this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
252 points (98.5% liked)

Futurology

1801 readers
42 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bluGill@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Sure, but where does the energy for that light come from? If the answer is burning things (this is the most likely answer today!) then you are making the world worse. Renewable answers all go back to the sun so why not use the sun directly and avoid all the inefficiencies from turning the sun into electric and then back into light? Which leaves nuclear - which is dieing because of expense.

[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, it can come from renewables. There are many ways to build renewables in a way that doesn’t use additional surface area. Like you can have wild nature with wind turbines sprinkled throughout. Solar panels can built on top of most structures humans build anyway.

Vertical farming has the potential to use less land, allowing more wild natural ecosystems.

The controlled environment of vertical farming also allows you to work in a cleaner environment, meaning less need to employ pesticides.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

We can also do agrifarming and use the space under the panels for animals to graze or whatever else they've come up with.

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Photosynthesis only uses a couple frequencies. Using solar to generate electricity and feed that into target LEDs can be significantly more efficient.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io -1 points 1 month ago

while not wrong solar does not use most of the sun either and what plants use is where a large part of the energy is. Plus your add in the rest of the inefficiencies of the grid. So I'm back to not seeing how this can be enough better.

i'm sure you can grow plants this way I just don't think you can ever make it a good way