CETvol87


 
 

 

                                                                    DOI: 10.3303/CET2187039 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Paper Received: 22 September 2020; Revised: 6 March 2021; Accepted: 10 April 2021 
Please cite this article as: Orsino M., Perone C., La Fianza G., Brunetti L., Giametta F., Catalano P., 2021, Microclimatic Control in Confined 
Agricultural Environment for Plants Cultivation, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 87, 229-234  DOI:10.3303/CET2187039 

 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS 
VOL. 87, 2021 

A publication of 

The Italian Association 
of Chemical Engineering 
Online at www.cetjournal.it 

Guest Editors: Laura Piazza, Mauro Moresi, Francesco Donsì
Copyright © 2021, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l. 
ISBN 978-88-95608-85-3; ISSN 2283-9216

Microclimatic Control in Confined Agricultural Environment for 
Plants Cultivation 

Michela Orsinoa, Claudio Peroneb,*, Giovanna La Fianzaa, Lucio Brunettia, 
Ferruccio Giamettaa, Pasquale Catalanoa  
a
Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences, University of Molise - Via F. De Sanctis – 86100 

Campobasso, ITALY.  
b
Department of the Sciences of Agriculture, Food Natural resources and Engineering, University of Foggia, Via Napoli, 25 - 

71100 Foggia, ITALY.   
claudioperone@gmail.com  

Microclimatic control is having an increasingly widespread in confined agricultural environment. This is 
important especially for plants cultivations that tolerate thermal and hygrometric conditions significantly 
different. Nevertheless, there is much to do in automation and control technologies of this field to achieve the 
best results in both quantitative and qualitative terms of the products. This is true above all for horticultural 
crops, sensible to pedoclimatic and microclimatic environment of cultivation. Aim of this work is to characterize 
the microclimatic parameters in a confined agricultural environment with a perforated duct for the supply of the 
air conditioning. For this work a microclimatic control unit was used instead of lettuce plants. It was placed into 
a confined agricultural environment at different locations in the space to acquire the main microclimatic 
parameters. After setting the inputs of the microclimate environment, the tool measured a series of physical 
quantities (temperature, radiant temperature, humidity, and air speed). Tests were carried out taking as 
constant the optimal day temperature to grow lettuce, and by varying supply airflow rate, setting the fan speed 
at 30 %, 50 %, and 80 %. The results of these tests are essential to perform a real-time control of the 
microclimatic environment and to manage parameters for the optimization of the entire system. In addition, air 
speed tests showed an adequate speed decay and a good mixing of air. The values obtained are generally 
acceptable for indoor cultures and the created conditions are suitable for plants cultivation in this kind of 
environment. 

1. Introduction

In the last few decades, the demand of food supply is increasing because of exponentially growing of human 
population and climatic changes make increasingly difficult to satisfy this request (Nellemann et al., 2009; 
Staniškis, 2012; Fedoroff, 2015) Thus, it is evident and pressing the need of a new approach in agricultural 
practices and food technologies. However, the development of new solutions in the food supply chain cannot 
be separated from a careful assessment of the energy saving aspects, both in the cropping phase (Perone et 
al., 2017a; Perone et al., 2020) and in the transformation processes (Perone et al., 2017b; Catalano et al., 
2020). In particular, to improve agriculture efficiency different techniques can be used to adapt the 
environment agriculture condition to plant needs and, in this way, to extend the harvest time of cultivations. 
One of the common solutions is represented by greenhouse, and the studying of it management enhanced the 
importance of microclimatic control in agricultural environments (Perone et al., 2017a; Ma et al., 2019). The 
handling of microclimatic parameters and the isolation from outdoor environment impose the utilization of 
innovative techniques beside conventional agriculture. 
New concepts are emerging from the broader strand of Urban Agriculture (UA) or Urban Farming (UF), as an 
increasingly relevant topic in planning of urban food systems aimed at reducing food supply issue and 
projected to the dimensions of economic, social, and environmental sustainability (Orsini et al, 2013). The UA 
sphere includes the Controlled Agriculture Environment (CEA) concept, that, thanks to its innovative 
techniques, fit well in the research of sustainable cultivation technologies. Nowadays it is widely spreading 

