43 ms·

3) and 4) are easily solved with glass or transparent polythene, as is already done commercially on a vast scale. https://portalexport.files.wordpress.com/2014

3) and 4) are easily solved with glass or transparent polythene, as is already done commercially on a vast scale. https://portalexport.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/greenhouses-almeria-25.jpg https://portalexport.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/greenhouses... 1) and 2) are essentially irrelevant, because the fundamental limiting factor on both agriculture and sustainable energy generation is surface area. Plants are effectively photochemical solar arrays that turn light and CO2 into food energy; nobody would be crazy enough to propose a "vertical solar farm" where LEDs are used to illuminate photovoltaic panels, but vertical farms are exactly as bonkers.

dmurray 7y ago
> nobody would be crazy enough to propose a "vertical solar farm" where LEDs are used to illuminate photovoltaic panels, but vertical farms are exactly as bonkers This isn't true: at least in theory, you can take white sunlight, produce electricity by the photovoltaic process and power LEDs in a spectrum optimized for plant growth (blue and red light instead of green). In practice the LED efficiency (150-200%) doesn't yet make up for the inefficiency of the best commercially available solar panels (25-30%), but the idea is not fundamentally ridiculous. And solar power is not always the cheapest form of electricity, or even necessarily competitive. Consider Iceland, with abundant cheap renewable geothermal energy but a shortage of sunlight, and LED-illuminated farms make even more sense (and are already operating at scale).
thecolorblue 7y ago
> Plants are effectively photochemical solar arrays You are right here, however, not all plants are created equal. The value of a plant in not tied to how much energy they produce.