Pre-Feasibility Study - Technical Anlysis Kazakhistan 2018-03-16 total1.2(Fort Merlice)(1)

Technical Analysis
Aqtobe Greenery
Date: 16 maart 2018
From: ClimaConnect
Subject: Technical Analysis
SZ/AC
ClimaConnect B.V.
Vlotlaan 710, 2681 TW Monster
P.O. Box 1041, 2680 BA Monster
The Netherlands
T +31 174 286 161

1. Index
2. Introduction Technical Analysis __________________________________________________________ 2
3. Fields of research______________________________________________________________________ 3
3.1 Introduction _______________________________________________________________________ 3
4. Technical analysis _____________________________________________________________________ 4
4.1 Location information ________________________________________________________________ 4
4.2 Climate profile _____________________________________________________________________ 5
4.2.1 Climate facts and figures _____________________________________________________________ 5
4.2.2 Preliminary conclusion climate points of attention _______________________________________ 11
5. Energy consumption __________________________________________________________________ 12
5.1 Analysis _________________________________________________________________________ 12
5.1.1 Nominal heating requirements _______________________________________________________ 13
5.1.2 Nominal electricity requirements _____________________________________________________ 14
5.1.3 Nominal CO2 requirements __________________________________________________________ 15
6. Production figures ____________________________________________________________________ 16
6.1 Normal Planting Cycle ______________________________________________________________ 18
6.2 Interplanting Cycles ________________________________________________________________ 19
6.3 Comparison Over 2-Year Period ______________________________________________________ 21
7. Contact information __________________________________________________________________ 26
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
1

2. Introduction Technical Analysis
Dear board of directors of Aqtobe Greenery,
ClimaConnect responds to the growing international demand for total solutions, whereby the customer can
refer to a single desk for all services required to make a capital investment in high-tech horticulture into an
undertaking that is profitable for the long term. The international ClimaConnect team is located at the KUBO
head office in the Netherlands.
In this Technical Analysis, we give you a summary of important parameters which will have a substantial impact
on your future business.
Our mission is to optimise our customers’ profitability by:
• making available knowledge from the international horticulture network accessible,
• helping to make the best investment decisions,
• using technology and knowledge to develop tools to support business operations,
• accelerating innovation with the assistance of ‘Full Service Grow Concepts’.
This Technical Analysis is a first step in cooperation with our clients to guarantee a thorough business
approach, which will enable you to achieve your goals better, faster and with less (start-up) costs.
Please, do not hesitate to contact us if you need further information or have any questions.
Looking forward to our future cooperation.
With kind regards,
Wouter Kuiper
CEO
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
2

3. Fields of research
3.1 Introduction
The successful design, buildup, and establishment of a high-tech greenhouse operation involves several
considerations. While it is often common in the industry to regard specific greenhouse solutions as being
directly applicable across a wide range of situations, ClimaConnect believes that a greenhouse project design
should be specifically attuned to local (i.e. climate and market) and client (e.g. grower or investor) conditions.
This means that a careful analysis of the climate and market profile for the location being considered must be
conducted at the onset of the project, as it will play an integral part of the decision-making process along every
step of the way.
The climate analysis is crucial, as it enables the determination of structural and technical requirements for the
greenhouse design. The market analysis, on the other hand, allows for the selection of the appropriate product
and marketing strategy combination to service the target market(s). Both elements are imperative for the
establishment of a technically-capable and strategically-sound greenhouse operation. It is also important to
assess how the local labor environment and experience will influence the buildup and performance of the
organization during its initial stages, and to determine the steps that are needed to achieve operational
excellence. Furthermore, it is vital to have the specialized knowledge and experience to formulate realistic
productivity estimates for a variety of crops and growing environments (i.e. greenhouse designs or
configurations), as this will play a definitive role in the profitability of the operation and the attractiveness of
the various options. Ultimately, ClimaConnect believes that by basing our analysis on not only the
consideration, but also the quantification of these factors, we empower our clients with objective and realistic
comparisons/studies, which enable them to make the best business decision for their specific situations.
For the present study, the board of Aqtobe Greenery has asked ClimaConnect to prepare all calculations and
projections based on the specific Ultra-Clima® Greenhouse which has already been designed and ordered from
KUBO. This specific greenhouse configuration has been developed by KUBO in conjunction with the
Shareholders of Aqtobe Greenery based on their prior experience in the Russian and Kazakh markets. The
project will be focused in the production of high-quality Tomatoes on the Vine (TOV) using an Ultra-Clima®
Greenhouse as described in the KUBO Contract: OW 4444.
Therefore, the objectives of this analysis are:
• To obtain a clear understanding of the local climate conditions.
• To provide an analysis of the energetic requirements for the selected greenhouse configuration (KUBO
Contract OW 4444) to achieve the desired growth conditions of the crop in your climate.
• To use our specialized knowledge and experience from established greenhouse operations worldwide
(e.g. KZ Greenhouse in Aqtobe and Lipetsk Agro in Dankov, Russia) to generate realistic productivity
estimates for TOVs under various growing cycles (i.e. standard vs interplanting).
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
3