229



(Shamshiri et al., 2018), which design and methods of environmental control can vary greatly depending on 
where it is located (Jensen, 2001). CEA systems are characterized by a clear separation between controlled 
agriculture environment (indoor) and the external uncontrolled environment (outdoor), even if the outdoor 
characteristics are taken in account to better control indoor and damping the diurnal and seasonal climatic 
variation of outdoor (Abdullah et al., 2016). Thus, in controlled agricultural environments with microclimate 
management, variability of outdoor environment does not affect plants cultivation and indoor microclimatic 
parameters can be controlled independently, allowing a greater harvest efficiency. It is clear that in CEA the 
optimal control of indoor microclimatic conditions becomes the key factor to increase the productivity and 
promote plants growth and health (Heuvelink and Gonzalez-Real, 2008; Nicholsa, 2017). In fact, anomalous 
alteration of the microclimate can induce morphological and physiological modifications of plants as result of 
environment-plant interaction (Amitrano et al., 2019).  
In this scenario, the monitoring and managing of microclimatic parameters becomes of primary importance 
and it is essential to consider control systems and locations inside the closed agricultural environment (Wada 
et al., 2019). In particular, lighting and air conditioning represent the main key factors in agricultural 
environment microclimate, through which it is possible to work directly and indirectly on crops quantitative and 
qualitative parameters (Yeh and Chung, 2009; Goto, 2012).  
The aim of this paper is to evaluate the distribution of the microclimatic parameters in a confined agricultural 
environment conditioned by supplying treated air with a perforated duct. The air conditioning system was 
handled to ensure the microclimatic parameters of a CEA for successive lettuce plants cultivation. This 
purpose is obtained using a microclimatic control unit, which simulate the crop. The measures of temperature, 
humidity, globe thermometer temperature, and air speed, were performed at different fan speeds for air 
conditioning supplying. 

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Equipment 

Tests for microclimatic parameters characterization were conducted in a closed environment with an inner 
volume of 40 m3 and with dimensions of 4.1 x 3.6 x 2.7 m (Width x Depth x Height) (Figure 1). The 
environment was insulated on the perimeter walls and on the roof with sandwich panels composed of 4.0 cm 
of polyurethane foam.  
A handling unit of 500 m3/h provide the conditioned air supplied by a perforated duct of 0.25 m in diameters 
and 3 m in length, with a 5 series of circular holes of different size. A central row of holes has a size of 20 mm 
and has the main aim of providing the air flow rate. Two rows of 10 mm holes on each side of the central row 
generates the induction phenomenon. The duct was installed on one side of the environment at a height of 
2.30 m. A recovery grid is located in the corner on the opposite side of the supply duct, at a height of about 60 
cm. The relative humidity of the environment was adjusted by supplying water vapor produced by an 
immersed electrode steam humidifier, with a nominal water vapor rate of 3 kg/h.  
Measuring the recovery temperature TR (probe installed on the recovery side of the handling unit) and the 
room humidity (UCTR) (with a combined T-RH probe located at the centre of the environment), it was possible 
to regulate the handling unit and the humidifier to stabilize the indoor microclimatic parameters. 
A supervision system allowed the data acquisition and historicization thanks to a set of probes (Table 1) and a 
microclimatic control unit that was used instead of lettuce plants. 

2.2 Microclimatic parameters acquisition 

The microclimatic control unit was placed at nine different locations equally distributed into the controlled 
agricultural environment, with a distance from walls of 0.90 cm, as shown in Figure 1, to have a uniform 
characterization of microclimatic parameters of the closed environment. It was equipped with probes for the 
acquisition of the main microclimatic dimension (temperature, radiant temperature, humidity, and air speed) 
and fixed at a height of 1.05 m, simulating the height of a shelf for the positioning of plants and/or of an typical 
aeroponic system.  
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the probes used for the measurement tests. The brand of all the probes is 
Centraline by Honeywell, except for the globe thermometer which is LSI LASTEM. 

230



Figure 1: spatial locations for data acquisition in the controlled agricultural environment, equipped with a 
supply fan, a perforated duct, a recovery grid, and a humidifier. 

