evaluate competitors and alternatives this proposed start-up. Commented [PL17]: Good.

ALTERNATIVES

Vertical farming is a relatively novel concept, and the primary alternatives are primarily existing
solutions that vertical farming seeks to supersede. Two alternatives to vertical farming systems are:
indoor hydroponics, and dedicated farming warehouses external to the consumer (Cosgrove, 2017).
These alternatives will be described and evaluated against this idea.

Alternative: Indoor Hydroponics

Description Superior Inferior Differences

Indoor hydroponics Many existing systems High technical Vertical farming is a

allows plants to be grown on the market. Well- maintenance required highly scalable
year-round in small, documented existing for large systems. solution, provided a
indoor environments technique. Small- and Technique primarily sophisticated
without soil. Systems large-scale solutions oriented towards control system is
offer control of all exist on the market. industrial systems. used.
variables in plant growth
including temperature,
water, and nutrient levels
(Tilley, 2020).

Alternative: Warehouse Farming

Description Superior Inferior Differences

Warehouse farms Lower cost, infrastructure Produce not Vertical farming

implement vertical maintained by third directly obtained. grows produce on-
farming in a centralised parties. Does not contribute premises.
manner, delivering the to internal Infrastructure
produce to the emissions targets. maintained by
consumers. building tenants or
external parties.

Alternative: Conventional Agriculture

Description Superior Inferior Differences

Indoor hydroponics Supply chain and Highly dependent on Low-tech, low

allows plants to be grown supporting industries favourable weather density farming
year-round in small, are highly developed conditions in any with minimal inputs
indoor environments and have been refined given season. and oversight
without soil. Systems for decades. Extremely land and
offer control of all water intensive, poor
variables in plant growth efficiency of resource
including temperature, use.
water, and nutrient levels
(Tilley, 2020).

6
COMPETITORS

Two competitors have been identified that offer similar services or products to this idea: Vertical Farm
Systems, and InvertiGro. The solutions provided by these competitors will be described and evaluated
against this idea.

Competitor: Vertical Farm Systems

Description Superior Inferior Differences

Vertical Farm Systems
provides commercial
farming technology for
indoor farming, focussing
on return on investment
(Vertical Farms, 2020).
Pre-configured system is Only one size of Vertical farming in
guaranteed to be system, occupies the context of this
effective and efficient large installation idea aims to
based on the design. One footprint. Product is establish
size of system that primarily aimed for agriculture in the
handles all aspects of the an industrial scale. centre of
farming process. sustainable
architecture and
infrastructure. An
additional goal of
this idea is to meet
organisational
environmental
targets.

Don’t forget how to present in the pitch – competitors are important, see it for the pitch presentation
demonstrate how product is different from the others (competitors analysis) Commented [PL18]: Correct.

Competitor: InvertiGro

Description Superior Inferior Differences

7
InvertiGro offers two main Two solutions target both InvertiWall can be This idea intends to
solutions: InvertiCube emerging vertical farming deployed in limited involve vertical
and InvertiWall. markets. The InvertiWall contexts, requiring farming in the
InvertiCube is designed is a modular and simple wall space that may architectural and
to be scalable in a structure that is well be required for planning
warehouse farming suited to office other purposes. considerations.
context. InvertiWall is an environments. Infrastructure will
aesthetically designed be designed
vertical farming product around the vertical
that can be configured in farming solution,
public spaces and other promoting aesthetic
public infrastructure design and
(InvertiGro, 2021). scalable
implementation.

Competitor: Conventional Agriculture

Description Superior Inferior Differences

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8
BIBLIOGRAPHY

There are no sources in the current document.

9
APPENDIX A: PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TABLE
APPENDIX B: CONSIDERED IDEAS

Goal 11: Sustainable cities and communities

- Vertical farming
o Less transport
o Efficiency
o 11.3
o 11a
- Block chain health data – secure health
o Secure
o Ease of access
o 11a,
o 11.5
- Micro-algae/plankton using for oxygen, for biofuel and food, water cleaning system
o Decrease in pollution
o Target 11.b
o 11.6

Notes from Greg:

Pain: wastewater treatment has significant greenhouse gas emissions.

Solution: micro-algae reduce CO2 emissions, nitrate emissions, reduces energy consumption by
conventional wastewater treatment dramatically.

Possible strategies:

1. We become a technology distributor and implementation consulting for wastewater &

stormwater treatment plants.
2. Partner with wastewater & stormwater treatment plants to introduce micro-algae into their
treatment processes.
3. Simply produce algae and biomass.
4. (Not really a possibility) If it was feasible to obtain materials at the start of the process, could
treat initially.

