Been saying this for years. Instead of (or in addition to) growing almonds in the central valley, requiring large irrigation inputs, we could be growing hybrid hazelnuts in the northeast. Just one example. Not saying it would have equivalent profitability, but I have a hard time believing it would be less efficient or profitable than vertical farming with external high energy inputs.

There's plenty that can be done in traditional agriculture.

What makes you think they don't grow food there now? Hint: they do.

The breadbasket as the name implies, grows mostly cereal crops: wheat, corn, barely and not a cereal but diverse use: soy. There are small operations that do grow more traditional vegetables, but due to their labor intensive harvests and produces short shelf lives, they are not terribly profitable (without underpaid migrant workers located near large populations to consume or process the produce quickly). This in my opinion is why we see things like water intensive almonds, only being harvested in places like water scarce California. Labor cost is something vertical farms often treat as a given, which at least for most of our non-cereal produce production, it is not.

Absolutely cheap labour is a major component of the central valley's success. Also being able to run multiple seasons worth of crops.

That the rich and naturally irrigated soils of the midwest and northeast are basically only used for animal feed agriculture now is a real shame from an economic diversification and health POV but also from an environmental perspective. Giant swathes of topsoil are depleted every year, and fertilizer and pesticide runoff pollutes entire drainage basins of these regions.

Cash crop agriculture like this is highly capital intensive, so squeezes out smaller operators, and does very little to support the surrounding towns.

Anywhere near the rustbelt is going to need their soil thoroughly tested for contamination. But maybe that's not too big a deal when you amortize the cost over the entire life of a farm.

You do realize the rust belt is enormous and only an infinitesimally small area of it was factories, right? Sure. Don’t try to grow food in Detroit. But vast majority of PA, OH, IN, MI have always been rural and are not some polluted hell scape.

Their main point is wrong... but it is worth pointing out that a lot of the soils in the northest _do_ need to be tested not because of industrial pollution but because of agricultural pollution.

Apple orchards in particular up until the 70s often used lead arsenate pesticide sprays. Yes, you read that right; lead and arsenic. Sprayed onto plants. It accumulated in the soil and basically never leaves, and is a serious potential health hazard.

There has been insufficient discussion of this, overall, and it's basically "buyer beware" for land.

Not to mention the tremendous farmland in Wisconsin and Iowa that could easily be converted to vegetable farms if the demand shifted from animal product.