cec_2014 _presentation_dzuy notes.pptx
TRANSCRIPT
Leandra Langlois
Dzuy-Tam Tran
McGill University
Macdonald Campus
A Canadian Integrated Northern
GreenhouseA Solution For Year Round
Food Security
1. Problem statement/Justification of innovation
2. Innovation/Technical feasibility1. Design goal
2. Design constraints
3. Design components
3. Social and Environmental impacts
4. Economic feasibility1. Cost
2. Marketability
5. Conclusion
Presentation Agenda
• 2 million people are food insecure in Canada (United Nations, 2012)
o Problem is more severe among First Nation populations
• In remote communities
Justification of Innovation
Import ExpensiveLesser quality
Health and social issues
• Innovative
• Replicable design
• Above the 60th parallel: Northern Communities
• Year-round production
Innovation Design Goal
• Cold climate
• Limited sun exposure
• Social acceptance
Innovation Design Constraints
C
+
Innovation
Innovative Design
Technical FeasibilityDesign component
Shell
• Repurposed oversea transportation container
• Polycarbonate glazed roof and side
• Variable-angle reflective panel
• Manual or electric steel shutters to transform system in
minutes
Foldable Closing System
• Recommended values:
Floor and ceiling RSI-10
Sides RSI-5
• Spray foam: moisture barrier, insulation
• Extruded polystyrene rigid foam
• Air lock
• Insulation Blanket for glazed parts
Airlock
Insulation
curtains
Technical FeasibilityDesign component
Insulation
• Motorized pivoting troughs
• Nutrient film technique hydroponics
• 483 lettuce heads produced per cycle
Technical FeasibilityDesign component
Irrigation and Plant Configuration
• Summer shading
• Integrated into the NFT pivoting hydroponic system
• LED’s emitting blue and red wavelengths
• LED’s provide 50 µmol/s PAR to plants
Technical FeasibilityDesign component
Supplemental Lighting
• CING Volume of 86.37 m3
• Fans provide up to 23.60 m3/s of airflow
• Heat exchanger: 9.09 m3/min
• Duct heaters: 2 of 5 kW, 9.91m3/min
Stage # Air Flow Operation Mode Outside Temperature
Stage 1 0.25 ACH Minimal air flow -20oC>T
Stage 2 1 ACH Gas control -10oC>T>-20oC
Stage 3 3ACH Heat recovery 0oC>T>-10oC
Stage 4 0.1 ACM Heat recovery 10oC>T>0
Stage 5 0.5 ACM Flow through 20oC>T>10oC
Stage 6 1-2 ACM Flow through T>20oC
Technical FeasibilityDesign component
HVAC
Social and Environmental
ImpactSocial element
• Provide fresh nutritious produce constantly
• More affordable
• Improve overall health of communities
• Community development
• Possibility of being rejected by the community
Environmental element
• Reduce GHG
• Reduce reliance on transportation
• Repurposing containers
Capital Cost $40,000
CING Unit Sale Price $50,000
Profit Margin $10,000 (20%)
Delivery Cost $8,730
Economic FeasibilityFixed Costs
Nutrients
Economic FeasibilityOperational Costs
• Pay back period of 5 years
• Market price per lettuce head
• A. Paulatuk, $0.16/kWh: $8.00 (savings of $0.55)
• B. Resolute Bay, $1.00/kWh: $20.00 (savings of $7.60)
Economic FeasibilityMarketability
Paulatuk,
NT
Resolute Bay,
NU
Conclusion
• Justification
• Innovation/technical feasibility
• Social impact
• Environmental impact
• Economic feasibility
Acknowledgements Dr. Mark Lefsrud, Project Supervisor
Dr. Grant Clark, Academic Supervisor
Scott Manktelow, Shop Technician
Patricia Gaudet, Researcher
Sara Tawil, Researcher
Nicolas Fabien- Oulette, Contributor
Misha Shodjaee-Zrudlo, Contributor
Jean-Francois Plante, Mentor
• Hendricks, P. 2012. Life Cycle Assessment of Greenhouse Tomato (Solanumlycopersicum L.) Production in Southwestern Ontario. The University of Guelph.Available at http://dspace.lib.uoguelph.ca/xmlui/handle/10214/4052. Accessed 9 April2013.
• Jahns, T. 2009. Controlling the Greenhouse Environment. University of AlaskaFairbanks. Available at http://www.uaf.edu/files/ces/publications-db/catalog/anr/HGA-
00336.pdf. Accessed 9 April 2013.• Controlled Environment Agriculture Takes Root in Alaska, Available
at:http://www.lumigrow.com/aboutus/case-studies/controlled-environment-agriculture-takes-root-in-alaska/
• Patterson, R.L. and Giacomelli, G. A. (2008). Resource and Production Model for the South Pole Food Growth Chamber. The University of Arizona
Bibliography
We will now happily answer your questions
THANK YOU!