Vertical farming: a local solution for greens, but not feeding the world any time soon

Hannah Ritchie · 5 Dec 2024

Others here said this too

Vertical farming swaps a land problem for an energy problem, and the energy cost is what stops it feeding the world.

Their wordsWhat stands in the way is energy demand. Growing crops indoors is energy-intensive. So we’re really swapping a land problem for an energy one.

Also said by Michael Grunwald

Read the piece on hannahritchie.substack.com ↗

3 korrents from this piece ↓

Hannah Ritchie did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

Our reading
Vertical farming swaps a land problem for an energy problem, and the energy cost is what stops it feeding the world.
Mental modelBottlenecks

Their wordsWhat stands in the way is energy demand. Growing crops indoors is energy-intensive. So we’re really swapping a land problem for an energy one.
Our reading
Cereals will stay an outdoor crop, because the energy to grow them indoors costs far more than the grain is worth.

Their wordsWithout some crazy technological breakthrough, cereals are are going to be an outdoor-only crop for a long time.
Our reading
Vertical farms are not automatically better for the climate than farming outdoors.

Their wordsA number of studies, conducting full life-cycle analyses, have found that vertical farms currently have a higher carbon footprint than conventional outdoor farming.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.