Andy wrote:
>
> Steve Pope said...
>
> > In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
> >
> >>Steve Pope said...
> >
> >>> Vertical farming of a sort has been going on for centuries
> >>> in steeply-sloped parts of Italy like the Amalfi coast
> >>> or southern Tyrolia. All you need is a near-vertical, south-facing
> >>> slope. And lots of labor.
> >
> >>I don't see how it's going to be cheap or even feasible to provide
> >>controlled artificial sunlight to all the floors year round.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Only pot farmers can afford much artificial light...
> >
> > Steve
>
> 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.
>
> Artificial sunlight would be the only feasible way to do a city block 10
> acre/10 story building. No other way to do it. It would be "Insanity
> Architecture & Engineering."
>
> Let's just think of the illegal aliens and put VFs to rest!!
>
> Andy

Lots of buildings in NYC are 'set back' or stepped to provide more
sunlight to more floors. The building frames wouldn't need to have that
much floor 'acreage' to work. Think more like terraced hillsides,
although the terracing isn't really about supplying more light.

Still very expensive to get going.