> The reason for growing in the city is to reduce transportation cost and time.of it gets in the store the same day the plants were harvested then it increases

> The reason for growing in the city is to reduce transportation cost and time.of it gets in the store the same day the plants were harvested then it increases freshness/nutritional value and it increases the shelf life. So let's see some analysis on the cost of growing in the city vs. cost of transportation plus spoilage. Data, numbers, the good stuff! > This also eliminates the need for pesticides since you're closing off the plants from insects. You don't need to grow indoors to grow pesticide-free. Nor do you need to grow indoors to protect plants from pests. > Organically grown plants are GMO free and therefore need a lot more pesticides to keep it looking good. So if you want to pay the cheaper price for a mouth of chemical then that's on you. Holy conflation, Batman! First of all, "organic" is a family of growing methods; one could grow GM stock using organic methods if one wished, though in most places it will be difficult to get certification. Second, by definition "organic" methods prohibit or greatly restrict the use of pesticides. So you're contradicting yourself here; someone growing non-GM food organically is by definition not using them. > I agree that the electricity usage is an issue but this is something that is being solved. Year by year we see lights getting more efficient and solar panels getting more efficient as well. As I explained, this doesn't matter. A 100%-efficient PV module connected to a 100%-efficient LED bulb with a 100%-efficient transmission and distribution system is at best going to provide the same growing area as the area of those PV modules. The physics of the situation simply do not allow anything more than that, and in this universe, where we obey the laws of thermodynamics, they don't even allow that. Surface farming will always be more efficient than covering the surface with PV modules and farming somewhere else. If you cannot accept this, then your entire argument reduces to "indoor farming is a perpetual motion machine" and you should expect it to be taken as such. > When it comes to running out of farmable land and fresh water becoming more scarce and a growing population though, If you don't have fresh water, you cannot farm anywhere, period. A tap in an urban building is not inhabited by magical water fairies; that water comes from the same places that traditional farms get theirs. If you believe you have a more water-efficient way to farm, why not combine that with the most energy-efficient farming method as well and employ it on the surface? Don't waste such an important advance by trying to sell it in a bundle with magic and perpetual motion.