This. People should be dense, farms should be sparse.
Taking city land to grow crops is NOT carbon-efficient. The far more carbon-efficient method would be to use city land for more housing, and use suburbia for farms.
Think of it this way: people commute both ways every day, but food commutes only once.
I'm not even going to get into the idea that it's more carbon-efficient to grow bananas in South America and ship them to New York than it would be to heat and light a greenhouse in New York...
I agree with most of this post. But, a small correction: food only commutes in, but then waste commutes back out again. Unless you propose to build landfills in the city.
Taking city land to grow crops is NOT carbon-efficient. The far more carbon-efficient method would be to use city land for more housing, and use suburbia for farms.
Think of it this way: people commute both ways every day, but food commutes only once.
I'm not even going to get into the idea that it's more carbon-efficient to grow bananas in South America and ship them to New York than it would be to heat and light a greenhouse in New York...