Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by MikeDelta on Friday December 30, 2022 @05:00AM
(#34183599)
How is that different from a glass house or normal agriculture?
A normal piece of farmland or glass house captures all sunlight falling on its surface for the produce that grows on the same surface, ratio 1:1. If you were to use sunlight falling on the vertical farm with 5 floors, it would have to divide the sunlight over more surface, ratio 1:5, so there is less sunlight per surface.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by ricardobeat on Friday December 30, 2022 @10:12AM
(#34185719)
Solar panels + lights together are a system for redirecting energy, and the efficiency “loss” is inconsequential. You can simply cover an adjacent area 10x the size to provide the extra sunlight.
Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by jodrellblank on Friday December 30, 2022 @10:40AM
(#34185993)
But then why not cover the adjacent area with crops and sod the vertical farm, solar panels, grow lamps, wiring, and all the costs, construction time, maintenance work, etc. and just have a farm?
Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by voakbasda on Friday December 30, 2022 @11:17AM
(#34186409)
Because good land itself might just be more expensive to purchase and maintain than all of those systems in a highly dense footprint?
Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by curi0sity on Friday December 30, 2022 @11:23AM
(#34186493)
Instead of an adjacent area, the panels could be in an arid desert. Meanwhile, the vertical farm is in a population center and using less water
Re:Vertical Farming Has Found Its Fatal Flaw
by dredmorbius on Friday December 30, 2022 @10:08PM
(#34193103)
That is equivalent to saying "vertical farming is cost-effective where energy is free and land is scarce and expensive".
Oddly enough, precisely the opposite circumstance describes most farming.