Offshore Wind Farms (OWFs) and Their Development

Introduction

Currently, environmental protection and minimization of global warming have been contemporary issues around the world. People and institutions have been formulating ways to produce clean and renewable energy that can be used for domestic consumption (Akbari et al., 2020). Currently, individuals and some organizations are using the technology to harness winds and convert them into power. To facilitate large-scale and maximum energy production, companies have opted to locate their sites along the coastal regions. This research paper will analyze the development of offshore wind farms (OWFs) and their contribution to the sustainable environment.

OWFs plants are well equipped with facilities capable of capturing wind power, transforming it into electrical energy, and then supplying it to the main station for distribution. They are mainly located in water bodies along with coastal areas (Díaz & Soares, 2020). The farms rely on the winds from the oceans to produce the required thrust because of their flow speed. Furthermore, the choice of location is to enhance reliability due to the presence of both onshore and offshore winds. According to the current statistics, wind technology generates about 0.3 percent of the world’s electricity. The focus is to achieve a sustainable energy system with limited greenhouse gases.

Offshore Wind Farm Design

When designing OWFs, the main objective is to produce more electrical energy at a minimal cost. In addition, the operations are aimed to stay within the site constraints. The process involves the establishment of the limiting factors like site boundary, the maximum number of facilities to be installed, identification of dwellings that rotor blade shadows may affect, and a minimum spacing of the turbines. Once all the possible risks have been assessed and identified, then the initial design of the OWFs can be launched. The stage involves determining the required size of the wind turbines (Feng & Shen, 2017). The considerations are based on the diameter range of the rotor blade and the hub heights.

A wind farm may consist of a single machine or many like over hundreds. Irrespective of the number of facilities, the construction method remains the same across the site. Two main factors that determine the cost of developing the plant include site complexity and extreme loads (Draycott et al., 2019). Complex location can be a result of difficult access, hard rocks, or even boggy grounds. Similarly, extreme loads are caused by strong winds flowing across the place, therefore, requiring a specified type of turbine. Upon completion, commissioning takes place, followed by routine inspection of the operations.

Strategic Planning of Wind Farms

The planning process starts with defining the mission and vision of the project on which other stages will be based. The phase involves combining both empirical and proactive strategies. In this procedure, the analysis of the current situation in the country is performed to evaluate energy independence and the future needs to produce consumer commodities like electricity (Spyridonidou et al., 2020). The next step is the exclusion of areas not suitable for OWFs. In this strategy, a geographic information system (GIS) mapping tool is used to synthesize data to help locate regions where sites can be located.

Another strategic plan is the determination of layout and technical specifications. This phase deals with the model selection of the wind turbine and the suitable structures based on the condition of the region. Furthermore, the cost estimation of the OWFs is calculated, and associated risks are evaluated (Florian & Sørensen, 2017). This includes estimates of the entire project’s capital, operational, and decommission expenditures in relation to the previous similar endeavor, which is still functioning. Lastly, the methodology involves the assessment of the portfolio outcome based on the overall estimates.

Advantages and Disadvantages

OWFs have several advantages like extensive free space for constructing large structures, availability of stronger winds yielding more power, consistent wind flow, ability to minimize noise pollution, providing renewable energy, and not release harmful carbon gases leading to environmental sustainability (Chipindula et al., 2018). Despite their merits, they still have some disadvantages, such as the cost of construction and maintenance of the assets from wave destruction (Afsharian et al., 2020). Furthermore, they might have an impact on the marine lives in the areas around the site.

Challenges

Designing and operating OWFs comes with a number of challenges. For example, the facilities are exposed to extreme weather conditions leading to corrosion and lightning strikes. In addition, they experience fatigue, erosion, and accumulation of microorganisms on the surfaces of the materials (Van den Berg et al., 2017). Moreover, other encounters are technical issues like choosing the right wind turbine and rotor blades suitable for the given location.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The development of OWFs is significant towards facilitating clean energy and promoting sustainable renewable power. The research has identified some challenges that are likely to hinder their design and establishment in different places. Having a proper strategic plan, the process of installing them can be simplified therefore increasing the capacity of power generated from the wind for domestic use. However, during site selection, proper research should be conducted to minimize possible risks that would increase the cost of operation. Governments should also conduct research to determine the effects of OWFs on marine lives (Kirchgeorg et al., 2018). When purchasing the wind turbines from the suppliers, the organization should ensure they have the right material based on the weather conditions of the wind plant. Within the factory, several wind turbines should be established to maximize the space to reduce the cost of constructing several locations.

References

Afsharian, S., Afsharian, B., & Shiea, M. (2020). Perspectives on offshore wind farms development in Great Lakes. Journal of Marine Science, 2(3). Web.

Akbari, N., Jones, D., & Treloar, R. (2020). A cross-European efficiency assessment of offshore wind farms: A DEA approach. Renewable Energy, 151, 1186-1195. Web.

Chipindula, J., Botlaguduru, V. S. V., Du, H., Kommalapati, R. R., & Huque, Z. (2018). . Sustainability, 10(6). Web.

Díaz, H., & Soares, C. G. (2020). Review of the current status, technology and future trends of offshore wind farms. Ocean Engineering, 209, 107381. Web.

Draycott, S., Sellar, B., Davey, T., Noble, D. R., Venugopal, V., & Ingram, D. M. (2019). . Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 104, 15-29. Web.

Feng, J., & Shen, W. Z. (2017). Design optimization of offshore wind farms with multiple types of wind turbines. Applied Energy, 205, 1283-1297. Web.

Florian, M., & Sørensen, J. D. (2017). Risk-based planning of operation and maintenance for offshore wind farms. Energy Procedia, 137, 261-272. Web.

Kirchgeorg, T., Weinberg, I., Hörnig, M., Baier, R., Schmid, M. J., & Brockmeyer, B. (2018). . Marine Pollution Bulletin, 136, 257-268. Web.

Spyridonidou, S., Vagiona, D. G., & Loukogeorgaki, E. (2020). . Sustainability, 12(3), 905. Web.

Van den Burg, S. W. K., Kamermans, P., Blanch, M., Pletsas, D., Poelman, M., Soma, K., & Dalton, G. (2017). Business case for mussel aquaculture in offshore wind farms in the North Sea. Marine Policy, 85, 1-7.

