Steve Pope said...

> In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>
>>Steve Pope said...
>
>>> I'm not aware that vertical farming ever involves artificial
>>> light. Instead, the man-made vertical structure intersects
>>> sunlight that would otherwise fall upon non-farming land,
>>> like a business or residential district, taking advantage
>>> of the fact that most sunlight is coming in at an angle
>>> rather than from straight above.
>
>>It still can't work. Each succeeding lower floor would get less and less
>>sunlight, yielding less and less. Even if the building rotated, the
"inner
>>sanctum" of each floor wouldn't see direct sunlight.
>
> All this implies is that the vertical spacing from floor to
> floor must be large compared to the width of the floor.
>
>>Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10
>>acre/10 story building. No other way to do it.
>
> I completely disagree. Why would you need to build a tall building
> (as opposed to a flat one) if you're simply piping in
> electricity for lighting? The whole purpouse of a vertical
> arangement is to intersect a large segment of sunlight
> for a given footprint, thus justifying the construction cost
> of a tall structure.
>
>
> Steve


OK, let's take the Pentagon, for example. It sits on 34 acrews but has
149.219467 acres of floor space.

Would you rather pay electricity and water and construction costs for
building 150 acres of vertical farm or just use 150 acres of God's green
earth. Which is the greener solution?

When you add up all the time it would take to creat the Pentagons you'd
have to build to have supply meet demand, we'd all be dead of starvation.

Andy