Интегрированное письмо TOEFL

📖 Текст для чтения

The Benefits of Urban Vertical Farming Vertical farming, the practice of growing crops in stacked layers within controlled indoor environments, has been hailed as a solution to many of the challenges facing modern agriculture. Proponents argue that vertical farms offer three key advantages over traditional farming methods. First, vertical farming dramatically reduces water usage. Because crops are grown hydroponically or aeroponically in closed systems, water is recycled and reused, with estimates suggesting that vertical farms use up to 95% less water than conventional field agriculture. Second, vertical farming eliminates the need for chemical pesticides and herbicides. In a sealed indoor environment, pests and weeds are largely excluded, reducing the reliance on harmful agrochemicals and resulting in cleaner, safer produce. Third, vertical farming can be established in urban areas, close to consumers. This proximity reduces transportation costs and the carbon footprint associated with food distribution, while also providing fresh produce to food deserts—areas with limited access to affordable, nutritious food. By shortening supply chains, vertical farming could enhance food security and reduce post-harvest losses. Given these benefits, many city planners and agricultural experts advocate for the widespread adoption of vertical farming as a sustainable alternative to traditional agriculture.

🎧 Лекция

Now listen to part of a lecture on the same topic. While vertical farming sounds promising, several critical issues undermine these claims. First, although vertical farms use less water, they require enormous amounts of energy. The controlled environment—lighting, heating, cooling, and ventilation—demands constant electricity, often generated from fossil fuels. In fact, studies show that vertical farming can consume up to ten times more energy per kilogram of produce than conventional farming. This energy intensity may negate any environmental gains from water conservation. Second, the claim about eliminating pesticides is misleading. While vertical farms reduce exposure to outdoor pests, they are not immune to infestations. Indoor environments can still harbor fungi, bacteria, and insects, and once an infestation occurs, it spreads rapidly because of the dense planting. Consequently, vertical farms may actually require more frequent and stronger chemical treatments than open fields, posing risks to consumers and workers. Third, the urban location advantage is overstated. Many vertical farms are built in repurposed warehouses or high-rise buildings, which come with high real estate and construction costs. These expenses are passed on to consumers, making vertical produce significantly more expensive than traditional crops. Moreover, urban farms still rely on long-distance supply chains for seeds, nutrients, and equipment, so their overall carbon footprint may not be much lower. In fact, the transportation savings are often offset by the energy needed for climate control, especially in cities with harsh climates. Therefore, the purported benefits of vertical farming are not as clear-cut as they appear.