You wrote earlier:
The whole friggn' cuntry is a "and sort of sprawly place".
As I demonstrated, that is not true. There's at least 5% of the US (in the areas I mentioned) which lives or works in areas with much higher population density than suburban sprawl. A counterexample trumps a universal assertion.
Further, we haven't even discussed that the vast majority of the US by land area doesn't even have the "sort of sprawly" population density of suburban sprawl. By the argument you've put out before, that means we don't need to consider any sort of high density technology at all. After all, most of the US is farms, wilderness, and water.
You've also genuinely engaged in the sort of "re-writing" that you futilely accuse me of. Perhaps you recall this rewrite of a few replies ago:
Yeah, the US isn't the only place in the world. It is, however, the biggest market in the world.
You are ignoring 80-85% of the world's economic activity and around 95% of the world's population by brushing off the rest of the world.
In addition, when bandying around claims of "biggest market", we need to consider biggest market for what? For example, I think we can all agree that the US probably will be punching well below its weight for urban farming due to the moderate sprawl of most of the US population. China, Japan, and the EU won't. I would consider each of those regions taken separately bigger markets for urban farming than the US.
And one doesn't need hundreds of millions of customers in order to successfully install and operate an urban farm. If urban farming is practical, then it'll be practical on the very ample US markets I already mentioned, which have around 10-15 million people in total. If it isn't practical, then it doesn't matter if the market is 10 million people or 350 million people.