In the question below, a passage is given followed by three statements. You must determine which combination of the statements WEAKENS the argument presented. Argument: To solve global food insecurity, several biotech firms are proposing the mass-scale development of "Vertical Urban Farming." They argue that growing crops in climate-controlled skyscrapers within cities will eliminate the need for vast agricultural land, reduce water consumption by 95%, and ensure a year-round supply of fresh produce regardless of climate change. However, critics point out the high energy costs for artificial lighting, the limited variety of crops that can be grown profitably, and the potential for these systems to become exclusive high-end services for the wealthy. Which of the following statements, if true, would WEAKEN the case for Vertical Urban Farming?
I. New breakthroughs in "Regenerative Open-Field Agriculture" have demonstrated the ability to restore soil health and produce high yields with minimal chemical input and water use.
II. Current urban zoning laws and international food safety protocols vary so widely that a standardized, global rollout of vertical farms would face decades of legal delays.
III. Analysts have found that the carbon footprint of the electricity required for vertical farm lighting often exceeds the emissions saved by reducing food transportation distances.