How to Reduce Carbon Footprint by Using Solar Farms

Introduction

The amount of carbon dioxide that melts into the atmosphere as a result of our routine actions creates footprint of carbon. In fact, at times, we unknowingly tend to perform some actions, which lead to an increase in our carbon footprints on the environment, which proves detrimental for our own survival. Inefficient use of energy is one of the first things that are being blamed for an increase in carbon footprints. It is now being widely discussed that carbon footprints can be effectively reduced by efficient use of energy.

Main body

Solar energy is considered one of the cheapest and most reliable alternative energy sources which has been with us since times immemorial. In fact the living beings on the earth use solar energy in many ways already, but now scientists and technologists have started thinking about the ways and means which could help us in tapping the solar energy. This would not only help in preserving many resources, but the humanity will be benefitted by way of reduction in carbon footprints as well. Companies are also carrying out researches to devise replacement products which could work on solar energy, thus reducing the burden on the nature.

Solar farming is one simple method of generating electricity on the farmland using photovoltaic cells. Solar farms spread over the land collects the sunrays on the solar panels and the cells help in converting this energy into electrical energy, which can be subsequently transferred to different places using transformers. Realising the importance of renewable energy, many countries have started offering attractive schemes to their citizens to go for solar farming. It is the concept of renewable energy, which helps in production of ‘green energy’ thus reducing the carbon footprints and undue burden on natural resources.

Though the concept has started gaining ground amongst the nature lovers and scientific community, but the masses in general remain aloof to the intricacies of how solar farming can help. NGOs and community organisation have a leading role in sending across this message. A Hindu temple in California has recently taken steps towards reducing the carbon footprints1. This temple has installed solar panels in the vicinity which helps in generating enough energy for the use of the temple. In fact, the temple is able to generate an electricity of 60KW which is more than its requirement. Therefore the excess energy is passed on to local grid for distribution amongst the residents.

Conclusion

Such steps will no doubt go a long way in informing and educating the masses about the need to reduce carbon footprints on the one hand and reaping the benefits of solar farming on the other. It is estimated that while reducing the power consumption, this California temple will be able to reduce CO2 emissions by 155o tonnes, which is equivalent to planting 62,244 trees, over a period of 25 years! As a part of their social responsibility, a number of corporate houses too have started taking initiatives to help the cause of the nature.

Google, for example has started making good use of its Mountain View parking space by resorting to solar farming2. The company installed pole-mounted solar panels between the parking rows, which provides some shade to the vehicles and invaluable energy to meet 30 percent power demand within the premises.

References

  1. Boston.com (2006). Google plants solar trees. Web.
  2. Ecofriend (2008). Web.

The Near-Shore Wind Farm Controversy Case

Background

The case study is about two opposing groups that were in disagreement regarding the requirements of constructing wind turbines on Samsø Island, Denmark. According to Papazu (2014), the project was saddled with a lot of uncertainties. The developers and investors dismissed the complaints made by the residents of Mejlflak. They made the assumption that it was merely a manifestation of a phenomenon labeled as “Not in My Backyard” or NIMBY.

From the perspective of the developers and big business investors, the residents were complaining about the noise and aesthetic impact of 150-meter turbines in their beloved community. They were unwilling to invest time and effort in trying to understand the reasons why there was opposition to the proposed project.

If the developers and investors went to the meetings with an open mind, they would have discovered the deep-seated reasons and the negative feelings that fueled the objection to the said project. They would have discovered that aside from aesthetic reasons, the residents complained about legal, financial and technical issues that were not resolved before starting the project.

If the investors and developer dug deeper, they would have discovered that the failure to consult the residents before making a public announcement about the project is one of the main reasons why the residents are opposing the idea of constructing wind turbines near their homes.

Given the situation, the windmill project looked more like an experiment. It was perceived as an ill-conceived project that may not benefit the inhabitants of Samsø Island. In her discussion on “understanding the opposition,” Papazu (2014) brings out the ‘objects of politics’ surrounding the Samsø windmill project. According to Papazu projects that generate public interest usually take a political twist.

In politics, the opposition’s view is usually ignored since they do not have direct control over the operations of the government. In most cases, the developers introduce new projects without consulting various stakeholders. This mindset causes the rejection of project proposals by the intended beneficiaries. In the case study, the residents of Samsø were not adequately informed about how the project was likely to influence their lives.

While they expressed their concerns, the developers did not give them a listening ear. The developers and the investors made the decision to persuade the residents to accept their position regarding the importance of the wind turbines.

The developers had a negative attitude regarding the solution to the problem as they already had a conviction that it was impossible to reach an agreement with their opponents. The best way would have been to involve members of the opposing team so that they too could have a sense of ownership of the project.

Their influence could create a major deterrent in the project implementation. Therefore, it would have been prudent to take them seriously as they have something important to contribute to the planning and preparation phase of the said project.

Process Followed Based on the Book “Getting to Know Yes”?

The Contending Parties Argued Over Positions

The developers and the investors made an argument based on a particular position. They took the position that eco-friendly technology like wind turbines is the best thing that could happen to the people of Mejlflak. The residents opposing the construction of the wind turbines took the position that it is unlawful to erect giant windmills, because it is noisy and degrades the natural beauty of the landscape.

The Contending Parties Failed to Separate the People from the Problem

The developers and the investors made the premature conclusion that the residents were spoiled property owners. They said that the residents wanted to benefit from clean energy. But they are unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to build renewable sources of energy. The residents on the other hand viewed the developers and the investors as insensitive and profit-oriented businessmen.

The Contending Parties Failed to Focus on the Underlying Interest of the Stakeholders

The focus was not on the underlying interest of the various stakeholders affected by the plan to build wind turbines in Mejlflak. The developers and the investors focused on the importance of the project. The residents focused on their own needs.

The Contending Parties did not Develop Options for Mutual Gain

The investors and the developers did not consider alternative project sites. They insisted that the best place to erect giant wind turbines was an area described as near-shore. The residents on the other hand created a hard stance against any type of construction within the area under their jurisdiction.

The Contending Parties Failed to Use Objective Criteria to Resolve the Issue at Hand

The investors and the developers did not persuade the residents to reconsider their decision to oppose the project based on objective criteria. They insisted that their position is the best course of action. In the same manner, the residents did not attempt to look for objective criteria to resolve the issue with the developers and investors.