Preliminary ideas for microalgae:

• Mine rehabilitation acceleration

• Farmers utilise microalgae to minimise environmental impact of fertiliser
o Microalgae in dams to provide additional benefits for farmers such as cattle feed and
water purification
• Offset CO2 for energy producers by growing microalgae
• Wastewater treatments, integrated with wastewater pipelines
o Huge energy savings in conventional activated sludge processes (500Wh per m3
down to 3Wh per m3)
o https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-13-2264-8_20#Sec14
o Potentially impactful in low socio-economic regions using conventional activated
sludge processes in their wastewater treatment plants
o Alternative to conventional wastewater treatments
o Marketplace of different alga types to treat different contaminants
o They can harvest and sell biomass which is seeing increased interest

1
Wastewater idea:

• Customer segments
o Niche: wastewater treatment plants i.e., sewerage or industrial (refine the types
based on microalgae effectiveness)
o Goals:
• Value propositions
o Sell a product that establishes a microalgae ecosystem in wastewater facilities
o Benefit: Offsets any CO2 emissions from the treatment
▪ Consumes the CO2 emissions
▪ Lower net CO2 emissions
▪ Doubles in quantity – effective separation system for harvesting
▪ By-product market – selling to biofuel (drying process will be involved)
o Benefit: It provides a source of biomass, when harvested is very valuable
o Benefit: Treats the water, removing contaminants such as nitrates
o Benefit: Assist in achieving climate goals
▪ What countries have agreed to aim for environmental goals?
o
- Cheap affordable housing?

2
APPENDIX C: BUSINESS MODEL CANVAS

Key Partners Key Activities Value Propositions Customer Relationships Customer Segments

Need to find specific Consulting End-to-end management of Farmers Construction firms

companies to do: vertical farming
Business and implementation Possible farmers wanting to Architecture and design
Infrastructure construction implementation plans live close to city firms
Configuration of vertical
Soil Selling control system farming system to client Supermarkets Outfitting firms
needs, architectural or
Seeds functional Environmentally-conscious
workplaces
Fertiliser Key Resources Compliant and optimised Channels
system designed for either
Utilities providers Knowledge revenue or sustainability Website
goals
Electricians and specialised IP control system Social Media
contractors

Cost Structure Revenue Streams

Design, construction, testing, and production of control system Sales of control system

Software and design employees, consulting employees On-going consulting related to mainentance and implementation of high
density farming
Website and advertisement costs
APPENDIX D: 5 CAPITAL MODELS

Positive Impacts
• Closer to urban centres therefore reducing transport emissions Reducing
land area required is better for the environment
• Making more efficient ways to produce vegetables reduces resources
required such as water
• Eliminate waste by having crops that can be monitored more closely and
Natural reduced disease as covered and indoors
Capital • Reduce requirement for harsh pesticides by having crops indoors
Negative Impacts
• More power required causing more energy consumption from fossil fuels
rather than using free sun energy
• Requires more infrastructure compared to conventional farming
• Moving away from renewable resources and requires much more
manufacturing

Positive Impacts
• Creates a reliable and stable connection between farming and
supermarkets
• Positive environmental impacts improve SLO
• Compliance and movement towards less environmental emissions seen
positively through government
Social
Capital Negative Impacts
• Cause discontent with farmers and farming communities having a
negative effect on SLO
• Australia values there farmers, taking jobs away from them will have a
negative impact
• Does not support development of rural communities

Positive Impacts
• Gives clients access to a more efficient method of farming improving
understanding of high-density farming
• Creates work opportunities for farmers closer to urban cities
• Creates opportunities for variance of work and versatile farming
Human opportunities
Capital • Promotes general health in Australian’s by bringing produce closer so
produce can be fresher (often stored for long periods of time)
Negative Impacts
• Does not respect farmers that are already struggling with payment but
creates a different solution that many cannot afford/do not want.
• Training and technology as a consultancy is for profit

Positive Impacts
 • Uses infrastructure and technology to use resources more efficiently
• Reduces emissions by allowing farms to be closer to urban
communities
• Improves product system by making the entire process more eco-
Manufactured efficient, eco-friendly and eco-innovative.
Capital • Sustainable designs improve overall community by considering future
uses and scale up
Negative Impacts
• Inefficiency due to difficult plants to grow makes versatility more narrow
• Do not own assets as we are consultancy

Positive Impacts
• High density farming means less land capital cost for the same quantity of
food produced (?)
• Demonstrate a positive stance on, and management of, sustainability issues
Financial to improve access to financial capital.
Capital • High return for consultancy from sharing knowledge and implementation plan
Negative Impacts
• Loss of wealth to farmers who do not use high density farming
• High capital investment required with large financial risk involved