71–80 of 164 posts
While I don’t disagree with the sentiment of the report, I do question its credibility. They don’t cite their sources, but do make bold claims with broad statistics and buzz words. Looking into the authors, they don’t lack credentials, but it seems like they’re newsletter and report writers, not people who are putting skin in the game to back their claims. First impression: be skeptical of “the Seba Technology Disrup…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm too lazy at the moment to look up a link but fast food restaurants are already adopting these faux-beef burgers and people love them.
yes, but i doubt that cost-parity alone will get people to stop eating meat. there has to be more than that. the popularity of these alternatives is an indicator but not everyone primarily eats burgers. there is also still the general problem with all processed foods being less healthy than naturally grown foods...
> The cost of proteins will be five times cheaper by 2030 and 10 times cheaper by 2035 than existing animal proteins
This is about more than nutritional equivalence. The meat in a burger is usually the most expensive component so artificial proteins could lead to a reduction in the price of a burger by approximately 5x.
Also, naturally grown food means different things to different people. As mentioned elsewhere in this discussion, much of the naturally grown food we consume now is produced in a vastly different way than it would have been 100 years ago, sometimes to the detriment of nutritional value.
Meh. The hippies were right. Eat food your grandmother would recognise. Eat it as unprocessed as practical. Eat a lot of it raw. But I bet where people have no choice (in prison, public hospitals, schools, on food stamps...) it will become compulsory.
While beef is an easy target, we are able to produce chicken at an incredibly low price per gram of protein.
> By 2030, the number of cows in the U.S. will have fallen by 50% and the cattle farming industry will be all but bankrupt. There's an impressive lack of humility here. Predictions are hard, particularly about the future. I challenge the authors to construct a longbets.org wager on the above. I wonder if spelling out verifiable details and putting a significant amount of cash on the line would soften their certainty…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, but i doubt that cost-parity alone will get people to stop eating meat. there has to be more than that. the popularity of these alternatives is an indicator but not everyone primarily eats burgers. there is also still the general problem with all processed foods being less healthy than naturally grown foods...
From the report: > The cost of proteins will be five times cheaper by 2030 and 10 times cheaper by 2035 than existing animal proteins This is about more than nutritional equivalence. The meat in a burger is usually the most expensive component so artificial proteins could lead to a reduction in the price of a burger by approximately 5x. Also, naturally grown food means different things to different people. As mention…
The rise of veganism, mostly on ethical grounds, shows that nutritional equivalence may in fact be a minority concern, and that the ethics of "cruelty-free" eating supercede all nutritional concerns.
Looking around I see examples like this everwhere, where the science seems to be rapidly advancing new approaches and techniques which will feed, cloth, transport, teach, and entertain billions of people in ways that are more economical and ecological . Examples like these are why I'm convinced that environmental impact reduction and ultimately rejuvenation is possible without massively disrupting life as we know it.…
Life... finds a way. Someday, we'll hit a Malthusian bottleneck that we can't innovate our way out of, presumably. However, to date, every time disaster looms, something occurs that kicks the can down the road. It makes it very difficult to take seriously the endlessly repeatedly claims that the world as we know it is coming to an end in the short term - the result of such hysteria seems to be to induce a lot of self…
I guess because people secretly long for the world to end. Rapture, Climate Change, nuclear armageddon, AIDS, Y2K, Peak Oil, take your pick. It's been a constant of life in Western civilisation for the last 50 years at least. There has never been a period in my life when there hasn't been some impending catastrophe that was going to destroy life as we know it.
I would blame the media - and that is definitely part of it. But the media only does this because we lap it up. Something about human psychology loves this idea that we're in the End Times.
> By 2030, the number of cows in the U.S. will have fallen by 50% and the cattle farming industry will be all but bankrupt. There's an impressive lack of humility here. Predictions are hard, particularly about the future. I challenge the authors to construct a longbets.org wager on the above. I wonder if spelling out verifiable details and putting a significant amount of cash on the line would soften their certainty…
I saw lots of talk about the meat industry, not a word about dairy. (Admittedly only read the executive summary.) I've seen quite a lot of this over the past year or two: Lots of "we're going to end cattle farming" when all they're really talking about is beef. Industrial dairy operations are horrible: carbon intensive, noisy smelly and cruel, but I don't see anyone claiming to have synthesized dairy replacements, an…
Addendum: Actually, you might be talking about the discussion here, rather than the article...
We already have the resources to feed the hungry. A third of all the food produced is thrown out. The problem is how we distribute it. Systemic change is the only thing that can address this problem in a meaningful way. Efficiency is great but producing more when we already have enough is completely missing the issue at hand.
Consumers, as usual, are the key to changing this. We'd have to change the eating and shopping habits of an entire generation to change this.
Changing the system won't work without changing the way we think about food and food shopping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, but i doubt that cost-parity alone will get people to stop eating meat. there has to be more than that. the popularity of these alternatives is an indicator but not everyone primarily eats burgers. there is also still the general problem with all processed foods being less healthy than naturally grown foods...
From the report: > The cost of proteins will be five times cheaper by 2030 and 10 times cheaper by 2035 than existing animal proteins This is about more than nutritional equivalence. The meat in a burger is usually the most expensive component so artificial proteins could lead to a reduction in the price of a burger by approximately 5x. Also, naturally grown food means different things to different people. As mention…