Could this be the future of farming? Inside Europe’s biggest vertical farm

Published

11 months ago

January 5, 2025

admin

Outside it is the bleak midwinter. We are smack bang in the middle of some of the country’s best agricultural land.

But inside the cavernous warehouse where we’ve come, you wouldn’t have a clue about any of that: there is no daylight; it feels like it could be any time of the day, any season of the year.

We are at Fischer Farms – Europe’s biggest vertical farm.

The whole point of a vertical farm is to create an environment where you can grow plants, stacked on top of each other (hence: vertical) in high density. The idea being that you can grow your salads or peas somewhere close to the cities where they’re consumed rather than hundreds of miles away. Location is not supposed to matter.

So the fact that this particular one is to be found amid the fields a few miles outside Norwich is somewhat irrelevant. It could be anywhere. Indeed, unlike most farms, which are sometimes named after the family that owns them or a local landmark, this one is simply called “Farm 2”. “Farm 1” is to be found in Staffordshire, in case you were wondering.

Farm boss’s dizzying ambition

These futuristic farm units are the brainwave of Tristan Fischer, a serial entrepreneur who has spent much of his career working on renewable energy in its various guises. His ambition now is dizzying: to be able to grow not just basil and chives in a farm like this but to grow other, trickier and more competitive crops too – from strawberries to wheat and rice.

Only then, he says, can vertical farming stand a chance of truly changing the world.

The idea behind vertical farming itself is more than a century old. Back in 1915, American geologist Gilbert Ellis Bailey described how it could be done in theory. In theory, one should be able to grow plants hydroponically – in other words with a mineral substrate instead of soil – in a controlled environment and thereby increase the yield dramatically.

In one sense this is what’s already being done in greenhouses across much of Northern Europe and the US, where tomatoes and other warm-weather-loving vegetables are grown in temperature-controlled environments. However, while most of these greenhouses still depend on natural light (if sometimes bolstered by electric bulbs) the point behind vertical farming was that by controlling the amount of light, one could grow more or less everything, any time of the year. And by stacking the crops together one could yield even more crops in each acre of land one was using.

Look at a long-term chart of agricultural yields in this country and you start to see why this might matter. The quantity of crops we grow in each acre of land jumped dramatically in the second half of the 20th century – a consequence in part of liberal use of artificial fertiliser and in part of new technologies and systems. But that productivity rate started to tail off towards the end of the century.

‘Changing the equation’

Vertical farming promises, if it can make the numbers add up, to change the equation, dramatically increasing agricultural productivity in the coming decades. The question is whether the technology is there yet.

And when it comes to the technology, one thing has certainly changed. Those early vertical farms (the first attempts actually date back to the 1950s) all had a big problem: the bulbs. Incandescent bulbs were both too hot and too energy intensive to work in these environments. But the latest generation of LED bulbs are both cool and cheap, and it’s these bulbs you need (in vast numbers) if you’re going to make vertical farming work.

Here at Farm 2, you encounter row after row of trays, each stacked on top of each other, each carrying increasingly leafy basil plants. They sit under thousands of little LED bulbs which are tuned to precisely the right spectral frequency to encourage the plant to grow rapidly.

Mr Fischer says: “We’re on this downward cost curve on LEDs. And then when you think about other main inputs, energy – renewable energy – is constantly coming down as well.

“So you think about all the big drivers of vertical farming, they’re going down, whereas compared to full-grown crops, everything’s going up – the fertilisers, rents, water is becoming more expensive too.”

This farm – which currently sells to restaurant chains rather than direct to consumers – is now cost-competitive with the basil shipped (or more often flown) in from the Mediterranean and North Africa. The carbon footprint is considerably lower too.

“And our long-term goal is that we can get a lot cheaper,” says Mr Fischer. “If you look at Farm 1, we spent about £2.5m on lights in 2018. Fast forward to Farm 2; it’s seven and a half times bigger and in those three years the lights were effectively half the price. We’re also probably using 60 to 70 percent less power.”

It might seem odd to hear a farmer talk so much about energy and comparatively less about the kinds of things one associates with farmers – the soil or tractors or the weather – but vertical farming is in large part an energy business. If energy prices are low enough, it makes the crops here considerably cheaper.