The root cause of the failure to resolve the problem was the insistence to hold on to established positions that they created before they went into negotiations (Fisher & Ury, 1991). The problem was exacerbated by the fact that the focus of the argument was the people behind the project.

The criticism was directed at the people behind the complaints made against the proposed project. Both parties made the conclusion that it was the greed or capriciousness of the people involved that served as the main roadblock to success.

If they dug deeper into the issue, they would have discovered the underlying interest of each party. The developers and the investors would have discovered that the residents are not against the construction of wind turbines in the island.

They would have discovered that they were offended by their non-inclusion in the preparatory stages of the project design. On the other hand, the residents would have discovered that the investors and developers have a genuine passion to build non-renewable sources of energy.

If the investors and developers went out of their way to know more about the concerns of the contending party, they would have proposed an alternative construction site. On the other hand, the residents would have discovered that the developers and investors did not prepare alternatives because they thought that their plan was acceptable to all the stakeholders in the said area.

If the contending parties were armed with the correct knowledge regarding effective negotiation techniques, they would search for objective criteria to help them resolve the issue. But in this case, this particular strategy was never utilized. As a result the contending parties resorted to creating a hardline stance, no one was going to give up the position that they have chosen in the beginning of the negotiation process.

Using the Book “Getting To Know Yes,” Discuss in Your Opinion How They Can Solve the Issue Better?

The developers and the investors would have succeeded if they hired an effective negotiator. An effective negotiator will never focus on the personalities involved in the issue. An effective negotiator will focus on the interest of the contending parties. An effective negotiator will never bargain based on a position. An effective negotiator will never make the mistake of jumping to conclusions that the residents were hypocrites and spoiled property owners.

An effective negotiator will immediately determine the underlying reasons why the residents decided to fight against the construction of wind turbines within their community. The negotiator will realize that the residents were offended because they were not included in the preliminary discussions regarding the idea of building giant wind turbines in their area.

The negotiator will discover that the residents were not opposing the project based on the NIMBY phenomenon. There are ethical, legal, and financial issues that have to be resolved before they could move forward. The negotiator will communicate these issues clearly to his employers. At the same time the negotiator will make the residents feel that their inputs are valuable for the purpose of project implementation. The negotiator will make them realize that investors and developers are passionate about the proliferation of renewable sources of energy in the country.

In the end, the negotiator will consult with the residents regarding objective criteria that can be utilized to resolve the issue. For example, the negotiator will make the suggestion to the residents that in order to break the deadlock, both parties must agree on using precedents and government standards with regards to the construction of giant turbines near a residential community. Using objective criteria like legal statutes, ordinances, and historical precedents creates a neutral area of discussion without provoking an emotional reaction from members of the contending parties.

References

Fisher, R. Ury, W. & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating an agreement without giving in (2nd ed.). New York: Penguin Books.

Papazu, I. (2014). Understanding opposition: The case of a near shore wind farm controversy- Not another NIMBY story. For the Workshop Devices and Desires: The Cultural Politics of Low Carbon Society, University of Copenhagen. Web.

Managing Farm Dams to Support Waterbird Breeding

Origin of the problem

Many bird species in the Murray-Darling Basin risk disappearing. The Australian Action Plan for Birds declared twenty-four bird species to be in the category of almost endangered species. It also identified fourteen species of birds as already endangered. Many farmers and encroachers have cleared the grass cover and woodland habitats.

Residents have already cleared 85% of the forest in Victoria and 75% in the neighbouring NSW for different reasons. The rest of the forest is scattered all over the basin while some part of it rests on infertile soils. The residents have also continuously collected dead and living timber in these forests. Such activities have led to the depletion of bird habitats. The authorities also deliberately introduced foxes into the basin’s ecosystem, leading the depletion of bird species due to predation.

In most regions of the basin, many birds have lost their habitats due to fire and forest clearance. The frequent fires and forest clearance in these areas have led to extensive migration of different species of birds.

Many people who live along Murray and other rivers in the basin have been engaging in the destruction of both living and dead trees along these rivers. Their destructive activities include cutting down the trees for firewood and timber and ring barking. Some natural activities along these rivers have also contributed to this loss of trees. They include waterlogging and salinization. These activities have greatly reduced breeding places and habitats of many water birds.

The victims of the problem

The loss of birds will greatly affect the people who live in this basin. They may not have seen the consequences of losing the birds now, but will see them in the future. The birds are part of the basin’s ecosystem, and losing them makes the system incomplete. Besides, the region is likely to lose the economic benefits it has been getting from the tourists who have been visiting the region with the purpose of seeing the different species of birds.

Attitudes of farm owners and ecological experts

Farm owners have never thought about the elimination of the birds as a possible threat to the entire ecosystem. They always think about their welfare at the expense of their colleagues in the ecosystem. If they were aware of this fact, they would not cut down the trees for firewood and timber. They would also spare dead trees to serve as habitats for the birds. On the other hand, the experts are fully aware of the consequences of losing birds. As a result, they have come up with different policies to remedy the situation.

Data analysis

The available data indicates that the basin will have 38 species of birds under the threat of completely dying. Currently, 24 species of birds are almost disappearing while 14 species have already disappeared. Statistics also indicates that the major cause of threats to the birds is human activities. Human beings are busy destroying habitats and breeding places for the birds. So far, people who live in the regions that fall in the Murray-Darling Basin have cleared 85% of the forest in Victoria and approximately 75% of the forest in New South Wales. If this trend continues, the region is likely to lose lots of revenue.

Local and international projections

The Australian Action Plan for Birds indicates that this trend is likely to go up in the future. Evidence shows that the number of people encroaching on forests and other natural resources is rising every day. Therefore, it is imperative that the number of endangered species will continue rising. There is little international research on this topic, but as a rule, the destruction of habitats leads to the migration of all species that reside in that region.

Division of the problem into a series

Experts should divide this problem into three categories and handle them separately. These sub-branches are habitats, birds and water. Problems that directly relate to habitats such as the cutting down of both living and dead trees should then get separate solutions. For example, the government should abolish the cutting of trees, whether dead or alive, and give harsh punishments to the offenders.