4. Technical analysis
The technical analysis is based on the parameters:
• Location
• Climate profile: climate parameters
• Energy requirement: nominal needs
The objective of this analysis is to get a better understanding of the facts and figures which have impact on
your investments decisions.
4.1 Location information
• Country Kazakhstan
• City Aqtobe
• Latitude: 50°22'34''N (50,376186)
• Longitude: 57°24'43''E (57,411900)
• Elevation: ca. 225 m
Weather station: for the data input we used a nearby station located 6,9Km South South-East from the
location.
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
4

4.2 Climate profile
The climate profile is determined with the coordinates of your location.
4.2.1 Climate facts and figures
The following parameters of this location have been analyzed on an hourly basis over the years 2013 to 2017:
• Elevation
• Temperatures
o Minimum
o Maximum
o Average
o Degree hours: hours when extra heating is needed to achieve the minimum climate.
• Humidity
o In relation to the temperature (RH)
• Sun light radiation
o Minimum
o Maximum
o Analysis of too low radiation hours
Figure 1.A Presents the average temperature per month in degrees Celsius (˚C). Figure 1.B Presents the
average accumulated daily solar radiation (i.e. Radiation sum) per month in Joules per square centimetre per
day. Figure 1.C Presents the average day- and night-time relative humidity per month. All estimates are based
on hourly measurements collected for the period 2013 to 2017.
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
5

Humidity (in %) Sun accum (J/cm 2 /day)
Temperature (in °C)
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
17
22
23
24
16
10
5
7
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-12 -11
-5
-2
-8
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
709
382
Night RH
1.256
1.685
2.171 2.347 2.236
1.908
1.415
832
454 302
-55
-60
-65
-70
-75
93Day RH
92 92 91 91 89
74
63
61 59 58
49
45 43
47
38
54
45
69
61
82
77
91 89
-80
Figure 1: Average climate parameters
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
6

Bandwidth per climate parameter
Figure 1.A displays the bandwidth of temperature variation per month. In Figure 2, a breakdown of these
bandwidths is presented per month with a differentiation between day-time and night-time temperatures.
Furthermore, the results from Figure 1.B have been included in the first column to enable a more detailed
comparison between temperature variations and average daily solar radiation.
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
Month
Solar
Radiation
Monthly
average
Monthly
night
minimum
Monthly
night average
Monthly
night
maximum
Figure 2: Bandwidth of climate parameters
Monthly day
minimum
Monthly day
average
Monthly day
maximum
J/cm2/day °C °C °C °C °C °C °C
1 382 -12 -35 -13 1 -36 -11 1
2 709 -11 -36 -13 2 -32 -10 3
3 1.256 -5 -24 -7 6 -23 -3 7
4 1.685 7 -21 4 19 -19 9 26
5 2.171 17 3 13 25 2 18 34
6 2.347 22 6 17 29 5 23 38
7 2.236 23 8 19 31 8 24 39
8 1.908 24 8 20 31 9 26 39
9 1.415 16 - 13 31 1 17 38
10 832 5 -11 4 16 -10 6 23
11 454 -2 -18 -3 9 -19 -0 11
12 302 -8 -31 -9 2 -29 -7 3
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
7

