Michael Timm, writing for the Bay View Compass, has an excellent writeup about Sweet Water “Organics,” the Bay View aquaponic farm that has proven to be long on claims of its viability and profitability but short on actual proof of either.
Sweet Water Organics, the Bay View aquaponics farm, is a media darling. But scrutiny of the local startup business, which angles to be a leader in a globally emerging urban agriculture industry, reveals a darker tale.
Last year, six employees departed the company, which wasn’t paying them and which they said wasn’t listening to them about how to make their systems more sustainable. Fish were dying. Greenhouses sat empty. The money, it seemed, had dried up. Then, with the help of Alderman Tony Zielinski, the city tossed Sweet Water and its skeleton crew a quarter-million-dollar life preserver. This year, back from the brink, the company is using that money to reinvent their systems based on the work of a Scottish aquaponics expert. These new outdoor systems, set to debut this month, once again dangle the lure of profitability.
Sweet Water’s critics believe passionately in aquaponics. They believe that good science results in efficient systems. But they remain unconvinced that the soul of their former company’s management has changed for the better. Has the enterprise finally turned a corner toward its goal of commercial viability, or do the missteps of the past portend ill for Sweet Water’s future?
The rest of Timm’s article is worth a read, and you can find our coverage of Sweet Water “Organics” HERE.
The problems shown here are why so many conservative investors resist government led projects. They always fear that, when personal money is not at risk, due diligence always suffers. That certainly seems to be the case with “Sweet Water Organics.” We have seen, however, in the case of the “too big to fail” bailouts, due diligence was not done in the private sector with most derivative investment offerings.
I don’t know why so many people believe in aquaponic foods. It has been impossible to inculcate many important minerals in the food from this process.
Fish need 2.5-3 gallons of water per fish. Fraundorf either didn’t know that (how could he not? google “stocking density”) or he decided to enforce some arbitrary profit projection on nature. For the quantity of fish he had, he would’ve needed a tank nearly the size of a football field and a yard deep. He’d need a hell of a lot of plants, pumps, and filtration to keep that water clean enough for the fish.
There is nothing “organic” or even “natural” about this “Sweet Water” system. It wasn’t designed as a home for fish and plants — it wasn’t designed from the perspective of their needs (the fish and plants), so it was all out of balance. Death and cannibalism set in among the trapped, traumatized creatures — like that other depressing story of the south side reptile “rehabilitator.”
It seems that aquaponics will only work on the “small is beautiful” scale. SWO’s business model is not on board with that. It’s not meant to be a big job creator but a very self-sufficient, low-input system. Unless you can afford to build a big vertical aquarium I don’t see how aquaponics can be scaled in an urban environment where land is expensive, highly taxed, and in short supply. Even if it can be done, it will not be a big profit or job creator.