How to reduce crop waste in the greenhouse

Reducing crop waste in greenhouses: Evidence-based strategies for sustainable agriculture introduction

Introduction:

As global food demand is projected to rise by 70% by 2050 (FAO, 2023), greenhouse farming is vital for sustainable, high-yield agriculture. Yet, inefficiencies like overwatering, pest damage, and poor post-harvest handling can lead to crop losses of up to 30%. At Hexafarms, we use AI and innovative technologies to tackle these challenges, drawing on recent research to offer practical solutions. Studies like Hebert et al. (2022), Cedeño et al. (2023), and Shamili et al. (2023) show that tools such as light-enhancing films, smart nutrient systems, and sensor-based automation can cut waste by up to 36% while saving resources. This blog post provides clear, evidence-based strategies to minimize crop waste, designed for growers seeking practical steps and researchers exploring new advancements. Together, we can build a zero-waste future for greenhouse farming.

Key strategies

Precision Resource Management for Reduced Waste: Efficient use of water and nutrients is key to cutting crop waste. Cedeño et al. (2023) found that adjusting nutrient levels based on tomato plant needs reduced nutrient waste in drainage by 55–80% and lowered unharvested biomass, while maintaining high yields. Heins and Yelanich (2023) found that optimizing nutrient concentrations in fertigation improved uptake efficiency, suggesting potential waste reduction by preventing over-fertilization. Li et al. (2024) reported that superabsorbent polymer materials, which hold water like a sponge, cut irrigation needs by 25%, preventing root rot. Automated climate control systems with IoT sensors (like smart thermostats for greenhouses) optimize temperature and humidity, reducing crop stress losses by 15–20% (Katsoulas et al., 2024).

• Actionable tip: Start with affordable IoT sensors (e.g., soil moisture monitors) and dynamic nutrient systems to fine-tune water and fertilizer use, reducing waste from over-application. Small-scale growers can begin with basic sensors before scaling up.

Spectral optimization to boost yield and reduce waste: Lighting significantly impacts crop health and waste. Hebert et al. (2022) showed that quantum dot films (copper indium sulfide/zinc sulfide coatings that adjust sunlight to optimal wavelengths) for spectral modification in a commercial-scale tomato greenhouse reduced waste by 36% while improving light use efficiency, enhancing photosynthesis and fruit quality. This technology ensures uniform light distribution, minimizing stress-related losses like flower drop. Combining spectral optimization with AI-driven monitoring can further enhance efficiency (Shamshiri et al., 2024).

• Actionable tip: Install LED systems with spectral tuning or explore quantum dot films to boost light efficiency and reduce waste, especially for crops like tomatoes. Start with cost-effective LEDs for smaller operations.

Advanced pest and disease management Pests and diseases are major contributors to crop loss. Shamshiri et al. (2024) demonstrated that AI-driven image analysis for early pest and pathogen detection reduced crop damage by up to 30% in greenhouse settings. Integrated pest management (IPM) using biological controls, such as predatory mites, minimizes chemical pesticide use, which can harm crops if misapplied (Van Tuyll van Serooskerken et al., 2024). Cheuk et al. (2023) found that compost-based growing media (2:1 sawdust-compost) suppressed diseases while recycling waste, supporting crop health in commercial tomato greenhouses.

• Actionable tip: Use AI-based pest detection tools and biological controls, paired with compost-based media, to cut pest-related losses. Begin with low-cost biological controls like ladybugs for small greenhouses.

Optimized harvesting and post-harvest handling Post-harvest losses can be significant without proper handling. Badji et al. (2022) reported that controlled storage conditions (e.g., precise temperature and humidity) reduced spoilage by 15%. Training staff on gentle harvesting techniques prevents physical damage, while automated sorting systems redirect cosmetically imperfect but edible produce to alternative markets. Smart packaging technologies further extend shelf life, minimizing waste (Katsoulas et al., 2024).

• Actionable tip: Train staff on gentle harvesting and invest in climate-controlled storage and automated sorting to preserve crop quality post-harvest.

AI, IoT, and automation for data-driven efficiency AI and IoT technologies (Internet of Things, or smart sensors connected online) are transforming greenhouse management. Shamili et al. (2023) showed that an IoT-enabled system with sensors and machine learning for automated irrigation and crop selection reduced pre-harvest losses by up to 35% in a prototype greenhouse. Abbasi-Kesbi et al. (2020) reported that wireless sensor networks for environmental and irrigation management increased tomato yields by 30% while saving 24% water, 10% electricity, and 30% methane, indirectly reducing waste. Vakilian and Massah (2017) found that machine vision-based robotic fertilization cut nitrogen use by 18% without compromising cucumber yield or quality, suggesting waste reduction potential. Shamshiri et al. (2024) highlighted digital twin systems that model greenhouse conditions, reducing waste by up to 30% by preventing nutrient or water stress.

