3 ms·

Am I ignorant or would it be hugely inefficient to grow meat in a lab energy wise? I understand the whole methane issue but using up non renewable energy sourc

Am I ignorant or would it be hugely inefficient to grow meat in a lab energy wise? I understand the whole methane issue but using up non renewable energy sources to make something that could be done with renewable resources seems a little silly unless the plan is to do this with renewables. Or is this about the ethics of consuming meat?

karaterobot 4y ago
> I understand the whole methane issue but using up non renewable energy sources to make something that could be done with renewable resources seems a little silly unless the plan is to do this with renewables. The source of power to the lab feels like a separate issue. It would be a very intense stance to take that having your city grid on non-renewable resources means any product made in that city is bad for the environment! Besides which, beef production uses the same power sources as everywhere else (heat, light, transportation, etc.) so it wouldn't be any different just because they feed the cows plant matter. Or maybe I've misunderstood?
- CTDOCodebases 4y ago
  > The source of power to the lab feels like a separate issue. It would be a very intense stance to take that having your city grid on non-renewable resources means any product made in that city is bad for the environment! That's not what I'm proposing. Nature is very efficient so I imagine the energy that it takes to create a pound of flesh naturally (with grass) is alot less than that to required to do it in the lab. From a little googling and back of the envelope calculations I just did it turns out methane is really that bad for global warming. At least in the short term. To produce a cow worth of fake meat you would have to displace more than 16 tons of C02 before it becomes a less efficient way to produce meat from a global warming perspective. This assumes the cow has been raised using ancient methods. However this is in the short term. C02 lasts longer in the atmosphere.

karaterobot 4y ago

> I understand the whole methane issue but using up non renewable energy sources to make something that could be done with renewable resources seems a little silly unless the plan is to do this with renewables. The source of power to the lab feels like a separate issue. It would be a very intense stance to take that having your city grid on non-renewable resources means any product made in that city is bad for the environment! Besides which, beef production uses the same power sources as everywhere else (heat, light, transportation, etc.) so it wouldn't be any different just because they feed the cows plant matter. Or maybe I've misunderstood?

CTDOCodebases 4y ago
> The source of power to the lab feels like a separate issue. It would be a very intense stance to take that having your city grid on non-renewable resources means any product made in that city is bad for the environment! That's not what I'm proposing. Nature is very efficient so I imagine the energy that it takes to create a pound of flesh naturally (with grass) is alot less than that to required to do it in the lab. From a little googling and back of the envelope calculations I just did it turns out methane is really that bad for global warming. At least in the short term. To produce a cow worth of fake meat you would have to displace more than 16 tons of C02 before it becomes a less efficient way to produce meat from a global warming perspective. This assumes the cow has been raised using ancient methods. However this is in the short term. C02 lasts longer in the atmosphere.