> Critics also note that many staple crops such as wheat, rice, and corn remain difficult and economically impractical to grow vertically at scale. For now, vertical farming is best suited to leafy greens, herbs, microgreens, strawberries, medicinal plants, and specialty crops with high nutritional or economic value.

Among other massively downplayed disclaimers.

Or look at her top-of-article photo. If it took just the visible infrastructure (building, shelves, lights) to grow food for at-scale human consumption, could we afford to keep more than 1 or 2 percent of the earth's current population alive?

My reimagining: An appliance that drools sugar syrup, or carbohydrate, or fat, or protein into a cup. Electric, using micro-machines etched into silicon wafers that sew the molecules together out of elements in the air (CHON)

Vertical farming articles are so often disappointing to me. They so often look like some one is trying to make a billion dollars.

It seems something like vertical gardening (a phrase I just made up) would be better. Something that is not trying to be then end all be all solution. Just a way to supplement peoples fresh food needs. Something like a few shelves outside a house with a small yard or the side of an apartment building sounds a little more practical. Some technology would probably be helpful (especially watering the plants). It could use natural sunlight and provide some shade for the building behind it. Make it into a greenhouse in the winter and it might even provide some heat. It might be something that many people could enjoy.