That seems kind of pricey.

The initial costs (which are high enough anyway in agriculture) would probably be so high that only corporate farmers could afford them. I don't think anything that replaces even more family farmers with corporate farmers would be good. But if we keep using our prime land for housing, we may need something like that.

I suppose a good thing about the housing downturn is that we might be able to preserve some good agricultural land. In the last 20 years, I have watched one of the top agricultural areas in the country (northern Colorado) disappear under tract houses and shopping centers. I hope to be able to persuade someone in a position of authority that houses can be built in other places. Wish me luck.

Sorry about getting off topic.

--lylwik

Last edited by lylwik; 03/13/09 08:54 PM.