The reason for this disconnect is that macroeconomics also factors in a strong premium for reliability and availability (and de-risking). A trucking company needs to guarantee its customers that it can consistently deliver the goods within a fixed window and hence requires its fuel supply to be likewise guaranteed. The same applies in IT -- business critical service require that the storage backend works 100% to deliver their promises, so even though a home-built storage server can do the same job as $10k (+$500/TB) professional storage solution, but there are many more unknown risks, support risk and a huge premium paid to deliver a reliable solution.
If a farmer wants to grow a bit of extra bio-fuel or pump a dying well, he is cushioned by the fact that if it doesn't work, he can still go to town and get what he needs. But the macro view here is that this is much less valuable than a reliable mass-scale system that can make stronger (but not perfect) availability guarantees.
Also, as a side-note, I'd wonder what the effective wage that a farmer that runs his own wells is paying himself for his own labor in setting it up and tending to it. This might end up being like owning a restaurant where it's only nominally profitable because the owners put in a huge amount of their own time and pay themselves only minimum wage. If they had to hire someone with the appropriate expertise to manage the restaurant, they would not be able to pay the prevailing wage and still make a profit. At some level, I suppose, there is a marginal non-fungibility of labor on your own farm/restaurant as there is on the open market, much in the way that engineers invest thousands of dollars in their own time on pet projects when a market solution would be nominally more efficient.