Low and high temperature situations
Figure 3 provides a breakdown per degree Celsius for the average amount of hours per year that temperature
was within a given degree Celsius. Cumulative hours have been sumed in the third column of Figure 3.A and B
to estimate the average total amount of hours where temperature was lower or higher (Figure 3.A and Figure
3.B, respectively) than a given degree Celsius. Furthermore, a fourth column has been included in both cases
calculating the percentage of time that temperature was lower or higher (Figure 3.A and Figure 3.B,
respectively) than a given degree Celsius. Only situations occuring more than 0.1% of the time are taken into
account in the calculations. These graphs are presented to give a better understanding of the temperature
profile and extremes at your location.
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
A
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
T [°C] Hours [h]
Hours lower or
equal than [h]
Percentage of year
lower than [h]
T [°C] Hours [h]
Hours higher or
equal than [h]
Percentage of year
heigher than [h]
-17 79 431 4,9% 20 219 2016 23,0%
-18 60 352 4,0% 21 203 1798 20,5%
-19 52 292 3,3% 22 195 1595 18,2%
-20 41 240 2,7% 23 194 1400 16,0%
-21 35 199 2,3% 24 172 1206 13,8%
-22 32 164 1,9% 25 172 1034 11,8%
-23 31 132 1,5% 26 151 861 9,8%
-24 25 101 1,2% 27 150 710 8,1%
-25 16 76 0,9% 28 123 560 6,4%
-26 10 60 0,7% 29 106 437 5,0%
-27 13 50 0,6% 30 84 331 3,8%
-28 8 37 0,4% 31 75 246 2,8%
-29 4 29 0,3% 32 57 171 2,0%
-30 9 25 0,3% 33 39 115 1,3%
-31 6 16 0,2% 34 34 76 0,9%
-32 2 9 0,1% 35 16 42 0,5%
-33 3 8 0,1% 36 14 26 0,3%
-34 2 4 0,0% 37 8 12 0,1%
-35 1 2 0,0% 38 3 4 0,0%
-36 1 1 0,0% 39 1 1 0,0%
-37 0 0 0,0% 40 0 0 0,0%
B
Figure 3. Detailed analysis of low (A) and high (B) temperature situations.
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
8

Scatterplot climate situation
Figure 4 presents the average number of hours that a given temperature and relative humidity have cooccurred
during the day and night (Figure 4.A and Figure 4.B, respectively) over the observed period. The red
area in each graph has been included to represent sub-optimal (i.e. undesired) growing conditions. The colour
intensity represents the average number of hours that a given condition has occurred over the observed
period.
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
9

