LONDON, May 13 ― Some US$2 billion (RM8.9 billion) dollars have already been invested in cultured meat technology. However, research from the University of California may have thrown a spanner in the works by challenging the ecological argument that often supports the legitimacy of this kind of research. In fact, lab-grown meat could be up to 25 times more harmful to the planet than regular beef.
Promises of CO2 emissions cut by between 80 and 92 per cent compared to conventional farming is one argument brandished by the French start-up Gourmey to extol the virtues of its synthetic foie gras. Many companies around the world that have embarked on creating cultured meat use such claims to convince people of the merits of their research. According to the Good Food Institute, a think tank focused on accelerating alternative protein innovation, “if renewable energy is used throughout the supply chain, cultivated meat’s footprint could drop to 2.8 kg CO2eq/kg. Even when compared to highly optimistic future scenarios for conventional meat production, this carbon footprint is up to 92 per cent less than beef, 44 per cent less than pork, and about the same as chicken.”
The GFI was right to specify in this study published in March 2021 that renewable energies were taken into account in these calculations. Because the development of cultured meat requires so much energy that scientists from the University of California put the environmental cost of lab-grown meat into perspective. According to their calculations, the impact could be 4 to 25 times more harmful to the climate than conventional farming. Speaking to The New Scientist, Derrick Risner of the University of California explains that despite some US$2 billion having already been invested in this technology, it's not yet clear if it will actually be better for the environment.
This surprising conclusion, which undermines one of the main arguments of start-ups involved in lab-grown meat, is the result of analysis that measured the amount of carbon dioxide generated by cultured meat. Several steps in the manufacturing process are indeed problematic. First, the need for sugars, vitamins, amino acids, salt and growth factors to stimulate the production of stem cells. And, above all, the extraction and purification stages carried out with the help of bioreactors that are particularly energy-intensive.
The limits of the ecological argument for lab-grown meat have, in fact, already been addressed by scientists at Oxford University. In 2019, their research modelled the potential warming impact of both lab-grown and regular beef production methods over the next 1,000 years. The scientists notably warn that while reducing methane emissions from cattle would be beneficial for the climate, simply replacing that methane with carbon dioxide resulting from the significant energy requirements of the cultured meat industry could ultimately have detrimental consequences in the long term. More efficient processes and greater use of sustainable energy sources could reduce this impact, the scientists conclude. ― ETX Studio
