There is an increasing concern regarding the impact that meat consumption has on the planet. It is estimated that around a quarter of the greenhouse gas emissions that are driving up the global temperatures originate from farming animals. One of the proposed methods to reduce these negative environmental impacts is to only produce animal muscle tissue, instead of whole animals. This technology is called ‘’cultured meat’’.
Cultured meat is produced by painlessly harvesting muscle cells from a living animal. These cells are then being nurtured and feed by scientists to stimulate multiplication of the muscle tissue. This tissue is biologically the same as traditionally produced meat (Maastricht University n.d.).
A Dutch company called ‘’Mosa Meat’’ was the first company to produce a lab grown-burger. It cost the company around €250.000 to create this burger back in 2013, which was mainly funded by Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google. Nowadays, Mosa Meat is working on scaling up and commercializing its business. The company is planning to launch its cultured meat in supermarkets in the next 2 to 3 years. It is expected that the price will go down from €250.000 to around €9 per burger (Clugston 2019), which is still relatively high in comparison to traditional burgers.
Research from the University of Oxford shows that producing cultured meat could reduce the space that is needed for farming animals with 99%. This can significantly lower the impact that the meat industry has on greenhouse gas emissions (Maastricht University n.d.). However, a recent research from Oxford Martin School questions whether cultured meat will really have such a positive impact on the environment. They argue that the energy intensive production of lab-grown meat could harm the environment even more than the farming of cows would (McGrath 2019). This argument has led to a lot of discussions, with many saying that the production method of cultured meat will most certainly change overtime, as soon as the technologies are more developed. Furthermore, the fact that this production method will save a lot of animals from getting slaughtered is often seen as an important argument to still have a positive view on cultured meat.
In short, there is still a lot of uncertainty regarding the beneficial impact of lab-produced meat. This leads to the question, whether consumers would actually eat cultured meat instead of traditional meat. Would you?
Biblography
Clugston, E. (2019). Mosa Meat: From €250.000 To €9 Burger Patties. Retrieved from: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/09/12/mosa-meat-from-e250000-to-e9-burger-patties/
Maastricht University (n.d.). What Is Cultured Meat?. Retrieved from: https://culturedbeef.org/what-cultured-meat
McGrath, M. (2019). Cultured lab meat may make climate change worse. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47283162
Interesting blog post!
This is another insight into how technology benefits society in general, especially since the meat consumption today is only increasing, while people are well aware that meat consumption is detrimental for the environment and the way these animals are treated is not acceptable. Even though the price is high, I am sure that there will arise innovative ways to reduce this price, and I firmly believe that “cultured meat” is the future. As more and more technologies are being developed everyday, it is unlikely that – with so many people caring about the animals – there will not be a new technology that can aid in the price reduction.
So, yes, I would really eat the cultured meat instead of the traditional meat!
Hi Karlijn, thank you for your comment. It is a very good point that prices will potentially go down further after the technologies are more developed. I think that we can especially expect a reduction in the price due to economies of scale, which is most likely happening in this industry once a broader audience adopts this type of meat and once the production methods have improved.
Hey Anne,
Thank you very much for your blog post. According to the World Economic Forum, “demand for meat will double in the 50 years to 2050” and satisfying this demand will be a “significant challenge” (Charlton, 2019). Therefore, I don’t think we have a choice, other than to think about more sustainable sources of protein. Alternatives such as mycoprotein, jackfruit, tofu, insects and alga have the potential to replace meat in terms of nutritional requirements entirely. Plus, they proved to have positive effects on average life span compared to beef, chicken and pork (Charlton, 2019). However, it is reasonable that eating insects and alga might be too big of an attitude change for now. Cultured meat has the potential to facilitate the transition, as science can produce it in a way that is indistinguishable from regular meat. And with an increase in consumption, production costs will reach affordable price levels soon. I believe that the success of start-ups such as “Beyond Meat” proof this theory while confirming that attitude among consumers towards substitutes is already changing (Ferenstein, 2019).
Charlton, E. (2019) https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/scientists-are-growing-meat-on-blades-of-grass/
Ferenstein, G. (2019) https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregoryferenstein/2019/05/26/an-interview-with-the-ceo-of-beyond-meat/#128be1867e2a
Hi Julia, thank you for flagging that there are also nutritional alternatives to eating meat. I agree with you that the average consumer might not be ready yet to eat insects. However, plant-based meat companies are increasing in popularity. Beyond Meat is indeed a very good example of how the world is changing its perception towards the traditional meat industry. I think that Beyond Meat’s successful IPO shows that the public believes plant-based meat can transform how the world eats. However, I also believe that there will remain a group of people that is not ready to fully give up on eating animal flesh yet. It would be very interesting to see how the adoption of both plant-based meat and cultured meat will evolve in society over time.