The authorities should also look at the problems that come with the water in the dams and find solutions to them. For example, they should reduce the level of salinity in the water by adding fresh water in the dams through fresh water tributaries. They should also solve problems that relate to the birds separately. For example, they should take some of the endangered birds and breed them separately in a good environment.

Existing programs

Existing programs that attempt to handle this problem include:

  • Integrated catchment management
  • The National Plan for Water Security
  • Water for the Future
  • Abatement plans

Responsible government authorities

The Australian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management is in charge of the entire problem. This ministry oversees everything that relates to the environment, forestry, agriculture and water. Therefore, this problem entirely falls within its jurisdiction.

Fish Farming in the United States

Introduction

Despite its size, the United States’ marine aquaculture may be currently regarded as the industry with great potential. The country’s long coastline and exclusive economic zone, available technologies, stable economic and legal system, skilled labor, and a substantively large seafood market contribute to the development of fish farming. However, for the United States marine aquaculture, social acceptance, and government regulatory policies are critically important. In the present day, the potential of the country’s fish farming is substantively limited by national, state, local, or tribal policies and opposition by national and local interest groups. Nevertheless, the supporters’ recent efforts and broad strategies may contribute to the advancement of marine aquaculture in the future.

Marine Aquaculture’s Significance

In general, fish farming plays a highly essential role in the global food market, while wild capture fisheries have already lost their dominating positions (Gentry et al. 1317). According to Knapp and Rubino, “aquaculture already provides about half of the world’s seafood supply, and future growth in supply will come from aquaculture” (214). Supported by scientific and technological innovations, environmentally responsible aquaculture creates opportunities for the production of nutritious food, create working laces, and maintain healthy oceans.

Despite the fact that the United States may be regarded as a large seafood consumer, its production does not meet domestic demand. According to the National Marine Fisheries Service, from 80% to 90% of consumed seafood is imported in the country (Knapp and Rubino 214). Although the United States may increase its own supply from wild capture fisheries by ending overfishing, it will not be able to provide an appropriate amount of seafood for the domestic market (Lester et al. 7162). In addition, the dietary guidelines of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommend citizens to increase the current consumption of seafood (Knapp and Rubino 214). Consumers, companies that sell fishing equipment abroad, food service companies, and investors that earn on foreign production traditionally benefit from the import of seafood. However, American seafood companies have recently admitted the dependence between prices and seafood consumptions in other regions across the world. That is why the development of local fish farming that may reduce price fluctuations in the domestic market is becoming highly attractive.

Reasons for the Local Aquaculture’s Limitation

Despite the increasing interest in the development of domestic fish farming, there are specific reasons why this development is currently limited:

Marine aquaculture in the United States is relatively diverse, small, and unproven

A small size creates substantial economic challenges for the aquaculture industry in the United States. Despite its origin several decades ago, this industry is still economically disaggregated in comparison with commercial fishing, tourism, shipping, recreation, and real estate. In addition, due to its unstable position, marine aquaculture should consider the opposing interests of other industries.

Marine waters are defined as public resources

While the concept of private land ownership is generally accepted in American culture and law, marine waters are predominantly public resources. The tradition of public possession of wild organisms imposes certain extra regulatory and political responsibilities on commercial aquaculture. For other resources, leasing mechanisms are comparatively well-established, however, fish farming faces social, philosophical, and institutional resistance to growing aquatic species in public waters.

Citizens perceive an insignificant positive impact of fish farming and substantial negative effects

There are several groups of Americans for whom the impact of marine aquaculture will be negative. For instance, coastal residents are apprehensive about the limitation of access to the waterfront, reduction of real estate values, and changes in favorite sea views (Knapp and Rubino 216). Commercial fishermen want to avoid economic competition as well, and ordinary people frequently admit that marine aquaculture may harm marine ecosystems, lead to pollution, and increase pressure on international wild fish stocks.

Marine aquaculture in the United States faces substantial social opposition

As has been previously mentioned, a substantive number of Americans believe that the development of the fish farming industry may have a negative impact on the environment. However, this public opinion, politicians, regulators, and press are considerably influenced by private foundations that invest substantive effort and funding to advocate delaying, banning, regulating, or restricting marine aquaculture in the United States (Knapp and Rubino 217).

The government system for leasing and regulations decelerates aquaculture’s development

In general, the political challenges of the aquaculture industry in the United States are determined by permit or leasing regulations and policies of various agencies as local, state, and federal levels. As “regulatory authority for aquaculture in marine waters is divided among multiple branches of government at multiple levels of jurisdiction,” it takes much time to secure leases and regulatory approval critical for business development (Knapp and Rubino 217).

Strategies for the Development of Fish Farming in the United States

First of all, the aquaculture industry should address misconceptions and fix actual environmental problems as social acceptability connected with ecological concerns plays a highly significant role in its development. Moreover, marine aquaculture should demonstrate its social benefits that will overweight potential negative effects. Aquaculture’s critical local and national benefits may include public health and employment creation. In order to overcome substantive political challenges, the aquaculture industry may build a partnership with committed supporters that will include activists, elected officials, seafood farmers, chefs, journalists, and investors. In addition, marine aquaculture should argue more effectively with opponents and make attempts to reform governance that currently limits the industry’s potential.

Conclusion

Fish farming in the United States may be characterized by the potential that is currently limited by national, state, local, or tribal policies and opposition by national and local interest groups. However, the aquaculture community is fully aware of the industry’s political and social challenges. In the present day, it applies broad strategies to reshape the political paradigm and public opinion for the development of the local fish cultivation.

References

Gentry, Rebecca R., et al. “Mapping the global potential for marine aquaculture.” Nature Ecology & Evolution, vol. 1, 2017, pp. 1317–1324.

Knapp, Gunnar, and Michael C. Rubino. “The political economics of marine aquaculture in the United States.” Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, vol. 24, no. 3, 2016, pp. 213-229.

Lester, Sarah E., et al. “Opinion: Offshore aquaculture in the United States: Untapped potential in need of smart policy.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115, no. 28, 2018, pp. 7162-7165.