Day time
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
Relative humidity [%]
Night time
Timeframe 01-01-2013 - 31-12-2017
Relative humidity [%]
Temperature [C]
-36
-35
-34
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-33 0
-32 1
-31 0
-30 0 0 1
-29 0 0 1
-28 0 1 1
-27 0 1 2
-26 0 1 2
-25 0 0 3 2
-24 1 3 3
-23 0 0 0 1 2 4
-22 1 1 2 1 6
-21 0 0 0 0 3 3 7
-20 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 8
-19 0 1 1 1 1 2 5 7
-18 0 1 1 1 2 2 7 8
-17 0 0 0 2 1 4 5 8 7
-16 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 5 4 9 9
-15 0 0 1 0 1 3 4 3 7 8 10
-14 0 1 0 0 1 1 3 4 5 8 11 10
-13 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 7 7 14 12
-12 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 3 8 9 19 17
-11 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 3 5 11 19 17
-10 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 5 8 14 23 17
-9 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 5 9 13 27 18
-8 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 3 5 9 15 33 20
-7 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 3 4 7 14 37 22
-6 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 5 9 14 45 19
-5 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 6 6 19 43 24
-4 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 9 15 38 20
-3 0 0 1 0 2 1 3 6 8 15 38 23
-2 0 1 1 2 2 2 5 4 11 18 46 20
-1 1 1 1 2 5 3 4 7 9 20 41 26
0 0 1 2 2 4 5 7 6 8 13 17 32 40
1 1 1 1 3 6 8 7 5 13 12 14 21 41
2 1 1 4 5 6 7 4 7 7 10 10 12 21
3 1 2 2 3 6 4 6 6 5 10 7 11 8 6
4 1 2 3 3 5 5 7 7 7 7 9 12 5 3
5 2 2 4 4 5 9 5 7 7 11 10 7 3 3
6 0 2 2 3 4 7 5 7 11 9 9 6 5 4 3
7 0 1 4 1 7 7 7 9 11 7 8 6 4 3 5
8 0 1 3 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 6 4 3 2
9 0 3 4 6 7 8 8 9 7 10 7 6 5 3 0
10 0 1 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 7 5 8 4 2 0
11 0 2 4 3 6 6 8 12 10 9 8 9 5 3 2 1
12 1 2 3 4 8 12 9 10 11 9 9 6 7 2 2 0
13 1 3 4 6 9 10 12 11 10 9 9 6 6 3 2 0
14 3 3 4 8 11 10 13 13 11 8 8 7 4 3 3 0
15 0 3 5 9 10 13 9 16 12 11 11 8 6 5 2 1
16 0 3 6 6 10 12 12 16 13 10 11 8 5 3 3 0 0
17 2 3 8 6 10 12 17 14 13 11 12 8 7 2 2 0
18 0 1 2 8 9 12 20 15 13 15 11 10 8 4 4 2 0
19 2 3 6 10 15 19 15 15 14 15 6 6 5 3 1 0
20 0 3 3 11 16 19 18 17 16 14 12 7 5 2 2 1
21 1 1 5 11 16 20 23 19 17 13 6 6 4 3 1
22 0 1 5 15 20 18 24 20 17 11 9 5 2 1 1
23 1 8 17 21 22 30 21 14 9 7 4 1 1
24 2 8 11 20 25 24 19 13 9 5 2 0 0
25 0 4 9 18 23 27 24 20 12 6 2 0
26 1 4 9 17 26 24 22 14 11 3 1 0 0
50
55
60
27 0 4 13 18 29 35 18 16 5 2 1
28 0 4 12 22 29 26 14 7 2 1
29 1 4 12 25 28 18 9 4 2
30 2 5 12 22 23 12 5 2 0 0
31 1 8 14 25 16 7 3 0 0
32 2 6 12 19 12 3 2 0
33 2 4 11 14 6 1 0
34 1 7 10 11 3 1
35 1 4 7 3 2
36 0 2 4 5 3 0
37 1 3 2 1 1
38 2 1
39 0 0 0
40
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Temperature [C]
Figure 4. Year-round temperature and relative humidity correlation in day (A) and night-time (B).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-36
-35
-34 0
-33 1 0
-32 0 1
-31 0 1 1
-30 1 0 0 2
-29 0 0 1
-28 0 0 0 1 3
-27 0 1 0 0 0 1 4
-26 1 0 0 1 2
-25 1 0 0 1 2
-24 0 0 0 2 4 5
-23 1 0 0 2 3 4 8
-22 0 2 1 1 0 1 2 9
-21 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 6
-20 0 0 0 2 3 4 3 9
-19 0 2 3 2 1 4 7 13
-18 0 0 1 0 4 3 8 12
-17 0 2 1 2 2 3 1 8 13 15
-16 2 3 3 3 2 6 4 8 13 20
-15 1 2 0 1 2 3 7 10 14 28
-14 1 1 0 2 1 5 8 10 14 28
-13 0 2 1 2 4 6 5 10 18 29
-12 1 0 0 2 3 4 6 10 20 33
-11 2 0 0 1 2 1 1 3 5 2 9 28 35
-10 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 2 3 4 9 25 36
-9 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 4 5 10 26 41
-8 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 3 4 10 25 44
-7 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 5 8 27 43
-6 2 0 0 0 1 5 9 8 23 44
-5 1 1 2 2 3 4 10 15 35 37
-4 1 2 5 3 2 8 5 15 36 39
-3 0 0 2 3 3 2 5 7 8 14 41 47
-2 0 3 1 1 1 4 7 5 9 11 14 35 42
-1 1 1 1 2 4 4 7 11 10 13 26 37
0 2 2 2 3 3 2 7 10 10 14 16 27
1 1 1 1 1 5 4 8 7 12 11 22 19
2 1 2 3 3 3 5 6 6 9 10 11 8
3 0 1 3 4 3 3 7 7 7 7 9 8 3
4 0 1 2 2 3 2 4 7 6 9 8 8 3 5
5 0 1 2 3 0 4 5 5 5 8 10 12 5 4
6 0 2 2 2 3 5 4 5 4 8 7 7 6 2
7 1 3 2 3 4 7 4 6 4 8 8 6 4 2
8 2 3 3 4 3 7 6 8 6 6 6 6 3 1
9 1 2 1 4 4 5 7 5 6 5 7 6 5 5 1
10 0 2 2 3 3 3 6 5 6 7 6 7 6 4 3 2
11 0 3 1 4 5 8 5 5 6 9 6 7 6 9 4
12 0 1 3 1 4 4 7 5 7 9 6 4 7 9 4 4 1
13 0 1 3 4 3 5 7 5 9 4 7 5 6 5 3 2 0
14 0 1 3 4 4 5 7 5 9 9 8 6 7 4 3 2
15 1 1 2 5 5 5 6 12 8 10 7 6 5 3 3 2 0
16 1 2 2 3 6 7 8 13 9 7 9 8 6 3 4 0
17 0 2 2 5 6 12 10 8 7 9 5 4 4 3 0
18 0 2 2 4 9 9 7 9 8 7 5 6 4 3 1
19 1 0 2 3 6 13 7 10 10 9 5 4 5 3 1 0
20 0 4 2 5 9 9 12 8 5 5 5 4 2 0
21 0 3 3 4 9 10 8 6 4 4 3 2 0
22 0 1 4 4 6 7 9 5 3 3 2 1 0
23 0 1 6 3 5 6 6 4 4 2 1 0
24 1 2 4 3 7 8 4 3 1 1 0
25 1 2 4 4 6 4 5 1 1
26 1 2 3 3 4 3 1 1
27 1 1 1 3 2 2 0
28 0 1 0 1 2 0 0
29 1 1 1 0 0
30 0
31 0 0
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
10

