Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

interestingengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 253 posts

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#221

Post by TrispusAttucks »

baremetal wrote: post #210
dmbche wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's orders of magnitude less destructive. We have to at least try to make an effort and not give up and "enjoy the status quo while it lasts" It's going to take work - giving up before trying isn't going to help. And telling others to give up won't either.

>It's orders of magnitude less destructive. Citation needed. I'm not sure you've ever been around industrial scale mono-cropping agriculture. The amount of pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides is astronomical. And you are worried about a little cow poop? Which is natural and beneficial to the soil? Have you ever heard of regenerative agriculture? That is what I practice. We live in such an alarmist society one can…

Wrong person

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#222

Post by dmbche »

TrispusAttucks wrote: post #221
baremetal wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's orders of magnitude less destructive. Citation needed. I'm not sure you've ever been around industrial scale mono-cropping agriculture. The amount of pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides is astronomical. And you are worried about a little cow poop? Which is natural and beneficial to the soil? Have you ever heard of regenerative agriculture? That is what I practice. We live in such an alarmist society one can…

Wrong person

Thanks for the kinds words, take good care !

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#223

Post by belorn »

myshpa wrote: post #199
kolinko wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed that many people who propose this are not aware of a plethora of health issues that people have that make eating plant-based foods extremely difficult. For many people eating plants only is extremely difficult - e.g. for me personally, with a plethora of food allergies (soy, almonds, various kinds of nuts, apples, peaches and other fruits) and intestine issues causing irritation when consuming multiple othe…

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, a…

The American Heart Association recommends eating 2 servings of fish (particularly fatty fish) per week.

- American Heart Association

A healthy, balanced diet should include at least 2 portions of fish a week, including 1 of oily fish.

- NHS UK

You should try and include both types of fish in your usual diet. Some foods have DHA added (fortified). Human milk contains DHA and infant formulas must have this fat added. The best way of ensuring we are getting enough omega-3 is to eat foods rich in these fats.

- British Dietetic Association

Among the general adult population, consumption of fish, particularly fatty fish, lowers the risk of mortality from coronary heart disease.

- WHO

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#224

Post by myshpa »

belorn wrote: post #223
myshpa wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, a…

The American Heart Association recommends eating 2 servings of fish (particularly fatty fish) per week. - American Heart Association A healthy, balanced diet should include at least 2 portions of fish a week, including 1 of oily fish. - NHS UK You should try and include both types of fish in your usual diet. Some foods have DHA added (fortified). Human milk contains DHA and infant formulas must have this fat added. T…

Yes, because people can't be bothered to change their diets. But it's different now, when there is 8 billions of us. Everything changes.

And we can obtain Omega-3 from algae, which is the same source that fish rely on.

---

The oceans are home for up to 80% of all life on Earth.

Today only 3% of Pacific bluefin tuna remain.

Overfishing puts $42 billion tuna industry at risk of collapse.

For the first time, sharks are going extinct because of us.

Species like thresher, bull, and hammerhead sharks have lost up to 80-99% of their populations in the last two decades.

Seabird populations have declined by 70% since the 1950s.

Sharks kill 10 people per year. Comparatively, people kill 11,000-30,000 sharks are killed per hour.

Approx. 50 million sharks are killed every year as bycatch.

Studies estimate that up to 40% of all marine life caught is thrown overboard as bycatch.

An Iceland fishery in one month killed approx. 269 harbor porpoises, 900 seals of four different species, and 5000 seabirds.

The Iceland fishery was awarded the blue tick by the MSC.

There are 4,600,000 commercial fishing vessels in the world.

10,000+ dolphins are killed as bycatch off the coast of France every year.

Over 300,000 whales, dolphins, and porpoises are killed as bycatch every year.

46% of the Pacific garbage patch is fishing nets.

There is enough long line set every day to wrap around the planet 500x.

Six out of seven species of sea turtles are either threatened or endangered due to fishing.

The fishing industry kills more animals in a day than the Deepwater Horizon oil spill did in months.