It was chosen an environment set-point temperature of 21 °C as constant day temperature for an optimum 
growth of lettuce crop, with a dead band of ± 1 °C. Also the internal humidity was chosen according the 
optimal growing of lettuce and fixed at 70 % ± 5 %.  
Tests were carried out setting the fan (ebm-papst K3G 190, with M3G055 – BI electronic motor) at different 
airflow speed rates: 30 %, 50 %, and 80 % of maximum fan speed. When the system reached the regime, all 
the data characterizing the indoor microclimate were acquired for each of the nine space positions, for an 
acquisition time of 5 minutes. This represents a sufficient time to have a good insight on the local conditions. 
The sampling time for each parameter was set to 5 seconds.
The acquired data were downloaded in spreadsheet format on a personal computer when data acquisition is 
completed. 

Table 1: Probes used during experimental tests. 

Probes Accuracy 

Humidity and Temperature Room Sensors, range 5–

95% -30 − 70 °C, output 0–10 Vcc 

±0.2 K at 25 °C 

±3 % at 25 °C 30–70 % rh 

±5 % at 25 °C 10–30 % 70–90 % rh 

±10 % at 25 °C 5–10 % 90–95 % rh 

Globe thermometric probe, range -30 – 70 °C  0.15 °C 

Duct humidity-temperature sensor, range 5–95% 30–

70°C, output 0–10 Vcc 

±0.3 K at 25 °C 

±2.5 % at 20 °C 10–95 % rh 

Hot wire anemometer, range 0–20 m/s, -50 +50 °C <10 % 

3. Results and Discussion

The acquired data were elaborated to analyse the distributions of the physical parameters inside the controlled 
environment. These estimations are based on the reasonable hypothesis that, at regime, the physical 
conditions of the environment are almost constant. Thus, it is possible to affirm that the temporal mean of all 

231



the acquired data of each probes is a reasonable estimation of the measured parameters and that the 
standard deviation can be assumed as its uncertainty. 

Table 2: Average values and standard deviation of measured parameters at 30 % airflow speed. 

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 

TCTR [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

24.66 
0.05 

25.39 
0.06 

25.00 
0.04 

24.51 
0.04 

25.27 
0.06 

24.83 
0.04 

25.45 
0.05 

25.11 
0.03 

24.68 
0.04 

UCTR [%] 
̅ 
σ 

73.28 
2.87 

67.41 
1.44 

66.46 
2.01 

71.29 
4.27 

71.04 
1.94 

69.17 
0.13 

65.05 
1.63 

67.62 
3.31 

73.71 
0.52 

Tcr [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

23.80 
0.03 

24.27 
0.05 

24.00 
0.04 

23.69 
0.08 

24.11 
0.03 

23.78 
0.04 

24.30 
0.06 

24.13 
0.07 

23.95 
0.05 

Ucr [%] 
̅ 
σ 

77.34 
2.28 

70.43 
0.76 

70.55 
0.69 

79.39 
3.42 

73.09 
1.20 

71.98 
0.39 

71.00 
0.53 

77.08 
3.25 

76.07 
0.37 

TS [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

37.98 
0.08 

38.59 
0.19 

38.87 
0.15 

37.15 
4.84 

38.25 
0.12 

37.89 
0.38 

38.05 
0.26 

38.91 
0.14 

38.08 
0.14 

US [%] 
̅ 
σ 

19.48 
0.11 

19.13 
0.08 

18.57 
0.07 

20.36 
0.53 

19.13 
0.10 

19.20 
0.33 

18.84 
0.05 

18.84 
0.21 

19.64 
0.15 

TG [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

20.90 
0.09 

21.48 
0.15 

21.20 
0.07 

20.18 
0.08 

21.44 
0.09 

20.95 
0.05 

21.52 
0.09 

21.17 
0.14 

22.93 
0.08  ren ̅ 

σ 
130.34 

0.82 
127.65 

1.08 
130.34 

1.53 
127.60 

1.46 
127.72 

2.04 
131.09 

1.58 
128.70 

1.36 
130.74 

2.21 
128.82 

2.41 

Table 3: Average values and standard deviation of measured parameters at 50 % airflow speed. 

