2 ms·
On top of that: this style of farming is additive to other uses of the same land area, not exclusive. Having a traditional 100-acre farm demands a loss of 100 a
by tremon 6y ago
On top of that: this style of farming is additive to other uses of the same land area, not exclusive. Having a traditional 100-acre farm demands a loss of 100 acres of land in opportunity cost. Vertical farming allows to use the same land for residential or commercial development, or it allows for 100 acres of food production in only 10 acres of land.
- shmageggy 6y agoThis is a big one, and we should aim for rewilding in the reclaimed space. Agriculture is one of the biggest drivers of habitat loss and thus biodiversity loss.
- ajmurmann 6y agoI wish we could properly account for this negative externality. To me the ideal state for every inch of land is it being a wildlife refuge. To that end I'd love to see a tax that gets charged for using land for anything else. I think it would drive a lot of improvements like vertical farming
- bryanlarsen 6y agoAs a counter example, raising grass-fed cattle on native prairie in Montana is much more "natural" than a wildlife refuge. The natural state of that land was maintained by massive wandering herds of bison. The massive bison herds and their apex predators generally don't exist any more, so a wildlife refuge can be far less "natural" than grazing land.
- lhopki01 6y agoWouldn't it be wonderful though if we could reintroduce them?
- Chris2048 6y agoAre there constrains wrt a given acre of land only receives a fixed average sunlight?