But here in the UK, with power costs higher than anywhere else in the developed world, the prospects for this business are more challenged than elsewhere. Still, Mr Fischer’s objective is to prove the business case here before building bigger units elsewhere, in countries with much cheaper power.

In much the same way as Dutch growers came to dominate those greenhouses, he thinks the UK has a chance of dominating this new agricultural sector.

Business

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry’s row lingers

Published

23 hours ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry's row lingers

Shares in The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) have fallen slightly on debut after the completion of its spin-off from Unilever amid a continuing civil war with one of its best-known brands.

Shares in the Netherlands-based company are trading for the first time following the demerger.

It creates the world’s biggest ice cream company, controlling around one fifth of the global market.

Primary Magnum shares, in Amsterdam, opened at €12.20 – down on the €12.80 reference price set by the EuroNext exchange, though they later settled just above that level, implying a market value of €7.9bn – just below £7bn.

The company is also listed in London and New York.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

Unilever stock was down 3.1% on the FTSE 100 in the wake of the spin off.

The demerger allows London-headquartered Unilever to concentrate on its wider stable of consumer brands, including Marmite, Dove soap and Domestos.

The decision to hive off the ice cream division, made in early 2024, gives a greater focus on a market that is tipped to grow by up to 4% each year until 2029.

But it has been dogged by a long-running spat with the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s, which now falls under the TMICC umbrella and accounts for 14% of group revenue.

Unilever bought the US brand in 2000, but the relationship has been sour since, despite the creation of an independent board at that time aimed at protecting the brand’s social mission.

The most high-profile spat came in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took the decision not to sell ice cream in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories on the grounds that sales would be “inconsistent” with its values.

Unilever responded by selling the business to its licensee in Israel.

A series of rows have followed akin to a tug of war, with Magnum refusing repeated demands by the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s to sell the brand back.

Magnum and Unilever argue its mission has strayed beyond what was acceptable back in 2000, with the brand evolving into one-sided advocacy on polarising topics that risk reputational and business damage.

TMICC is currently trying to remove the chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.

It said last month that Anuradha Mittal “no longer meets the criteria” to serve after internal investigations.

An audit of the separate Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where she is also a trustee, found deficiencies in financial controls and governance. Magnum said the charitable arm risked having funding removed unless the alleged problems were addressed.

The Reuters news agency has since reported that Ms Mittal has no plans to quit her roles, and accused Magnum of attempts to “discredit” her and undermine the authority of the independent board.

Magnum boss Peter ter Kulve said on Monday: “Today is a proud milestone for everyone associated with TMICC. We became the global leader in ice cream as part of the Unilever family. Now, as an independent listed company, we will be more agile, more focused, and more ambitious than ever.”

Commenting on the demerger, Hargreaves Lansdown equity analyst Aarin Chiekrie said: “TMICC is already free cash flow positive, and profitable in its own right. The balance sheet is in decent shape, but dividends are off the cards until 2027 as the group finds its footing as a standalone business.

“That could cause some downward pressure on the share price in the near term, as dividend-focussed investment funds that hold Unilever will be handed TMICC shares, the latter of which they may be forced to sell to abide by their investment mandate.”

Business

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros ‘could be a problem’, Donald Trump says

Published

1 day ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros 'could be a problem', Donald Trump says

Donald Trump has said he will be “involved” in the decision on whether Netflix should be allowed to buy Warner Bros, as the $72bn (£54bn) deal attracts a media industry backlash.

The US president acknowledged in remarks to reporters there “could be a problem”, acknowledging concerns over the streaming giant’s market dominance.

Crucially, he did not say where he stood on the issue.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

It was revealed on Friday that Netflix, already the world’s biggest streaming service by market share, had agreed to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and HBO Max streaming division.

The deal aims to complete late next year after the Discovery element of the business, mainly legacy TV channels showing cartoons, news and sport, has been spun off.

But the deal has attracted cross-party criticism on competition grounds, and there is also opposition in Hollywood.

The Writers Guild of America said: “The world’s largest streaming company swallowing one of its biggest competitors is what antitrust laws were designed to prevent.

“The outcome would eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers.”

