3 ms·
They've found a shortcut to protein production, and that could be huge. Protein production by raising cows to make beef is incredibly expsensive on every axis
by beagle3 6y ago
They've found a shortcut to protein production, and that could be huge.
Protein production by raising cows to make beef is incredibly expsensive on every axis you measure, (though this is not reflected in the price paid at the register, as environmental costs are externalized and there is a huge subsidy). It takes ~25 times as many resources to make 1g of beef protein compared to 1g of soy protein.
I'm not aware of the specifics of this process, but it's not unthinkable that it could be 100x as efficient as prevalent systems per 1g of protein produced (or that a future version of it, once perfected).
Also, in some places (e.g. in iceland, and in many places near dams) electricity is effectively use-it-or-lose-it free after sunk costs; Sounds like -- if electicity is the expensive factor in this -- another use for this essentially free energy; e.g. iceland exports this energy as aluminum, could also export it as protein.
- gus_massa 6y agoThey compare the new process with animal proteins, but not with plants. It also would be nice to compare the production of proteins and carbohydrates, they may have a very different shield. For carbohydrates, I think the best plants are potatoes and corn (IIRC wheat and rice have lower efficiency). For proteins, the best plants are soy and chickpeas. They actually host bacteria to fix the nitrogen to produce the proteins. Even for "free" electricity, there are many uses. Like making Aluminum or mining Bitcoins. (And there was a recent post about using the surplus of electricity to make metallic iron, and then burning the iron, but I'm not sure if it makes economic sense.) You can use the profits in a reforestation program to capture the CO2.