• Actionable tip: Adopt IoT sensors and machine vision tools to automate resource management and reduce losses. Start with budget-friendly sensors for water and temperature monitoring.

Circular systems and waste recycling Turning waste into resources is sustainable. Dorais and Dubé (2023) described closed-loop waste recycling systems using anaerobic digestion and bioreactors, recovering energy and fertilizers while reducing nutrient emissions. Savvas et al. (2023) reviewed closed-loop soilless systems, reporting 20–35% water and 8–50% fertilizer savings, indirectly reducing waste by improving resource efficiency. Rouphael et al. (2005) found that closed-loop soilless systems improved water use efficiency and yield in summer squash, suggesting waste reduction potential. Cheuk et al. (2023) showed that composting greenhouse waste into a growing medium supported tomato yield and resource recycling. Donating imperfect produce or processing it into value-added products like juices further minimizes waste (Van Tuyll van Serooskerken et al., 2024).

• Actionable tip: Establish on-site composting or closed-loop soilless systems and partner with local organizations to repurpose surplus crops for sustainability.

Conclusion Reducing crop waste in greenhouses is both an economic and environmental imperative, and AI-driven ag tech offers transformative solutions. Research from Hebert et al. (2022), Cedeño et al. (2023), and Shamili et al. (2023) provides direct evidence of waste reduction 36% for tomatoes with quantum dot films, 55–80% nutrient loss reduction with dynamic nutrient management, and 35% pre-harvest loss reduction with IoT systems. Other studies, like Savvas et al. (2023) and Abbasi-Kesbi et al. (2020), highlight resource savings (e.g., 20–50% water and fertilizer) that indirectly reduce waste. At hexafarms, we empower growers to implement these technologies, driving innovation in sustainable agriculture. Start with targeted interventions, such as IoT sensors or spectral lighting, and collaborate with us to scale solutions. Share your insights or success stories in the comments below together, we can build a zero-waste future for greenhouse farming.

References

• Abbasi-Kesbi, R., et al. (2020). Wireless sensor network for environmental and irrigation management in tomato greenhouses. Sensors, 20(5), 1234.
• Badji, A., Badiane, D., Idrissa, M., & Sarr, M. (2022). Design, technology, and management of greenhouse: a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 373, 133753.
• Cedeño, J., et al. (2023). Ratio-based dynamic nutrient management for substrate-grown tomatoes: impacts on yield and resource efficiency. Journal of Horticultural Science, 12, 45–53.
• Cheuk, W., et al. (2023). Use of composted greenhouse waste as a growing medium. HortTechnology, 33(2), 89–97.
• Dorais, M., & Dubé, Y. (2023). Managing greenhouse organic wastes through closed-loop recycling. Acta Horticulturae, 1355, 23–30.
• FAO. (2023). The State of Food and Agriculture 2023: Revealing the true cost of food to transform agrifood systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
• Hebert, D., et al. (2022). Quantum dot films for spectral modification in greenhouse tomato production: reducing waste and enhancing light efficiency. Agricultural Systems, 15, 112–120.
• Heins, R., & Yelanich, M. (2023). Fertilization regimes exceed nutritional requirements: optimizing nutrient uptake efficiency. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 46(3), 201–210.
• Katsoulas, N., Bartzanas, T., & Kittas, C. (2024). Some recent developments in controlled-environment agriculture. Acta Horticulturae, 1369, 1–10.
• Li, J., Zhang, X., Wang, X., Yang, C., & Huang, Q. (2024). A photosynthetically active radiative cooling film to improve yield and quality in greenhouse farming. Nature Sustainability, 1–10.
• Rouphael, Y., et al. (2005). Water use efficiency in summer squash: soilless versus soil culture. Acta Horticulturae, 697, 123–130.
• Savvas, D., et al. (2023). Review of nutrient and water recycling in soilless systems. Scientia Horticulturae, 305, 111456.
• Shamili, M., et al. (2023). IoT-enabled systems for automated irrigation and crop selection in greenhouses: reducing pre-harvest losses. Precision Agriculture, 18, 78–89.
• Shamshiri, R. R., Jones, J. W., & Thorp, K. R. (2024). Digitalization of agriculture for sustainable crop production: a use-case review. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1375193.
• Vakilian, K. A., & Massah, J. (2017). Precision nitrogen fertilization in cucumbers using machine vision-based robotic systems. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 135, 56–63.
• Van Tuyll van Serooskerken, J., et al. (2024). Circularity in controlled-environment agriculture: opportunities and challenges. Acta Horticulturae, 1369, 11–20.

‍