4.2.2 Preliminary conclusion climate points of attention
The climate observations lead to the following conclusions:
Light levels:
The results presented in Figure 1.B show that there is sufficient solar radiation to support the seasonal
production of TOVs at your location. However, the radiation levels are relatively low in the period from October
to February to enable year-round production. Therefore, we agree with the decision that artificial lights (e.g.
HPS) should be included for continuous (i.e. year-round) production. Conversely, in the months of May, June,
July and August the radiation levels are relatively high. A shade screen and/or roof application (e.g. whitewashing)
could be advisable in these months to limit the build-up of heat within the structure, as well as to
protect the crop from excessive solar radiation.
Humidity levels:
Taken together, the results from Figure 1.C and Figure 4 indicate that the average day and night relative
humidity levels are relatively low in relation to temperature. Therefore, it will likely be necessary to equip the
greenhouse with evaporative installations (e.g. Adiabatic Cooling and/or Fogging System) that enable humidity
to be increased to the appropriate levels. Forced ventilation should also be considered when possible as a
means for temperature and humidity correction and/or control. The red area in Figure 4 represents situations
where a given temperature and relative humidity combination could prove problematic for cultivation and
climate control. As can be seen in Figure 5, most of the situations for your climate are within the desirable
range, which means they can be managed with relative ease by properly using the greenhouse with the
suggested configuration. Therefore, the installation of equipment for dehumidification by active cooling is not
advised, considering the limited number of hours these difficult or undesirable circumstances occur. All of
these conclusions are in line with the selected greenhouse configuration under KUBO Contract OW 4444.
Temperatures:
Tomatoes perform best in temperature conditions that do not exceed 28°C during the day and are not less than
19-18°C during the night. Therefore, given the climate profile of your location, heating during both day and
night time is essential. An indication of the energy requirements is visualised in Chapter 5.
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
11

5. Energy consumption
The engineering of a greenhouse is dependent on many external factors, such as the outside climate. Another
important aspect is determining the relevant tools (equipment) that are needed to create the optimal growing
environment inside the greenhouse compartment.
Following the preliminary conclusions of the climate analysis that was presented in Chapter 4, Chapter 5
focuses on the energetic and technical requirements of the structure to achieve the optimal growing
environment for your location.
5.1 Analysis
We analyse the energy usage of the selected Ultra-Clima® greenhouse configuration on the following aspects:
• Heating capacity
• Electricity capacity
• CO2 requirements
Image 1:Ultra-Clima® greenhouse system
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
12