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 

TCTR [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

22.36 
0.14 

23.61 
0.10 

23.79 
0.05 

23.55 
0.08 

23.62 
0.12 

24.46 
0.05 

23.34 
0.06 

22.85 
0.09 

23.38 
0.14 

UCTR [%] 
̅ 
σ 

62.78 
0.32 

70.56 
0.70 

68.92 
0.41 

68.86 
0.69 

72.11 
0.93 

68.21 
0.32 

70.63 
1.49 

70.37 
0.52 

69.91 
1.04 

Tcr [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

21.70 
0.11 

22.92 
0.04 

23.05 
0.05 

22.89 
0.03 

22.93 
0.09 

23.73 
0.05 

22.71 
0.08 

22.43 
0.05 

22.72 
0.10 

Ucr [%] 
̅ 
σ 

65.20 
0.40 

72.31 
1.04 

71.48 
0.11 

71.94 
1.56 

75.10 
1.36 

72.35 
0.69 

71.09 
1.80 

72.43 
0.49 

74.07 
1.80 

TS [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

31.97 
0.09 

32.90 
0.25 

33.98 
0.80 

31.93 
0.21 

32.50 
0.12 

33.49 
0.62 

32.41 
0.15 

31.97 
0.09 

33.35 
0.30 

US [%] 
̅ 
σ 

21.62 
0.12 

22.67 
0.20 

21.79 
0.98 

24.67 
0.38 

22.71 
0.26 

21.36 
0.24 

24.32 
0.14 

23.65 
0.10 

21.73 
0.31 

TG [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

21.98 
0.14 

21.95 
0.33 

22.27 
0.03 

21.90 
0.14 

22.27 
0.54 

22.75 
0.04 

21.64 
0.17 

20.75 
0.19 

21.76 
0.30  ren ̅ 

σ 
223.98 

1.66 
231.93 

3.54 
222.30 

9.15 
230.25 

1.45 
233.10 

3.18 
229.05 

2.92 
230.62 

2.69 
229.05 

3.41 
234.58 

2.76 

Table 4: Average values and standard deviation of measured parameters at 80 % airflow speed. 