Republican Senator, Roger Marshall, said in a statement: “Netflix’s attempt to buy Warner Bros would be the largest media takeover in history – and it raises serious red flags for consumers, creators, movie theaters, and local businesses alike.

“One company should not have full vertical control of the content and the distribution pipeline that delivers it. And combining two of the largest streaming platforms is a textbook horizontal Antitrust problem.

“Prices, choice, and creative freedom are at stake. Regulators need to take a hard look at this deal, and realize how harmful it would be for consumers and Western society.”

Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, were two other bidders in the auction process that preceded the announcement.

The Reuters news agency, citing information from sources, said their bids were rejected in favour of Netflix for different reasons.

Paramount’s was seen as having funding concerns, they said, while Comcast’s was deemed not to offer so many earlier benefits.

Paramount is run by David Ellison, the son of the Oracle tech billionaire Larry Ellison, who is a close ally of Mr Trump.

The president said of the Netflix deal’s path to regulatory clearance: “I’ll be involved in that decision”.

On the likely opposition to the deal. he added: “That’s going to be for some economists to tell. But it is a big market share. There’s no question it could be a problem.”

Business

Young people may lose benefits if they don’t engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Published

1 day ago

December 8, 2025

admin

Young people may lose benefits if they don't engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Young people could lose their right to universal credit if they refuse to engage with help from a new scheme without good reason, the government has warned.

Almost one million will gain from plans to get them off benefits and into the workforce, according to officials.

Latest updates from the Politics Hub

It comes as the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) has risen by more than a quarter since the COVID pandemic, with around 940,000 16 to 24-year-olds considered as NEET as of September this year, said the Office for National Statistics.

That is an increase of 195,000 in the last two years, mainly driven by increasing sickness and disability rates.

The £820m package includes funding to create 350,000 new workplace opportunities, including training and work experience, which will be offered in industries including construction, hospitality and healthcare.

Around 900,000 people on universal credit will be given a “dedicated work support session”.

That will be followed by four weeks of “intensive support” to help them find work in one of up to six “pathways”, which are: work, work experience, apprenticeships, wider training, learning, or a workplace training programme with a guaranteed interview at the end.

However, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has warned that young people could lose some of their benefits if they refuse to engage with the scheme without good reason.

“Doing nothing should not be an option,” he told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“If someone just took that attitude, yes, they would then be subject to, you know, the obligations that are already part of the system.”

“What I want to see is young people in the habit of getting up in the morning, doing the right thing, going to work,” he added.

“That experience of that obligation, but also the sense of pride and purpose that comes with having a job.”

The government says these pathways will be delivered in coordination with employers, while government-backed guaranteed jobs will be provided for up to 55,000 young people from spring 2026, but only in those areas with the highest need.

However, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately, from the Conservatives, said the scheme is “an admission the government has no plan for growth, no plan to create real jobs, and no way of measuring whether any of this money delivers results”.

She told Sky News the proposals are a “classic Labour approach” for tackling youth unemployment.

“What we’ve seen today announced by the government is funding the best part of £1bn on work placements, and government-created jobs for young people. That sounds all very well,” she told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“But the fact is, and that’s the absurdity of it is, just two weeks ago, we had a budget from the chancellor, which is expected to destroy 200,000 jobs.

“So the problem we have here is a government whose policies are destroying jobs, destroying opportunities for young people, now saying they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on creating work placements. It’s just simply the wrong answer.”

Ms Whately also said the government needs to tackle people who are unmotivated to work at all, and agreed with Mr McFadden on taking away the right to universal credit if they refuse opportunities to work.

But she said the “main reason” young people are out of work is because “they’re moving on to sickness benefits”.

Ms Whately also pointed to the government’s diminished attempt to slash benefits earlier in the year, where planned welfare cuts were significantly scaled down after opposition from their own MPs.

The funding will also expand youth hubs to help provide advice on writing CVs or seeking training, and also provide housing and mental health support.

Some £34m from the funding will be used to launch a new “Risk of NEET indicator tool”, aimed at identifying those young people who need support before they leave education and become unemployed.

Monitoring of attendance in further education will be bolstered, and automatic enrolment in further education will also be piloted for young people without a place.