5.1.1 Nominal heating requirements
The heating demands of a greenhouse are determined by its configuration and type. In this Technical Analysis,
we provide a quantification of the energy requirements for the greenhouse configuration being considered for
your location (KUBO Contract OW 4444).
The energy calculations assume:
• A glass roof and wall cover
• A single energy-saving screen
• A heat demand based on Delta-T and including dehumidification and activation of the crop
• A Natural Gas energy conversion efficiency equal to 90% of that of the Netherlands: 28.49 MJ/m 3
o Based on our prior experience in Kazakhstan (i.e. KZ Greenhouse)
Ultra-Clima ® Greenhouse with lights
The energy requirement of the considered Ultra-Clima® greenhouse for heating (only) in Mega Joule per square
meter [MJ/m 2 ] was estimated to be: 1319.8 MJ/m 2 . The results from the calculations have been visualized in
Figures 5 and 6. Figure 5 presents the energy requirements for heating the greenhouse in MJ/m 2 for each
month of the year, with a breakdown between the various sources of heat to the greenhouse environment (i.e.
Lights, Pipe rail, or AHU). Figure 6 presents the energy sources for heating the greenhouse in MJ/m 2 for each
month of the year, with a breakdown between the primary sources of heat (Boiler or Cogen) consuming natural
gas.
Figure 5: Ultra Clima® heating energy requirements
• AHU 675,4 MJ/m 2
• Light heat 456,9 MJ/m 2
• Pipe rail: 189,4 MJ/m 2
• Total: 1319,8 MJ/m 2
Figure 6: Ultra Clima® heating energy input
• Boiler: 13,9 m 3 /m 2
• Cogen: 88,8 m 3 /m 2
• Total: 96,8 m 3 /m 2
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
13

5.1.2 Nominal electricity requirements
Based on the established equipment specifications, the electricity requirements for the Ultra-Clima®
greenhouse have been worked out in this chapter. The equipment specifications that are used for the
calculations are based on general (standard) greenhouse (irrigation and all mechanics) and packing hall
equipment. The required artificial light radiation was based on minimum crop requirements, as well as the
selected Ultra-Clima® greenhouse configuration, and is integrated in the total electricity demand that is
calculated in this chapter.
Ultra-Clima ® greenhouse with lights
Figure 7 shows the yearly usage of electricity for fans and general equipment in the selected Ultra-Clima®
greenhouse. Figure 8 shows the electricity input requirements.
The energy requirement of the Ultra-Clima® greenhouse for electricity in Kilowatt hours per square meter
[kWh/m 2 ] was estimated to be: 431 kWh/m 2 . The results from the calculation are summarized in Figures 7 and
8. Figure 7 presents the estimated electricity usage in kWh/m 2 for each month of the year, with a
differentiation between the sources of consumption (i.e. General equipment, AHU, and lights). Figure 8
presents the electricity input (supply) that is needed from the Grid or Cogen per month in kWh/m 2 .
Figure 7: Ultra-Clima® yearly energy use for fans and general
equipment
• AHU: 13,8 kWh/m 2
• Artificial light: 407,7 kWh/m 2
• General equipment: 9,5 kWh/m 2
• Total: 431,0 kWh/m 2
Figure 8: Ultra-Clima® yearly energy supply per equipment
• Grid: 18,7 kWh/m 2
• Cogen: 412,2 kWh/m 2
• Total: 431,0 kWh/m 2
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
14

