AEROPONICS
A Sustainable Alternative to Traditional Agriculture
Prepared by: Erin Sharkey, Georgia Ernst, Matthew Brenneman
Abstract:
All people should have affordable access to proper nutrition. The Aeroponics team has worked to design a sustainable
growing system that allows users to grow nutrient-rich vegetables year-round in arid climates. The project is intended to use
space, water, and materials efficiently to reduce waste and
cost. Although the final product is inspired by existing aeroponic technology, it uses elements of other aquaponic technologies in order to meet nutrient needs of the plants. In addition
to the physical system, the Aeroponics Project explores the
process of growing plants in nontraditional mediums with nontraditional nutrient sources.
Conceptual Design:
Our Client:
Tower Body:


Well casing blocks UV light and is both waterproof and durable
For a tower that is one meter tall, the cost of the well casing is about
$17, in U.S. Dollars
Cup Design:


Thermoforming or injection molding is most common in the U.S.
We are currently working with Open Door Development (O.D.D.) in Mahadaga, Burkina Faso. Our client contact, Matt Walsh, has supplied us with
information and resources to create the best possible system for families in
Burkina. Our goal is to implement the first iteration of our Aeroponic System in January 2017. We will train volunteers to build and use the system at
O.D.D. so that they can build and sell the systems at-cost.
Drain pipe (or other thin walled PVC) split lengthwise is a cheaper
and easily manufactured alternative
Troughs trap water, similar to
aquaponic or hydroponic designs

Growing Medium:
Project Goals:
Rockwool is manufactured
and used in the U.S. but not
available in our client’s location


Total system cost under $50

Efficient water use

Utilizes materials readily available in Burkina Faso

Allows growth of vegetables such as kale and squash

Provides year round growth

Conserves space for use in urban areas
Goat’s wool and cotton are
feasible alternatives, however
goat’s wool is hydrophobic and
cotton creates mildew/mold

Does not require electricity
Reservoir:

Eliminates need for soil

Must hold at least 5 gallons
of water


Must be easily removable, for watering purposes
Nutrient Source:
Prototype:

First prototype from Spring 2016,
Compost and manure tea may or may not be sufficient
Bleaching occurred in greenhouse tests; suggests iron
deficiency
Nutrient Testing:
Concentration gradient testing was inconclusive due to the
hydrophobic properties of the goat’s
wool.
Plants in greenhouse showed significant bleaching,
indicating a nutrient deficiency.

Supplements or additional nutrients might need to be
imported

Conclusions:

Acknowledgements:
We want to thank our faculty adviser, Prof. Michelle Lockwood, and our expert adviser, Nick Noss, for all of the time
they put into working with us. Also, we are grateful for the support of our partners at Open Door Development, American Foundation for Children with AIDS and Aero Development Corp.


Prototype One leaves very little room for plant growth, but if holes were
arranged in a spiral around the tower, this could be improved.
Empirical nutrient testing would help to determine whether the plants are
lacking iron or something else entirely.
Thermoforming cups would be difficult in Burkina, but in the long-term,
could be an option.