Why the Best Soil in the Province of BC Is Not Used for Farming

Warehouses and airports are giving a higher economic value as compared to farming in the case the opportunity cost is considered. Opportunity is a summation of the monetary value of the next available best alternative that one foregoes during the making of a decision. The monetary value of farming must be lower than the gains from warehouses and airports. The farm products’ total price minus the costs incurred to the point of sale which equals to the net profit is compared to the monetary gains from warehouses and airports whereby the warehouses could be rented o ceased and the airport authorities pay for the land in large amounts. This is why the residents use the land for warehouses and airports but not farming because they can use the revenue/profits from warehouses and airports to buy farm produce for a use other than do the farming themselves (Mankiw, 1998. Pp.56). The issue of comparative advantage also comes into play because both the farming and warehouses/airports generate income/profit but that of warehouses/airports is larger than that for farming. The opportunity cost of airport/warehouses is the amount that they could have gained from farming but they derived themselves. This advantage. The opportunity cost for farming is, therefore, lower than the opportunity cost for the warehouses/airports.

The cost of parking is the total revenue that could have been gained from subletting the parking space to a third party. In this case, you are denying yourself some revenue (if you did sublet). This revenue that you are denying yourself is the actual cost of the parking space. The opportunity cost is expressed in relative price and is the price revenue of one choice /alternative in comparison to the price/revenue of another.

The cost of parking is, therefore, the foregone expected revenue from the parking out letting. In this case, it doesn’t make sense to sublet the parking space provided by the company and then you pay someone else for parking in case you have to get a vehicle. But if you can get parking at cheaper rates then you would better sublet the parking provided by your company because they relive price/revenue advantage would be higher. If you did not have a vehicle then it would have been very economically necessary for you to sublet the parking instead of it being idle. This will enable you to gain from the parking space which has been provided by the company out of your position in the company. In this case, the opportunity cost will be zero because you don’t have another choice. Economically this space should not let free because if you not using it this can be translated into some monetary value which will be an incremental sum to your salary.

Scarcity of resources/monetary value effects deficits brings about tradeoffs, cases where you need to compare between using the parking space and subletting it. In this case, you must give up the revenue from subletting in case you decide to use the space yourself. Your decision has involved two choices and opportunity cost must b considered. This is not like in accounting where forgone opportunities, i.e. collecting revenue by subletting the parking may not be considered. Opportunity cost is normally represented in monetary values and is the assumed expected benefits/cost. In microeconomics, the cost benefits analysis is very important for any activity/operation. Economic institutions/entities go for the alternatives whereby the total revenue is higher than the total cost. You can’t consume what you have produced/you can’t have your cake and eat it too if you and in need of your output and other producers in the market are giving a lower quotation of the same. So you would better buy other similar products than use what you have.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too, is true because we are looking at the comparative price/advantage: if the revenue of the output you have are higher than the cost of acquiring other similar product/substitutes than you would see it out because by consuming it as part of your input will be denying yourself some revenues and this will be an opportunity cost to you (Kendrick, 2003.pp. 45-54).

  1. Rent as restaurant for $1200/MO. The next best choice is selling as a house warehouse for $1400/MD the extra cost incurred in this case is $1400-$1200=$200. $200 is the opportunity cost for your decision and is what you are denying yourself by taking hits action.
  2. Sell as a warehouse for $1400/MO. The next choice would be to sell as a warehouse for $1400/MO. The cost for your action would be $1400-$1400=0. So you have got no opportunity cost for this because this is the best option for your building and it is advisable to go for this.
  3. Rent as a bookstore for $700/MO. The next best choice is selling as a warehouse for $1400 so the cost for your action is $1400-$700=$700. This is what you deny yourself if you don’t sell s warehouse for $1400/MO but instead rent as a bookstore for $700/Mo comparative/relative advantage should guide you.

Reference

Kendrick, D.A. (2003). Models for Analyzing Comparative Advantage 45-54. Springer Publishers.

Mankiw N.G. (1998). Principles of Microeconomics 60-63. Dyden Press. ISBN 00300245028.

Prices at Farmers Markets vs. Grocery Stores

Farmers’ marketplaces or food markets are retail sites where landowners trade their commodities directly to customers. Merchants’ industries can be hosted indoors or outside and typically contain tents, benches, or pavilions where growers sell products, livestock, vegetation, and cooked foods and drinks (The Coast, 2015). On the other hand, a grocery store or grocery shop is a store that mainly sells a broad selection of food goods, which may be fresh or packed (View, 2017). Larger grocery shops, such as supermarkets and hypermarkets, often contain many non-food items, such as apparel and home goods. Small grocery shops specializing in fruit and vegetables are referred to as greengrocers. The following, as discussed herein, are the advantages and disadvantages of traders and grocery marketplaces.

Agricultural markets may be more cost-effective, especially for in-season fruit. Thus, this demonstrates that purchasing seasonally and territorially can save individuals money if they plan to buy merchandise during summer months when stockpiles are abundantly available and order directly from the gardener. Buying in a local growers’ sector benefits the domestic economy, ensures the viability of small farms, and broadens people’s nutritional options (View, 2017). According to View’s (2017) survey, supermarket shops carry 69% fewer varieties of food than farmers’ markets. All goods offered at NFMA industries are 100% made in the United States, guaranteeing that individuals’ money goes directly to the farmer on the other side of the vegetable showcase (View, 2017). Farmers’ markets often include heritage varieties and specialized food that never reach supermarket shelves. Purchasing fresh, seasonal vegetables at a farmer’s market is generally equivalent to grocery store costs, if not cheaper.

Conversely, grocery shopping is more convenient for working people since they value good food and have families and occupations that require them to meet other obligations on time. Numerous things are often unavailable at farmer’s markets, including toilet paper, laundry detergent, and chocolate chips (The Coast, 2015). Some families operate on low budgets, and the allure of seasonal food makes overspending easy (Farmers market vs. supermarket, 2014). When evaluating the items ordered at grocery retail locations to those acquired at local traders’ marketplaces, it is revealed that the commodities purchased at hypermarkets are more reliable and outstanding in form and structure.

Grocery stores are also more efficient and faster because the products are well organized and clearly labeled locations. Thus, if one is genuinely ready to purchase items, it is possible to complete shopping quickly, in under an hour (Farmer’s market vs. supermarket, 2014). Hence, time is saved as compared to purchasing from a farmer’s market, where it may take a long time to discover what people need since the items are not adequately organized (Farmer’s market vs. supermarket, 2014). Moreover, traders’ marketplace is often congested and requires someone to spend additional time searching for specific commodities.