Preliminary conclusion
Disclaimer:
All the calculations presented in this chapter are based on historical weather data, and represent our best
estimate given the available information. However, it is important to realize that future weather circumstances
can significantly deviate from expectations and can have a substantial impact on the final energy consumption
figures.
Furthermore, it is also important to note that the growing strategy that is selected will also bear a considerable
influence on the total energy consumption of the operation. For the current study, assumptions have been
made regarding the growth strategy of the crop. It is important to realize that if the actual climate strategy
applied is significantly different from these assumptions, then it will also significantly influence the accuracy of
the provided estimates.
5.1.3 Nominal CO 2 requirements
Under ambient levels of CO2 (~350-400 ppm), various plants have been found to re-evolve about 25% of their
captured CO2 through the process of photorespiration, which occurs partly because of the low [CO2] in the air.
Such losses of assimilated CO2 can have important implications for plant productivity. By increasing the [CO2] of
the greenhouse air through CO2 dosing, photorespiratory losses are reduced and both quantum efficiency
(µmol CO2 assimilated/µmol PAR absorbed) and the light-saturated rate of the photosynthetic process are
increased, resulting in increased crop productivity.
In practice, there is a lot of discussion between growers and researchers on how much CO2 is beneficial for the
crop. In this chapter, we give an indication of the potential CO2 consumption for your location based on user
feedback from our customers.
In moderate climates, like the Netherlands, the CO2 usage is on average 40 kg/m 2 . In areas with higher levels of
solar radiation year-round, the CO2 usage is on average 60 kg/m 2 . However, the actual usage is highly
dependent on aspects like the use of the Boiler, the price of liquid CO2, the grower’s own personal decisions, as
well as other factors. One positive aspect of the Ultra-Clima® greenhouse is that its substantial reduction in the
number of roof vents, as well as its ability to recirculate CO2 makes it much more efficient than conventional
greenhouse structures in its use of CO2. For the present analysis, we have considered that only the Boiler will
supply CO2 to the operation, which was calculated at 19,8 kgCO2 m -2 year -1 .
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
15

6. Production figures
Production estimates are important to calculate the Return on Investment (ROI) of the project. In this section,
the potential productivity of your operation has been estimated for your greenhouse configuration while
considering the following factors:
1. Climate conditions,
2. Technical configuration of the greenhouse,
3. The crop cultivar/variety,
4. Growing method,
5. Artificial lights,
However, it is important to be aware that the actual productivity of the operation will ultimately be
determined by a wide array of factors, many of which cannot be accurately determined or accounted for a
priori (e.g. labor management). Therefore, the results presented in this section represent our best estimate of
the possible productivity of your operation given our experience and the information that is presently
available.
1) Climate Conditions
All influences of the exterior climate on the conditions within the greenhouse structure are considered, based
on the analysis that was conducted for your location in Chapter 4.2.
2) Technical Configuration of the Greenhouse
Production figures have been based on the technical configuration of the Ultra-Clima® Greenhouse as defined
in the KUBO Contract OW 4444.
Benchmark analysis of the KUBO-group clients shows that productivity increases of +20% to +40% can be
expected for an Ultra-Clima® greenhouse. In the productivity calculations we use a conservative productivity
increase of +20% for the Ultra-Clima®.
3) the Cultivar
The board of Aqtobe Greenery has requested productivity estimates for the following TOV cultivars:
1. Forticia (Rijk Zwaan)
2. Merlice (De Ruiter)
For our calculations, we have assumed that the entire operation will be devoted to either the production of the
TOV cultivar ‘Forticia’ from Rijk Zwaan, or the TOV cultivar ‘Merlice’ from De Ruiter.
To calculate the productivity of the selected cultivar, the following sources have been consulted:
• Information of the breeder
• Dutch benchmark figures
• Benchmark figures of KUBO Group customers
• We calculate with 80% of the benchmark (the Ultra-Clima® benchmark), based on our prior
experience in Kazakhstan (KZ Greenhouse) and Russia (Lipetsk Agro).
4) Growing method
Soilless (hydroponic) cultivation in raised gutters in combination with the ‘High Wire’ system: Industry standard
for over 15 years. Consists of training the stem over the growing season and continuously ‘leaning and
lowering’ the plant to increase pollination and light interception, while maintaining the fruits at a convenient
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
16

height for workers. This system also enables year-round production of a high-quality crop with consistent labor
demand.
5) Artificial lights
Based on our analysis of sunlight radiation at your location (Chapter 5.2), it was agreed that the installation of
supplementary assimilation lights is necessary to maintain production levels during the period from October to
February. This is in line with the greenhouse configuration as defined in the KUBO Contract OW 4444, which
specifies an artificial lighting installation that can deliver 246 µmolesPAR m -2 s -1 .
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
17

