3 ms·

> this project has been part of our overall endeavor to develop the biotechnological production of daily and familiar commodities that are conventionally produc

> this project has been part of our overall endeavor to develop the biotechnological production of daily and familiar commodities that are conventionally produced by agriculture. I'm afraid I have to call BS. The nutrient medium used to feed the cell cultures will contain glucose or sucrose most likely from industrially-grown corn or sugarcane as a carbon source and other nutrients. I.e. in this case biotech isn't getting rid of an agricultural production process and magically replacing it with something sustainable - it's simply shifting the agricultural supply chain more upstream and out of view. Could it still be more sustainable compared to traditional coffee growing? I doubt it very much given all the input required to run commercial-scale bioreactors. Those things are energy intensive, produce waste water, and require complex nutrient broths and sterility. If you're claiming sustainability benefits in such a fuzzy situation, at least have an LCA to back up the claims. What about commercial feasibility? Extremely unlikely. Most if not all of the dealbreakers recently outlined in the context of commercial-scale lab-grown meat will apply here too [0]. But perhaps they can bioengineer some novel coffee characteristics unobtainable otherwise and sell it for $500 a cup. [0] https://thecounter.org/lab-grown-cultivated-meat-cost-at-scale/ https://thecounter.org/lab-grown-cultivated-meat-cost-at-sca...

thatcat 5y ago
The PRL-4 media referenced is mostly the same macro and micronutrients that all plants need plus a small amount of sucrose (30 g/L) with 10% coconut milk added.
- hybrid_cluster 5y ago
  Unfortunately, small amount of sugar = even smaller amount of useful product. I.e. for all we know the yields/cell densities (not reported) are so low that you need more land to grow sugarcane and coconut trees than to grow the amount of coffea plants needed for a similar amount coffee.
  - wbl 5y ago
    European sugar is from sugarbeet.
aaron695 5y ago
> The nutrient medium used to feed the cell cultures will contain glucose or sucrose most likely from industrially-grown corn or sugarcane as a carbon source and god knows what else. Where exactly do you think people here think it comes from? Sewerage, mining waste, asteroids? Sure, in the dystopian future people will be drinking coffee from stolen sewerage (it has the nutrients and energy). And in a SolarPunk future assuming everyone one's not retarded like now, you could mine it (coal and minerals also have the nutrients and energy) But currently we all know it's sugar and by "god knows what else" are you referring to plants? Sugar is 19 cents per lb Coffee is about $1.93 per lb In the world of the Environmental Complex controlled sheeple that means nothing because it all has to lead to fear, but in the napkin maths world of engineers it means coffee is very intensive to grow compared to sugar, so there is a lot of leeway. Maybe it's too expense now, but it will mostly be done this way within our lifetimes, and I don't see why it won't be sooner rather than later.
hmsshagatsea 5y ago
I know nothing of agriculture but I would think corn is much more sustainable than coffee beans. So it’s a step in the right direction at least, isn’t it?
- hybrid_cluster 5y ago
  Looking corn farming's environmental impact in the US (eutrophication & Gulf of Mexico deadzone, top soil erosion, biodiversity losses), I wouldn't be so sure.

thatcat 5y ago

The PRL-4 media referenced is mostly the same macro and micronutrients that all plants need plus a small amount of sucrose (30 g/L) with 10% coconut milk added.

hybrid_cluster 5y ago
Unfortunately, small amount of sugar = even smaller amount of useful product. I.e. for all we know the yields/cell densities (not reported) are so low that you need more land to grow sugarcane and coconut trees than to grow the amount of coffea plants needed for a similar amount coffee.
- wbl 5y ago
  European sugar is from sugarbeet.

aaron695 5y ago

> The nutrient medium used to feed the cell cultures will contain glucose or sucrose most likely from industrially-grown corn or sugarcane as a carbon source and god knows what else. Where exactly do you think people here think it comes from? Sewerage, mining waste, asteroids? Sure, in the dystopian future people will be drinking coffee from stolen sewerage (it has the nutrients and energy). And in a SolarPunk future assuming everyone one's not retarded like now, you could mine it (coal and minerals also have the nutrients and energy) But currently we all know it's sugar and by "god knows what else" are you referring to plants? Sugar is 19 cents per lb Coffee is about $1.93 per lb In the world of the Environmental Complex controlled sheeple that means nothing because it all has to lead to fear, but in the napkin maths world of engineers it means coffee is very intensive to grow compared to sugar, so there is a lot of leeway. Maybe it's too expense now, but it will mostly be done this way within our lifetimes, and I don't see why it won't be sooner rather than later.

hmsshagatsea 5y ago

I know nothing of agriculture but I would think corn is much more sustainable than coffee beans. So it’s a step in the right direction at least, isn’t it?

hybrid_cluster 5y ago
Looking corn farming's environmental impact in the US (eutrophication & Gulf of Mexico deadzone, top soil erosion, biodiversity losses), I wouldn't be so sure.