The expenses of supporting local farmers at the market are equivalent to if not exceed those of purchasing comparable produce at the grocery store. On the other hand, farmers’ markets may be more affordable, particularly for people during peak seasons. Purchasing fresh, seasonal produce at a traders’ market is often equivalent to grocery store rates, making it more convenient. Additionally, buying at farmers’ marketplace in an individual’s neighborhood helps the local economy, supporting smaller farms. I prefer purchasing items at a farmer’s market due to the nutritional value of the products sold there. Since the food merchandise is directly from landowners’ farms, they do not undergo processing like those sold in grocery sectors, hence healthier.

Works Cited

Farmers market vs. supermarket. (2014). Press Herald. Web.

The Coast. (2015). Farmers’ market vs supermarket. [Video]. YouTube. Web.

View. (2017). Farmers markets vs. grocery stores: A price comparison. Balanced You. Web.

Linking Small-Scale Farmers to Input-Output Markets

Introduction

Linking small scale farmers towards output and input markets is a very special undertaking since it is an activity that is geared towards global anthropocentricity. This is because linking small scale farmers is very important in eliminating food dearth the fact that it ensures a steady food supply. In Africa, the situation is much needed since the mainstay of the African economy is agriculture, with most farmers being small scale farmers. However, this should not be misconstrued as to mean that the linking of small scale farmers to input and output markets is solely an African problem. On the contrary, it is factual that Africa and most of the Least Developed Countries (LDCS), given the fact that these have not undergone industrialization, mainly produce agricultural and farming products not only for consumption but also for exporting into the developing countries. These developing countries on the other end, having undergone industrialization, are able to process these raw materials into finished consumable products. In a nutshell, this means that linking farmers to input and output markets is a matter of global concern since it ensures both a steady source of food in the LDCs and raw materials in the developed countries (Kataki, 2003 pp. 75).

Output markets refer to the markets that are used by the farmers or businessmen to market their products while the input market is used by the same group to access products that are to be used for the production of farming or agricultural products.

The importance of linking the small scale farmers

After the liberalisation reforms which took place in Africa in the late 1980s, and in the early 1990s need to be revisited due to the fact that the reforms shortchanged Africa and its small scale farmers. For instance, African countries were told to liberalise their markets so that there could be the creation of a free market, commonly known as the global market. Given the fact that most African countries have not undergone industrialization, the commodities being produced were mainly raw materials that proceeded to Europe for manufacturing. After the manufacturing process, according to the 1991 Brandt Report (Kayizzi- Mugerwa, 1999 pp. 78), these LDCs were then subjected to exploitation by the developed countries who could now set up higher prices for the already manufactured goods.

Again, according to the same research report, the small scale farmers in Africa ought to be helped stay in the output market by being given the chance to protect their products. This is to take the shape of the African governments being allowed to exact tariffs in world trade. Although it is a World Trade Organisation policy that the imposition of tariffs was to be abandoned to support free trade, yet this methodology does not auger well with the African economies that earn from the exaction of tariffs. In addition to this, even developed countries like America announced at the turn of the 21st century, that she was would revert to imposing 30% of tariffs in the foreign trade of her goods to protect her industrial sector and small scale agriculturalists (Hout, 2007 pp. 133). This only breeds unequal ground in the international trading competition of agricultural products and sectors.

The issue is made more complex by the fact that governments in Africa were expected in the WTO TRIPS meetings and DOHA ministers to drop the art of issuing subsidies and local assistance to the small scale farmers. Although this is one of the underpinnings of international trade, yet small scale farmers in Africa are so poor that they cannot on their own manage to access fertilizers, hybrid seeds and pesticides (Djik, 1995 pp. 130). On the other hand, the farmers they are competing with within the foreign market sector who hail from the developed economies have huge capital and vast technical knowledge in the field of agriculture, biotechnology and research. On top of these, some of the farmers in the developed world are offered state support.

These forms of imbalances obfuscate the path of industrialization for the African countries due to the fact that the same prospects ensure unequal aspects in the quality of goods produced, in that the developed countries produce goods that are of superior quality, compared to the ones produced in the LDCs. This imbalance translates deeply into inequality in the international market due to the fact that the developed countries agricultural products’ sell easily and much faster, compared to the African and the LDCS. The same has led to the plummeting of the agricultural growth in Africa (Hase and Vink, 2003 pp. 66). Therefore, the actualisation of the linking of small scale farmers to the input and output market has almost a one to one correlation with the prospects and the speed of industrialization.

Again, the concept of linking the small scale farmer to the input and output market ensures that the protracted chain of distribution that exists between the small scale farmer as the producer, and the consumer is cut short. This is because the direct accessibility of the market by the farmer allows one interaction between the farmer and the consumer in the market, and hence cutting off the role of the middle men. This usher in more affordability of the products to the consumer (Mitchel, 1995 pp. 79).

Still, on the local level, accessibility to the market by the small scale farmer translates to the provision of more fresh products and commodities, especially when the governments repair the infrastructure and thereby, allowing free and faster transportation. This still trickles down to lower prices and low wastage, to which farm produce are always susceptible.

The linkage services are aimed at equipping the small scale farmers mainly entail the dissemination of the marketing information to the farmers. This is a step that is normally taken by the African governments that first take the pain to solicit the information about the world, regional and local market, before repackaging it and then disseminating it to the small scaler farmer.

Apart from these types of information on marketing, these governments seek to link the indigenous small scale farmers by initiating linkage systems for the farmers, of which an example is the Marketing Information and Linkages System, MILS (Molden, 3007 pp. 192). In the same spectrum, these institutions seek to through these services, encourage the small scale farmers to come up with better products, and also to access better markets.

In Africa, this feat is achieved through the setting up of stratified channels of the organisation. The first stratum is the Rural Based Marketing Information Points, MIPS. This group seeks to work through the local administrative officers such as the chiefs, and the assistant chiefs, the counsellors and the headmen. This is because most rural areas in Africa have no access to information services such as adequate telephones network coverage, and strong television network services (Diao,2007 pp. 90). Days are always distinguished for public gatherings to facilitate the dissemination of the information.

