The article portrays indoor agriculture as more expensive that traditional agriculture outdoors in a field. On the other hand the article claims big improvement

The article portrays indoor agriculture as more expensive that traditional agriculture outdoors in a field. On the other hand the article claims big improvements in crop yields due to the controlled environment to add to the savings in transport costs. So the idea is looking viable right up to the time that the huge electricity bill for the grow-lights arrives. The missing next step in the analysis is to break out the concept of penthouse farming. Penthouse farming is different from vertical framing in that penthouse farming only farms the top floor, using daylight through a glass roof. Lower floors are flats or offices as usual. If vertical farming makes any kind of sense then penthouse farming should be very profitable. The path to vertical farming looks something like this: o penthouse farming starts and is just about viable o improved techniques boost yields leading to fat profits, almost enough to cover the cost of electricity for grow-lights for lower floors o cost of electricity falls o vertical farming profitable!