Lab Grown Meat – Serene’s Synopsis 105
The meat industry is known for its immense environmental impact and inhumane treatment of animals, which, among other factors, have encouraged many individuals to decrease their consumption of meat, especially beef. However, it is possible to produce meat, beloved for its taste and protein content, without having to kill an animal for it. Lab-grown meat is produced by cultivating animal cells, meaning that much of the environmental drawbacks of meat production can potentially be negated, and the ethical dilemmas associated with breeding hordes of animals under poor conditions are entirely eliminated.
That being said, the process is still early in its development, meaning estimates of production costs and environmental impact vary widely. On one end of the spectrum, a study conducted by UC Davis found that the current way of producing lab-grown meat can have a warming effect up to “four to 25 times” that of the “average for retail beef,” though it is important to note that the paper has yet to be peer-reviewed (Quinton). This estimate assumes that current technology requires that lab-grown meat be grown with pharmaceutical-grade materials, which is both pricey and less than ideal for the environment. However, experts argue that pharmaceutical-grade ingredients are not necessary for meat cell cultivation, as much of the costs from producing those ingredients are associated with purification steps that aren’t necessary for cultivated meat. UC Davis’ estimates for lab-grown meat that don’t involve using pharmaceutical-grade resources go as low as 20% of the global warming potential of meat from slaughtered cows (Quinton).
It is hard to know for sure what the global warming effect of synthesized meat is, as it is extremely early in its development, and predictions rely on a variety of factors that have yet to be determined. One study in the Environmental Science & Technology journal made predictions under the assumption that cyanobacteria hydrolysate was used to grow meat in 2013, finding that that cultivated meat has about “7%-45% lower energy use, 78%-96% lower GHG emissions, 99% lower land use, and 82%-96% lower water use” than traditional meat. A different report approximates about 3-14 kilograms of CO2 equivalent per kilogram of cultivated meat, whereas traditional methods result in 10 for chicken, 12 for pork, and 33-100 for beef (Sinke et al.; Ritchie).
It is important to note that much of the environmental impact of cultured meat stems from electricity use, and higher estimates typically use data for global average energy. Right now, most of the world’s energy is generated through fossil fuel combustion, and using sustainable fuels can drastically reduce the environmental toll of cultured meat. Global targets to phase out fossil fuels in the coming decades could decrease the impact of synthesized meat over time, but the GHGs produced by living animals are much more difficult to control. That being said, the study conducted by UC Davis found that lab-grown beef was outperformed by the most efficient traditional beef practices in terms of emissions.
Regardless of environmental impact, lab-grown meat will not be widely implemented as a substitute for livestock if it cannot be offered at a competitive price. Though exact numbers haven’t been released to the public, companies cultivating synthetic meat have admitted that current costs are significantly higher than their normal counterparts. It is important to keep in mind, though, that costs are always heightened in new fields because it takes time to refine the systems necessary for new markets. The first lab-grown burger cost a staggering $325,000, but that cost dropped to just $11.36 in only two years (Shepherd). Over time, research and technological adjustments will eliminate some of the inefficiencies responsible for the price gap. Progress advances quickly, and lab-grown meat may be hitting the market soon, as two companies received approvals from the USDA for their lab-grown chicken meat in June 2023. If it can be manufactured at price parity with conventional meat, it can gain traction with consumers, and funds raised can be invested in making the process more sustainable. The verdict is still out on if lab-grown meat is better for the environment under current circumstances, but given the proper investment and research, it could be an amazing alternative to slaughtered meat.
Writing this article made me consider what an animal is. I was uncertain that it was true to say that lab-grown meat could be harvested without killing any animals, because the meat does come from animal cells. But as my eloquent friend pointed out to me as I asked her what she thought, if you slice off a pig’s leg, it’s not like you killed a bunch of animals, just animal cells.
It’s so exciting to hear about the advancements of food technology and the benefits it could bring. As with the precision fermentation of dairy, lab grown meat could eliminate concerns over disease transmission in livestock, which is a very relevant topic considering the prevalence of avian influenza right now.
I’m enjoying how a lot of my recent articles are overlapping right now, like with cell cultures and the importance of decarbonizing the energy sector. It’s cool to see how much we can do and how they all relate, even in a small corner of our technological research.
Anyway, I originally wrote this article over the summer, so I apologize if there’s more relevant information I could include. I am definitely excited to hear more about this topic in the future, and I hope it becomes a commercial success, because it really does have so much potential. Guess we’ll have to see, so stay tuned to learn with me!
https://www.ucdavis.edu/food/news/lab-grown-meat-carbon-footprint-worse-beef
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21682287/#full-view-affiliation-1
https://www.livescience.com/lab-grown-meat
https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/07/03/1075809/lab-grown-meat-climate-change/
https://ourworldindata.org/carbon-footprint-food-methane