At the district level, most African countries have the Marketing Institution Centres, the MICS. These MICS are often open market centres and exhibition halls that are always made for the beneficence of the farmers, in that farmers are allowed to not only sell their farm produce here but are also provided with information on effective farming methods and international marketing trends. In most cases, there are also days designated for particular districts to partake of these agricultural shows. At the heart of the capitals and other cities, this farming and marketing information is disseminated in myriad ways. Some of these ways include the use of the mobile phone Short Messaging Services, the Interactive Voice Response, the IVR Response, which are always designed in a way that ensures an instantaneous and simple way of interacting with the telephone operator. The developing countries also use the IBDBS, the Internet-Based Data Based Systems which avails information to the small scale farmer at the click of the mouse. In addition to this, the most commonly adopted method by the African governments in the urban areas is the mass media (Besley and Cord, 2006 pp. 78). Often, there are always television and radio programmes that are aimed at inculcating farming techniques and matters that touch on making choices that touch on the marketability of the farming products into the small scale farmers.

Apart from the above techniques, governments in Africa ensure the accessibility of the small scale farmers to the market by repairing and maintaining the infrastructure, so as to facilitate the rapid exchange of farming products. The African governments may also take to reorganizing the markets that are poorly structured and inefficient. To this end, virtually all governments have clear market policies that define the authority in charge of the markets and how the markets should be run ( this is as far as the local markets are concerned). Marketing boards and packaging boards are also hugely controlled by the governments in Africa for close monitoring. For instance, most African economies have never privatised the coffee boards and the tea boards even when given the fact that most of these coffee producers are small scale farmers. Instead, most African governments facilitate and regulate packaging, loading and processing through government parastatals, the coffee boards. According to research (Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development, 2001, pp. 210), 98% of coffee and tea farming are still in the hands of the governments which have still never imagined or debated the prospects of privatising this sector.

The African governments also ensure the accessibility to the market by the small scale farmers by educating and advising the farmers on the type of commodities that the farmers should seek to produce in order to fine-tune their production with the market trends. In addition to the above techniques, the governments in Africa have mostly taken to not only advising the small scale farmers on the type of technology to apply but through the ministry of agriculture, in liaison with the ministry of science and technology, most farmers are also being equipped by the same, with information touching on how to choose the most appropriate technology. To bring in more effectiveness, the ministries in charge of agriculture under the aegis of the government also issue advisory services to the small scale farmers on the type of crops or agricultural products to produce, when to venture into the undertaking and the standard that should be set in pricing.

Ideologies and theories that seek to explain competitiveness

There are diverse and sundry ideologies that seek to explain and set normalcy to the competition in the agricultural sector. One of the theories is the agricultural Regional Restructuring Theory. This theory posits that the best way to get out of the inconsistencies between the cores and the periphery is to restructure the rural and the urban development so that both of these are at par. This theory continues that once the nations and the territorial divisions of a nation are at par, then there will have been the eradication of the inequality in agricultural and trade exchange and competition, both at the local and the international level.

However, other groups in the West, for instance, use the Adam Smith Report Institution Report (1990), to maintain that fair trade is the only panacea to both agricultural and financial woes that bedevil both national and international economies (World Bank, 2005 pp. 99). This theory maintains that the abolition of tariffs and the extirpation of local state support and subsidies are bound to usher in the equal exchange of capital in a transborder manner.

Closely related to this is the Trickle Down Theory which maintains that free trade or fair trade is also the best way out of the agricultural competition and the inequality quagmire. However, unlike the Adam Smith Report Institution’s recommendations, this theory tries to be sincere by divulging further that accruals are bound to be experienced by the developed countries first due to their technological advancement, and then that these gains will further trickle down to Africa and the rest of the LDCs (Molina and Fuwa, 2007 pp. 32).

Conversely, the Oxfam (2004) and the Union of Christan Churches see the concept and the actualisation of free trade or the international trade as an artifice that is meant to disable the small scale farmers and all the farmers in Africa and in the LDCS (Ozirio de Almeida, 2001 pp. 109). This group maintains that the poor are going to be faced out of the competition as cheap and highly subsidised US produce inundates their markets.

The last theory is the Green Revolution which sees attempts to stamp out desertification and the actualisation of the re-afforestation movements as the panacea to the shortage of agricultural and farm products, due to the fact that the earth is covered with deserts and semi-arid areas which take up the areas that could have been used to make food (Palo and Mary, 2001 pp. 102).

Recommendations

The recommendation that should be followed is that, if the concept of world trade or fair trade is to be still carried on, then the international trade deals should be refined to incorporate the labour standards of the UN’s International Labour Organisation so that cases of discriminatory employment practices and child labour are totally proscribed.

In addition to this, Africa and the LDCs are still economically weak and therefore. should be left to rely on tariffs. The same governments should still be left to offer incentives and subsidies to the local farmers so as to ward off cases of food insecurity ( World Bank, 2007 pp. 155). In almost the same wavelength, the Patent Rules should be left to enable African farmers and the rest of the LDCS to carry out their biotechnological improvements without having to seek permission from the multinational agricultural and biotechnological corporations.

References

Besley, T. and L., Cord, Promises: Pro poor growth, 2nd Ed., World Bank Publications, 2006.

Diao, X et al, Agriculture and development: Implications in sub Saharan Africa, 3rd Ed., IFDRI, China, 2007.

D’Haese, M and N.,Vink, Domestic institutional innovation and poor agricultural growth, 1st Ed., Garrant, Bahamas, 2003.

Dijk, G., Impacts of endogenous rural development, 2nd Ed., Uit Van Gorum Press, 1995.

Hout, W, Poverty reduction and the EU Development policy, 6th Ed., Ashgate Publishing Ltd., California, 2007.

Kayizzi- Mugerwa, S., Policy, institution and future of the African economy, 2nd Ed., Routledge, New York, 1999.

Kataki, P., Agriculture and food systems, 4th Ed., Haworth Press, Michigan, 2003.

Mitchell, M,et al, Agricultural policies for developing countries, 4th Ed., Ithaza Press, Colorado,1995.

Molden, D, Water for agriculture and life,5th Ed., Earthscan, New York, 2007

Molina, A. and Fuwa, N, The reasserting of the rural development agenda, 1st Ed., Institute of South East Asia, 2007.