6.1 Normal Planting Cycle - Forticia
Yearly production of TOV ‘Forticia’ under Normal Planting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima®
greenhouse configuration.
Normal Planting
Floor area (m 2 ) 50.000
Artificial light 246 µmol/m 2 /s
Crop (variety)
Tomatoes (Forticia)
Harvesting (weeks) 39 (2018-2019)
Production (kg/m 2 ) 58
Production (kg total) 2.900.000
Figure 9: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] for a standard year growing TOV ‘Forticia’ under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 10: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] for a standard year growing TOV ‘Forticia’ under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
18

6.2 Interplanting Cycles - Forticia
Production of TOV ‘Forticia’ under Interplanting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® greenhouse
configuration
Interplanting Year 1 Interplanting Year 2
Floor area (m 2 ) 50.000 50.000
Artificial light 246 µmol/m 2 /s 246 µmol/m 2 /s
Crop (variety) Tomatoes (Forticia) Tomatoes (Forticia)
Harvesting (weeks) 43 (2018-2019) 44 (2018-2019)
Production (kg/m 2 ) 64 56
Production (kg total) 3.200.000 2.800.000
Figure 11: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] during Year 1 (Sep-Aug) for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Interplanting
Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 12: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during Year 1 for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Interplanting Cycles
(Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
19

Figure 13: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] during Year 2 (Sep-Aug) for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Interplanting
Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 14: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during Year 2 for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Interplanting Cycles
(Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
20

6.3 Comparison Over 2-Year Period - Forticia
Comparison of Total Production [kg m -2 ] over 2-Year Period for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Normal Planting
Cycles and Interplanting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® greenhouse configuration
Figure 15: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during 2-Year Period for TOV ‘Forticia’ grown under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) or Interplanting Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
21

6.4 Normal Planting Cycle - Merlice
Yearly production of TOV ‘Merlice’ under Normal Planting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima®
greenhouse configuration.
Normal Planting
Floor area (m 2 ) 50.000
Artificial light 246 µmol/m 2 /s
Crop (variety)
Tomatoes (Merlice)
Harvesting (weeks) 39 (2018-2019)
Production (kg/m 2 ) 77
Production (kg total) 3.850.000
Figure 16: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] for a standard year growing TOV ‘Merlice’ under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 17: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] for a standard year growing TOV ‘Merlice’ under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
22

6.5 Interplanting Cycles - Merlice
Production of TOV ‘Merlice’ under Interplanting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® greenhouse
configuration
Interplanting Year 1 Interplanting Year 2
Floor area (m 2 ) 50.000 50.000
Artificial light 246 µmol/m 2 /s 246 µmol/m 2 /s
Crop (variety) Tomatoes (Merlice) Tomatoes (Merlice)
Harvesting (weeks) 43 (2018-2019) 44 (2018-2019)
Production (kg/m 2 ) 85 74
Production (kg total) 4.250.000 3.700.000
Figure 18: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] during Year 1 (Sep-Aug) for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Interplanting
Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 19: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during Year 1 for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Interplanting Cycles
(Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
23

Figure 20: Expected monthly production [kg m -2 ] during Year 2 (Sep-Aug) for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Interplanting
Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Figure 21: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during Year 2 for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Interplanting Cycles
(Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
24

6.6 Comparison Over 2-Year Period - Merlice
Comparison of Total Production [kg m -2 ] over 2-Year Period for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Normal Planting
Cycles and Interplanting Cycles using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® greenhouse configuration
Figure 22: Expected total production [kg m -2 ] during 2-Year Period for TOV ‘Merlice’ grown under Normal Planting Cycles
(Normal System) or Interplanting Cycles (Interplanting) using the Aqtobe Greenery Ultra-Clima® configuration
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
25

7. Contact information
ClimaConnect B.V.
Vlotlaan 139
2681 TX Monster
Post address:
P.O. Box 1041
2680 BA Monster
The Netherlands
+31 174 286 161
www.climaconnect.nl
For climate-, technical-, energy questions and research fields:
Sebastiaan Zwinkels
Business Analyst
+31 620 532 397
szwinkels@climaconnect.nl
For account management -, communication-, Pylot questions:
Kameliya Petrova
Account Manager
+31 623 710 002
kpetrova@climaconnect.nl
For strategic-, organisational-, ICT questions and research fields:
Wouter Kuiper
CEO
+31 653 725 523
wkuiper@climaconnect.nl
Date: 16 March 2018
Technical Analysis
26