Fishing has become a major threat to coral reefs from the Middle East to the Caribbean, where 90% of large fish have disappeared.

In the 1830s, a typical fishing boat caught 1-2 tons of halibut per day, but today the entire fishing fleet catches 1-2 tons across the entire year.

2.7 trillion fish are caught every year, or up to 5 million caught every minute.

Fish populations are in decline to near extinction.

Virtually empty oceans by 2048.

- https://www.seaspiracy.org/facts

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#225

Post by x86x87 »

AlexandrB wrote: post #144
x86x87 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question to ask is: can everyone eat meat from animals that had good happy, lives? Does that scale to everyone?

Yes if they eat a lot less of it. You probably can't raise animals as efficiently (especially in terms of land required) while keeping them happy. The difference will be reflected in the cost to the consumer - ethical meat is more expensive[1]. Whenever these conversations crop up, the idea that we might need to eat less meat to achieve ethical or environmental goals seems to be unthinkable to many commenters. The re…

If people are willing to eat less meat would you have the problem to begin with?

I feel the solution should me along the lines of pricing the meat accordingly vs inventing this freak alternative that allows you to virtue signal while still causing the same amount of damage. This without going into the question of what effects this synthetic meat could have on the human body - for better or worse people have been eating meat for all of history and AFAIK meat is one of the most nutriet dense foods you can eat.

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#226

Post by x86x87 »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #160
kevincox wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And yes, starting with new technologies, but if we try to optimize our existing process for obtaining meat we will likely not get far before hitting a local maximum. So it makes sense to try to make dramatic leaps to other areas of the solution space to see if we can fine a new maximum. It will take a lot of resources until the new technologies are better (by various metrics) than the old ones, but that does…

In terms of optimising, I can see it going two ways: 1. Optimising for the consumer means that we will be able to engineer meat to our preferred and individual tastes. Gamey or fatty, dry or falling off the bone etc. 2. Optimising for the producer means that we will get the slurry what was served as a meal in the movie Brazil. The free-market optimist in me would like to see 1, but the realist in me knows that once c…

Yeeah. Given enough time it's always 2.

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#227

Post by x86x87 »

callalex wrote: post #140
x86x87 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not disagreeing with you, but ultimately you have to ask the question: does this make sense? And look at the "why". What are you trying to optimize?

You may not care about the widespread cruelty to animals in meat production, but many people do.

I think animal cruelty is more nuanced than "killing animals to eat them is bad" but yes. The question is: if you care about animal cruelty should you stop eating meat altogether?

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#228

Post by x86x87 »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #168
x86x87 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not disagreeing with you, but ultimately you have to ask the question: does this make sense? And look at the "why". What are you trying to optimize?

Opinion: They are trying to optimize profit and control. Don't mess with food. We know what works, we've almost always made it worse: less nutritious (rolled oats instead of steel cut), less tasty (tomatoes, chicken), more vulnerable to die-out (bananas), or worse. Now you get Bill Gates and Monsanto advocating GMO / lab-grown foods for the masses. The market plan for the long-term on this is terrifying though. Just.…

For better or worse, if you look at what is needed to feed all people GMOs are going to happen. It's not an if, it's a when. Everyone consuming real, organic food has not been on the table for years now.

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#229

Post by x86x87 »

refulgentis wrote: post #134
x86x87 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not disagreeing with you, but ultimately you have to ask the question: does this make sense? And look at the "why". What are you trying to optimize?

Cost

Cost makes sense. Is the synthetic meat cheaper?

Re: New study suggests that lab-grown meat produces up to 25 times more CO2

#230

Post by refulgentis »

x86x87 wrote: post #229
refulgentis wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost

Cost makes sense. Is the synthetic meat cheaper?

I’m being glib intentionally, spirit of like, hacker koans.

obviously not, as in a everyday definition of cost, sticker price today. but the externalities, as in a formal definition of cost, are so much, and important enough to enough commercial stakeholders that yes, 100% makes sense to try to do this and hit under the actual cost, which has diverged from the short-term cost

Post reply on HN