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 

TCTR [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

21.90 
0.07 

22.01 
0.08 

22.07 
0.05 

22.08 
0.08 

21.77 
0.08 

21.83 
0.04 

21.13 
0.14 

21.70 
0.14 

21.85 
0.11 

UCTR [%] 
̅ 
σ 

69.09 
0.26 

71.19 
0.29 

70.62 
2.19 

69.91 
0.81 

67.67 
0.59 

68.12 
0.51 

62.63 
0.64 

63.48 
0.73 

65.99 
0.63 

Tcr [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

21.81 
0.03 

21.90 
0.08 

21.66 
0.05 

21.93 
0.05 

21.43 
0.05 

21.40 
0.07 

20.32 
0.10 

21.03 
0.06 

21.46 
0.05 

Ucr [%] 
̅ 
σ 

70.50 
0.07 

71.89 
0.40 

72.32 
1.69 

71.52 
0.63 

70.19 
0.65 

71.14 
0.74 

67.12 
0.32 

67.15 
0.30 

67.62 
0.32 

TS [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

29.68 
0.74 

29.96 
0.45 

29.14 
0.30 

29.36 
0.10 

29.06 
0.23 

28.87 
0.21 

28.57 
0.06 

29.03 
0.35 

28.68 
0.07 

US [%] 
̅ 
σ 

28.32 
0.36 

27.56 
0.16 

27.96 
0.16 

27.87 
0.09 

28.03 
0.15 

28.37 
0.24 

27.35 
0.24 

27.82 
0.41 

28.94 
0.16 

TG [°C] 
̅ 
σ 

20.19 
0.07 

20.65 
0.19 

20.41 
0.12 

21.03 
0.30 

20.39 
0.20 

19.81 
0.18 

20.70 
0.07 

20.25 
0.14 

20.33 
0.10  ren ̅ 

σ 
392.87 
15.12 

391.67 
6.09 

392.46 
3.98 

391.11 
2.97 

394.24 
4.15 

394.10 
2.99 

388.96 
2.67 

394.01 
6.16 

386.98 
4.80 

232



Tables 2, 3 and 4 show the main microclimatic parameters acquired at 30 %, 50 %, and 80 % of fan speed, 
respectively. In addition, to the renewal air  ren, it was also acquired the air conditions of the supply air (Ts and 
Us), near the crop (Tcr and Ucr), and in the middle of the environment (TCTR and UCTR). To complete the 
characterization of the indoor microclimate it was also acquired the radiant temperature of globe thermometer 
(TG). 
When the fan speed was set to 30 % and the mean renewal air flow  ren was 129.28 m3/h (Table 2), the 
spatial mean of crop temperature Tcr in the environment was 24.03 °C and the spatial mean of crop relative 
humidity Ucr was 74.10 % with a mean supply air temperature Ts of 38.20 °C. Increasing fan speed to 50 % the 
mean  ren increased to 229.43 m3/h (Table 3). In this configuration, there was a decrease of mean Ts to 32.72 
°C with a consequent decrease of the mean Tcr to 22.79 °C. The Ucr reached a mean value of 71.77 %. 
Similarly, with the fan speed at 80 % (Table 4) (  ren increased at 391.82 m3/h), the mean supply temperature 
dropped further to (Ts 29.15 °C,) and Tcr fell to 21.44 °C. In these conditions, the mean Ucr is 69.94 %. 
To well understand if this environment is suitable for growing of plants like lettuce, it is also important to take 
into account the influence of temperature by thermal radiation. To determine this effect, it was measured the 
globe thermometric temperature TG, that is the temperature measured by Vernon globe thermometer. Varying 
the air flow rate, the spatial mean of TG was 21.31 °C, 21.92 °C, and 20.43 °C for 30 %, 50 % and 80 % airflow 
rate, respectively. Comparing this variation with that of Tcr, it was clear that thermal radiation and air flow rates 
had great effects on plants local temperature. Simultaneously with these measurements, a room temperature 
TCTR was acquired, with a temperature probe placed on a central pedestal in the room, to have a term of 
comparison for each acquisition. 
As already stated by La Fianza et. al, 2019, the use of the perforated duct in such could permit an optimal 
plant growing values of the environment properties. At fan speed of 30 % it is possible to note that the mean 
crop temperature was about 3.0 °C above the set point temperature. This was mainly due to a too low air flow 
rate. In fact, with a decrease in the air flowrate, the supply temperature must be increased, leading to a higher 
indoor temperature. To better explain this fact, it is worth remembering that the probe to measure the recovery 
temperature is installed on the recovery side of the handling unit (Figure 1), which has a value of 21 °C ± 1 °C 
in each test. At fan speed of 50 % the temperature difference between the crop and set point it was on 
average 1.8 °C, and at 80 % of about 1.4 °C. This means that the higher speed of fan, which ensures about 
10 1/h number of air exchanges, allowed to obtain the best temperature control. 
Regarding relative humidity, it can be noted that at fan speed of 30 % the higher values were measured along 
the diagonal, moving from the humidifier towards the return grid. The same behavior is observed at 50 %, 
while a more uniform distribution is ensured at 80 %. This means that by setting the fan speed at 80 % is 
possible obtain a good mixing of the water vapor inside the environment. 
In all test, the mean air speed near the crop, in each position is about 0.1 m/s, which is a very good value to 
prevent transpiration stress of the plants. Although these only represent preliminary results, the knowledge of 
the indoor distribution of the main microclimatic parameters represent an important aid to better understand 
how to handle the conditioning systems in the presence of the crops. 

4. Conclusion

Microclimatic parameters characterization in confined agriculture environment (CEA) is becoming the most 
suitable solution to improve technologies able to solve issues related to increasingly urbanization and climate 
changes. To further enhance their development, it is essential to improve the microclimatic control. 
Tests were carried out in a controlled agricultural environment fixing the temperature set point at 21 ± 1 °C 
and relative humidity at 70 ± 5 % (suitable for lettuce cropping). Their control happened through a handling 
unit, which supplied treated air by means a perforated duct, and a humidifier. The main microclimatic 
parameter were acquired by means of microclimatic station equipped with probes and positioning it according 
to a uniform grid in the environment, for different speed of handling unit fan. 
The main results shown that in all tests, the controlled environment is characterised by a good spatial 
uniformity of parameters value that ensure the equal conditions to all the plants independently by their 
position. However, the best conditions were observed at 80 % of fan speed, which correspond to about 10 1/h 
number of air exchanges. This is due to a higher turbulence with a consequent well mixing of water vapor and 
uniform temperature distribution. The higher the speed does not seem to affect the air speed near the crop, 
which is 0.1 m/s in all cases, confirming the correct sizing of the air handling unit. 
Also the use of perforated duct is confirmed to be an efficient way to spatially uniform the microclimatic 
parameter distribution inside a confined agriculture environment. 
In conclusion, this system can be employed to ensure a more efficient and fast lettuce cultivation thanks to its 
reliable environment microclimatic control.  

