Test Tube Steak: sustainable lab-grown meat

Tube Steak: There's no doubt that lab-grown meat will be on your table in the future. The reason? It's cheaper than dealing with whole animals, there are none of the ethical issues associated with factory farms, it can help prevent the spread of animal-borne diseases, and according to a new study, cultured meat production generates up to 96% less greenhouse gas emissions than conventional meat production.

With the exception of chicken, which is the most energy-efficient of all meats. You can come in contact with a test-tube steak well before a test-tube chicken breast.

Tube Steak: The Study

A study in partnership between the universities of Stanford and the University of Amsterdam, Environmental Impact of Cultured Meat Production, are emphatic: the overall environmental impact of cultured meat production, or rather Tube Steak, is significantly lower than conventional meat production.

This is mainly due to the greenhouse gas emissions associated with raising livestock (i.e. methane emissions from, believe me, cow flatulence), manure management, soil nitrous oxide and the conversion of forests to pastures. .

In almost all cases, growing animal muscle tissue in vitro makes more sense for the environment than having real animals. But it requires more energy than conventional poultry production, which has relatively few CO2 emissions when grown conventionally and requires less energy than it would to run an in vitro meat lab.

The study authors argue that the production of farmed poultry may still make more sense, because the emissions numbers do not take into account that biofuel crops could be placed on land where the chicken coops now stand:

Energy input alone does not necessarily provide a sufficient indicator of energy performance if the opportunity costs of land use are not taken into account. Cultivated meat production requires only a fraction of the land area used to produce the same mass of conventionally produced chicken meat. Therefore, more land could be used for bioenergy production, and it could be argued that the overall energy efficiency of cultured meat would be more favorable.

Citation from the study “Environmental Impact of Cultured Meat Production”.

And since most greenhouse gas emissions from cultured meat production come from fuel and electricity use, using renewable energy sources can further reduce emissions. There's another (a little scary) energy bonus: cultured meat may require less refrigeration than conventional meat because of the lack of excess bone, fat, and blood.

Large-scale meat production is still far from reality. The study's authors estimate that it would cost $160 million in research to bring artificial meat into mass production. And then there's the question of cultural acceptance to work with – who will actually consume these products?

But the study makes an excellent point: “Cultivated meat consists of muscle tissue similar to conventionally produced meat, but only the production technique differs. It could also be argued that many current meat production systems are far from natural systems. ”

Tube Steak: the first results

With such efficiency, a race between labs has begun to produce the cultured meat that best emulates the real meat experience. The results are still a state secret, at least for now. But an article carried out by the Wall Street Journal exploring the experiences of the Just Foods sector delivers the first moments of what is certain about our future. Check out: 

From gourmet steaks to chicken nuggets, apparently everything is, at least to the eyes, satisfying and, why not, delicious. As for the taste, the question remains. But not for long.