Organisation of Economic Co operation and Development, A review of agricultural policies, 3rd Ed., Organisation of Economic Co operation Development, Massachusetts, 2001.

Ozirio de Almeida, L, The colonisation of farming, 3rd Ed., University of Texas Press, Texas, 2005.

Palo, M. and G., Mary, Policies of world forests, 2nd Ed., Springer, New York, 2001.

World Bank, Investment source book of agriculture: agriculture and rural development, 3rd Ed., World Bank Publications, 2005.

World Bank, World Bank Development Report on agriculture, 4th Ed., World Bank Publications, 2007.

Competitive Market: Farm Income and Costs

Connecting the farms in the US to the concept of the perfectly competitive market, the definition and the characteristics of such a market should be outlined. The main characteristics of a perfectly competitive market include the availability of many buyers and sellers, identical products, and the absence of barriers to entering the market. These main characteristics can be reflected in US farms, where there are large numbers of buyers and sellers in this industry, and accordingly, there is a change in market entrants annually, e.g. “[t]he estimated the number of farms in the U.S. in 2007 were revised from 2,088,790 to 2,204,950” (Economic Research Service). Additionally, it can be seen that the output of each farm in the US, is very small relative to the overall production numbers, and thus, each participant in the market being insignificant to the market in general, is an indicator of the perfectly competitive market. In terms of income and costs, a perfectly competitive market implies a long-run competitive equilibrium, where the entry and the exit of firms, results in zero economic profit in the long run. In that regard, the farming industry in the United States can be described as an increasing cost industry, where the average long-run costs increase with the expansion of the industry. Looking at the gross farm income, production expenses, and net farm income, it can be seen that the expansion of the industry with new entrants is correlated with the rise in production expenses. Accordingly, new entries to the market mean that the supply curve is shifted, resulting in lowering the market price. However, the increase in the production costs and the commodity prices might have led to that the prices are determined by the market, rather than market participants.

Building a Sky Garden: Vertical Farming System Business Plan

Sky gardening or vertical farming is a new agricultural scenario enabling farmers to farm deeper instead of spreading out over more land. It is sometimes referred to as urban gardening, since it favors urban environment with little space on the ground but a lot of it vertically. It helps farmers to appreciate the benefits of valuing more the depth of land fertility than the size of land holdings. It therefore concentrates on more intensive than extensive farming.

A great benefit of vertical farming is the maximum utilization of the little land available in urban areas. Many high raises are developed where many levels of different crops are grown. The plan highlighted here focuses on farming of strawberry and tomato. An additional important aspect of this type of farming in that it is also essential for teaching purposes, whether for healthy cooking, amongst other aspects. Various aspects of the plan have been discussed as follows:

Problem and Opportunity

There has been a major challenge around the globe with continually shrinking amount of arable land as compared to the rising global population and with it the demand for food. This may sound a warning of a serious problem in the coming days if some concrete measures are not undertaken. In addition, the modern agriculture, with green revolution has resulted to increasing demand for water. There is also a lot of pollution going hand in hand with current agricultural practices especially on its reliability on irrigation. It calls for review on the manner we would continue growing food in the future.

A great opportunity of handling the rising dangers presents itself with growing food vertically in enclosed domes that are self-contained. These have a great potential to absorb carbon dioxide and generate valuable carbon credits. It would go a long way into producing highly nutritional and mineral-rich vegetables and fruits aeroponically. It is estimated about twenty times potential increase in produce can be realized from an acre of land using this method as compared with traditional methods (Blackman, 2012). The greenhouse facilities can be located anywhere since there is no need of soil. Therefore, the organization focuses on producing healthier, tastier, and more disease resistant vegetables and fruits, as well as teaching people how to cook in a healthier manner.

Vision and Mission Statement

Mission: Attain a society that appreciates advanced sky farming to promote self-grown organic vegetable and fruits, as a major achievement in living healthier at cost-effective terms while creating opportunities for the urbane mostly youth population.

Vision: We sensitize the populace on making more use of healthier, fresher and more nutritious food, and learn a lot on healthier cooking.

Products Description and Features

There are several features that differentiate our products from competitors. These include the fact that the products are grown in-house, and near the customers. This is an advantage in that it is supplied to them while still fresh. In addition, the social factor of participating in development of the society is enhanced through engaging the youths in urban centers. This is unlike the major competitors who deal with whole food that may need a lot of transportation and processing.

The product range dealt with includes tomato and strawberry. An important aspect emphasized is retaining the great quality of tomatoes and strawberries, and how to make healthier use of the products.

Contact Information

Located in the South Bronx, we choose to get established in the neighborhood of Mott Haven, identified as an area suffering from low levels of sensitization and shortage of supermarkets.

Marketing and Competitive Analysis

The whole foods are the major competitors in the market. Our products remain on the top of the competition considering that they are in-house, and near the customers, and thus supplied to them while still fresh. In addition, development of the society is enhanced through engaging the youths in urban centers. This is unlike the major competitors who deal with whole food, more expensive and not quite fresh.

Customer Benefits

There is a great reduction of the need to transport produce for longer distances since the greenhouse facilities can be located in the urban areas near majority of consumers. Therefore, consumers benefit a lot with reduced prices.

Another advantage includes reduced use of petroleum products in the production process. These include fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, amongst others. In organic gardening, it is possible to grow vegetables and fruits that are healthier, more disease resistant, and tastier.

In vertical farming, the farmer brings together technology, economy, environment and society. The mush-needed jobs in urban areas are provided, while also creating a sustainable environment in urban areas through use of byproducts that would rather have been pollutants. The technique also contributes a lot in reducing carbon footprints and pollution of drinking water by pesticides and other chemicals.

The facility would also be of great use as a learning center to teach people on healthy cooking. It involves meal preparation, while it could also be used for students of nutrition, science, and farming in learning institutions.

Conclusion

The effort of this project has been dedicated to use the advanced sky gardening technology to promote health by providing a local supply of organic high quality foods. This is a favorable urbane method of farming considering the lesser space required, and the opportunities provided to youths through employment.

References

Blackman, Matt. “Vertical Aeroponic Farming: Healthy Food Near You.” Planet Forward, 2012. Print. Web.