That trucking process means getting produce optimized for transport, rather than produce optimized for flavor. The costs are not only in dollars, but in quality.

Agreed and this has been proven already in greenhouse farming. There are many greenhouse farmers that grow crops that would otherwise be impossible to grow in their zone. One example is a orange tree grower in a very cold zone that can sell oranges to his local community at a tiny fraction of what it costs to ship oranges from California. He still makes a profit and the produce is fresh.

Here is a small scale example [1] but I can't fault this guy for keeping it small given his advanced age. I hope I have that much energy when I am older.

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD_3_gsgsnk

There are some remarkably low tech ways to grow citrus in cold climates: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/04/fruit-trenches-culti...

no, they are optimised for mass production. Not shipping.

Shipping isn't that damaging to plants, compared to a 55mph wind.

Decay time is a huge factor in selective breeding, and also in the harvest time of produce shipped across the country versus used locally.

You're telling me that produce grown in its optimal environmental conditions and flash-frozen at harvest is going to taste worse than something grown in a truck in a parkinglot in Brooklyn?

I call bullshit. It's pretty much universally agreed that frozen fruit is fresher and often tastes better, for example.

Flavor is more about varieties being selected for mass production rather than their growing method and transportation. You can transport heirloom tomatoes. Nothing stopping you.

Unquestionably worse. Recognize that "taste" is some mixture of flavor and texture.

I challenge you to slice a thawed tomato the way you would a vine fresh one and tell me there isn't a difference. Same goes for most leafy greens and fruits.

Delicate cellular structures of high water content vegetables are completely obliterated when frozen and then thawed or otherwise processed.

Hydroponically grown vegetables don't typically taste good either. (Common complaints being: bland, weak, "oily", boring). That's the reason why this operation in the article is using soil in their growbeds. It's the only way to get plants that are worth selling.

I don't think you can flash freeze leafy greens and still maintain the texture. Have you eaten flash frozen lettuce for salad?

I mean like, why not? I think the issue with leafy greens is that they're fairly stable, travel well and grow well/quickly in greenhouses, so it's not worth flash freezing them.

Because they're mostly water, and water expands when frozen, destroying the structure of the plant.

You know what else destroys the structure of the plant? Chewing.

That’s a part of the experience though. Freezing will preserve the nutrients, but risks the “mouthfeel”.

But if you’re going to blend it, who cares.

Could that be because we don't yet have a carbon offset cost for transportation? I recognize that the actual cost would be controversial and mostly subjective, but I always wonder about how many things are 'free' or nearly just because there are otherwise hidden costs elsewhere (such as the environment).

This math has already been done.

Even if you figured the carbon offset cost, transporting agriculture still beats out all of these alternatives by a lot.

The math is only becomes slightly favorable to the subset of plants with high water content and lower sunlight tolerance. You can grow tomatos at nearly break-even. A diverse set of agriculture that can sustain people with balanced diets? Not a chance.

Yeah, but not as fresh or tasty. Those that can pay more for the better option will.

Historically they haven't - imported vegetables have beaten locally-grown ones handily. What's changed?

Not negligible in terms of pollution

Do you think that LED grow systems and the nutrients/chemicals being used to help grow these plants are pollution-free?