top | item 44058615

(no title)

99_00 | 9 months ago

I don’t get it. How could a high tech green house ever be more profitable than free sunshine, dirt

Your product gets, what? Max $2.50/# retail?

discuss

order

poulsbohemian|9 months ago

Farmland is stupidly expensive. The equipment and inputs (fertilizer, fuel) are stupidly expensive. Growing outside, you are forever at the whims of the weather rather than being able to control each detail of production. Fields inevitably have parts that have variable soil and water conditions. When you look at what a country like the Netherlands has done with greenhouse growing, it's pretty compelling. Was AppHarvest the answer? Apparently not, but that doesn't negate that there are indoor models that work.

Doxin|9 months ago

For some context on the scale of what's going on in the netherlands, see this article for some lovely photos[0]

Mind that these aren't startups either. These are old companies making money. My grandfather used to talk about working in greenhouses exactly like these.

[0] https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/glowing-dutch-greenhou...

nradov|9 months ago

Which indoor models work? They might be viable for boutique produce that is highly perishable. But the notion that this could ever work for bulk staple crops is just stupid.

Farmland isn't that expensive.

99_00|9 months ago

It’s the opposite of compelling. The fact the tech and knowledge is well established but not widely used means it’s less profitable and not competitive with traditional farming except in exceptional circumstances

bryanrasmussen|9 months ago

many products that are wanted year round in some freshness are seasonal and limited, tomatoes being the canonical example.

99_00|9 months ago

Mexico City to Edmonton Alberta is a 48 hour drive