Artificial meat

[BrainGlutton]

@erislover

Now that you took it there

Oh, somebody will IRL, it’s inevitable. (Assuming perfected artificial-meat-growing technology.) And eventually it will get out, if it’s ever in. And then there will be legislation and litigation and controversy and electoral litmus-tests on the issue.

[erislover]

Well we already know that RCC will refuse to help anyone who has eaten faux-human. But will artificial pork be kosher? These are the questions that drive us all.

[Ruby_Slippers]

One more possible benefit which I don’t believe has been mentioned yet: in the thread from which this was spun off, someone mentioned the problem of overuse of antibiotics in food animals and pointed out that this practice, more than overprescribing for humans, is a major driver in the growth of multiply resistant bacteria. I’m assuming that if the meat is grown in a laboratory, it won’t require antibiotics.

[andros]

@BrainGlutton

You know where this is going, don’t you? Cannibalisn’t. Anthropofauxgy. Test-tube-babycakes.

“I’m Spider Jerusalem, and I approve this message.”

[Trinopus]

Heck, even now, at the state of the art today, fake meats aren’t too bad. Soya burgers won’t fool anybody into thinking they’re made of cow, but they are kinda yummy for what they are. I think this will be a huge growth industry in the next decade or two, and I’m wholly in favor of it. It’s win/win/win/win/win!

[Ruby_Slippers]

I’m betting the first artificial meat product will be Spam. Closely followed by hot dogs.

[jjimm]

@Blake

slaw enforcement

Motto: “protect and serve the right condiments on your artificial hot dog”.

[BMalion]

What about Soylent Green?

[DSeid]

As to the potential positive impact IF artificial meat could be produced that was as palatable as the real thing and for the same or less cost, let us use China as a case study:

Starting in 1979, pork became the most produced and consumed meat in the world. The reason for its ascent to the top of the global meat heap is simple: China. In 2010 alone, farmers and companies in China produced more than 50 million metric tons of pork, virtually all of which was sold and consumed domestically …

… The consequences of these changes in pig production and pig feeding have wide-ranging impacts. In terms of environmental degradation, agriculture in general—and livestock farming in particular—are the most important sources of pollution in China. Livestock farms produce more than 4 billion tons of manure annually, much of which contributes to nutrient overload in waterways and subsequent eutrophication and dead zones. Globally, as more and more land is converted to intensive monocrop production of soybeans and corn (and others in a narrow range of industrial feed crops), pesticide and fertilizers pollute waterways, biodiversity declines, natural carbon sinks are destroyed, and greenhouse gases are emitted in all stages of intensive feed production and transport.

Industrial pig feeding also carries a range public health concerns. China is becoming increasingly infamous as a site of food safety scandals, most of which stem from feed additives such as hormones and growth regulators ending up in meat and livestock products. On top of this, the prophylactic administration of antibiotics in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has resulted in antibiotic-resistant and disease-causing organisms emerging in China, just as in the United States and Europe …

Humanity’s growing appetite for animal flesh (just heard a report on NPR this morning about how vegetarianism is becoming passe among the middle class and above in India now) is unsustainable, and has significant environmental consequences. At least as animal flesh is currently produced.

Artificial meat theoretically could need dramatically fewer resources as inputs and produce many fewer harmful outputs. It could free up land for other purposes, perhaps biomass for energy, or more food, or indeed as forests to function as carbon sinks. (Like that would happen.) It could be designed to have the protein of one animal, any particular mouth feel, and yet have salmon adipocytes mixed in to provide more omega 3s.

I relish the concept and can’t wait until the technology can catch up to the role I say it should have, yes, the says me role.

[thelabdude]

Be interesting to see how such a product fares in a society banning genetically modified grains from the human food chain.

Logic says go for it. As mentioned demand for grazing land is a severe problem. So is bush meat. Malnutrition?

I would want strict labeling laws. Those wanting Angus and paying for it are entittled to it

[Lantern]

Interesting articlein the Guardian:

According to the analysis by scientists from Oxford University and Amsterdam University, lab-grown tissue would reduce greenhouse gases by up to 96% in comparison to raising animals. The process would require between 7% and 45% less energy than the same volume of conventionally produced meat such as pork, beef, or lamb, and could be engineered to use only 1% of the land and 4% of the water associated with conventional meat.

[Cat_Whisperer]

Are we actually at the stage where we can develop a decent, palatable vat meat?

[DSeid]

@Cat_Whisperer

Are we actually at the stage where we can develop a decent, palatable vat meat?

No.

[Tom_Tildrum]

Why would it require less input of resources?

[TripleFail]

It would require less input of resources because there wouldn’t be any need to grow bones, brains, fur etc.

[BMalion]

“Tofu, the other fake white meat.”

[Michael63129]

@TripleFail

It would require less input of resources because there wouldn’t be any need to grow bones, brains, fur etc.

For some numbers, according to this article, muscle (which is what most meat eaten is) accounts for about 1/4 of the resting metabolic rate (RMR) in a human (presumably similar for other animals, except for maybe the brain):

“Brain function makes up close to 20% of RMR,” he said. “Next is the heart, which is beating all the time and accounts for another 15-20%. The liver, which also functions at rest, contributes another 15-20%. Then you have the kidneys and lungs and other tissues, so what remains is muscle, contributing only 20-25% of total resting metabolism.”

Add to that calories expended during movement and the final number is even lower, although the quality and texture of unexercised muscle is different (not that many animals raised for food get much), thus methods have been proposed to exercise artificial meat (although, in products made of ground-up meat that probably wouldn’t make a difference).

Also, artificial meat could be grown much faster, which would reduce the amount of energy needed to sustain the RMR (due to less time), which is normally much higher than the energy used in growth (e.g. if RMR is 10 times the energy used for growth and the growth rate could be increased by 10 times, then they would become equal, plus the RMR would be over 1/10th of the time, effectively 100 times less compared to growth energy).

[DSeid]

@JoelUpchurch

… I actually tried to compute the GHG footprint for cheese, but my numbers are very rough, since it is difficult to compute how many ounces of milk go into an ounce of cheese. …

I knew I had seen a study that did this. Here.

For protein-rich food, such as legumes, meat, fish, cheese, and eggs, the difference is a factor of 30 with the lowest emissions per kilogram for legumes, poultry, and eggs and the highest for beef, cheese, and pork. Large emissions for ruminants are explained mainly by methane emissions from enteric fermentation. For vegetables and fruits, emissions usually are ≤2.5 kg CO2 equivalents/kg product, even if there is a high degree of processing and substantial transportation. Products transported by plane are an exception because emissions may be as large as for certain meats. Emissions from foods rich in carbohydrates, such as potatoes, pasta, and wheat, are <1.1 kg/kg edible food. We suggest that changes in the diet toward more plant-based foods, toward meat from animals with little enteric fermentation, and toward foods processed in an energy-efficient manner offer an interesting and little explored area for mitigating climate change…

They come up with 11 kg CO2 equivalents/kg of product for cheese; half as much as beef and 2 1/2 times more than chicken. Not so far off from your calculations.

[andros]

@TripleFail

It would require less input of resources because there wouldn’t be any need to grow bones, brains, fur etc.

Also time, space, possibly fuel . . .

[Sunspace]

@BMalion

“Tofu, the other fake white meat.”

You laugh, but I’ve been living with vegetarians and some of that tofu is damn good. I eat a lot less meat than I used to.