233



References 

Abdullah, A., Al Enazi, S., Damaj, I., 2016, AgriSys: A smart and ubiquitous controlled-environment agriculture 
system. In 2016 3rd MEC International Conference on Big Data and Smart City (ICBDSC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. 

Amitrano, C., Arena, C., Rouphael, Y., De Pascale, S., and De Micco, V., 2019, Vapour pressure deficit: The 
hidden driver behind plant morphofunctional traits in controlled environments. Ann. Appl. Biol. 175, 313–
325. 

Fedoroff, N. V., 2015, Food in a future of 10 billion. Agriculture & Food Security, 4(1), 1-10. 
Goto, E., 2012, Plant production in a closed plant factory with artificial lighting. VII International Symposium on 

Light in Horticultural Systems 956, 37-49. 
Heuvelink, E., and González-Real, M.M., 2008, Innovation in plant-greenhouse interactions and crop 

management. Acta Horticulturae, pp. 63–74. 
Jensen M.H., 2001, Controlled environment agriculture in deserts, tropics and temperate regions - A world 

review. In International Symposium on Design and Environmental Control of Tropical and Subtropical 
Greenhouses 578, 19–25. 

La Fianza, G., Giametta, F., Brunetti, L., Orsino, M., Bianchi, B., Perone, C., Catalano, 2019, Thermo-fluid-
dynamic characteristics of confluent jets for distribution of treated air in small environment, MODEL-IT 
2019. 

Ma, D., Carpenter, N., Maki, H., Rehman, T.U., Tuinstra, M.R., and Jin, J., 2019, Greenhouse environment 
modeling and simulation for microclimate control. Comput. Electron. Agric. 162, 134–142. 

Nellemann, C., Macdevetta, M., Manders, T., Eickhout, B., Svihus, B., Prins, A.G., and Kalterrnborn, B.P., 
2009, The Environmental Food Crises: The Environment’s Role in Averting Future Food Crises. 
UNEP/GRIP-Arendal, Arendal, Norway. 

Nicholsa, M., 2017, Plant factories - The ultimate in controlled environment agriculture. Acta Hortic. 1176, 17–
22. 

Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R., Gianquinto, G., 2013, Urban agriculture in the developing world: a 
review. Agronomy for sustainable development, 33(4), 695-720. 

Perone, C., Fucci, F., La Fianza, G., Brunetti, L., Giametta, F., Catalano, P., & Bianchi, B., 2017a, 
Experimental study of a mechanical ventilation system in a greenhouse. Chemical Engineering 
Transactions, 58, 811-816. 

Perone, C., Catalano, F., Giametta, F., ...Bianchi, B., Ayr, U., 2017b, Study and analysis of a cogeneration 
system with microturbines in a food farming of dry pasta, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 58, pp. 499–
504. 

Perone, C., Catalano, P., Giametta, F., Brunetti, L., Bianchi, B., 2020, Controlled Mechanical Ventilation to 
Reduce Primary Energy Consumption in Air Conditioning of Greenhouses, Lecture Notes in Civil 
Engineering, 67, pp. 399–407. 

Shamshiri, R.R., Kalantari, F., Ting, K.C., Thorp, K.R., Hameed, I.A., Weltzien, C., Ahmad, D., and Shad, Z., 
2018, Advances in greenhouse automation and controlled environment agriculture: A transition to plant 
factories and urban agriculture. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 11, 1–22. 

Staniškis, J., 2012, Sustainable consumption and production: how to make it possible. Clean Technologies 
and Environmental Policy, 14(6), 1015-1022. 

Wada, T., Fukuda, H., Ogura, T., 2019, Fundamental components and points to consider in the design of a 
plant factory: an example of OPU new-generation plant factory. Plant Factory Using Artificial Light, 231-
241.  Elsevier.

Yeh N., and Chung. J., 2009, High-brightness LEDs: Energy Efficient Lighting Sources and Their Potential in 
Indoor Plant Cultivation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13(8), 2175–2180. 

234