Vertical Farming
Vertical Farming is often presented as a replacement for traditional agriculture, however, I believe it works best when both systems are incorporated together for our society. Both methods have their pro's and cons, and removing one completely for the other would ignore what it does well.
Vertical Farming has clear advantages of the space maximization, allows food to be grown in cities and not just rural areas (like where most traditional farming is done), making it more accessible and reduce transportation since food is grown closer to where lots of the population lives. It also uses less water, zero pesticides, and it is season-independent.
At the same time, traditional farming lays a role that vertical farming cannot take over. Large-scale crops like corn, rice, wheat, etc, require more space and are more practical to grow in open fields of land, and has more high-efficiency regarding production in bigger amounts. Replacing traditional farming with vertical farming would create new limitations and remove the innovation of having both.
Overall, this shows that improvement doesn't always mean replacement. Vertical and traditional farming both have their advantages in specific situations, but treating one as "better" than the other will do more harm than good. Their differences is what makes them useful together. Instead of replacing systems proven to work, we should build on both of them and increase them to be even more efficient for our society.
I agree with your argument, I think it’s a very nice take often times people don’t stop to consider- we aren’t completely moving to one side or the other. I also liked how you explored where traditional and vertical farming was better. Overall great work!
ReplyDelete