Open main menu
Home
Random
Donate
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Stockhub
Disclaimers
Search
User menu
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Meatech
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Resource use === Conventional livestock farming is well-known for causing carbon emissions and for its use of land, water and energy. In contrast, cellular agriculture is much less resource-intensive. For example, each kilogram of conventional farmed meat produces on average 14kg of CO2 emissions, versus 3kg for cultured meat (source: MeaTech). '''Exhibit 4: Resource use of conventionally farmed beef compared to cultured beef''' [[File:Resource use of conventionally farmed beef compared to cultured beef.png|600px]] Source: MeaTech 3D, Edison Investment Research In addition, while conventional farming of livestock and fish uses most of the antibiotics produced worldwide, cellular agriculture requires minimal or no antibiotics. Food safety is also improved with cultured meat, due to the absence of mass slaughtering and the clean environment in which the cells are cultured. This reduces the likelihood of contamination from pathogens such as salmonella or E. coli and also results in the benefit of a longer shelf life for the finished product. '''Scale''' Cell culture and fermentation have been used for the last 20–30 years in the healthcare sector. Cellular agriculture for food production is a relatively new concept and the technology is still developing. At present, cellular agriculture is mostly being undertaken in labs (with quantities below 1000L), and therefore requires scaling up to pilot stage (c 5,000L), and then full commercial production (>20,000L), in order to reduce costs and manufacture meaningful quantities. Scaling up always presents challenges, both predictable and unforeseen, as the different conditions need to be optimised. One of the problems when it comes to scaling up cell culture is the increased pressure in the larger bioreactors, particularly at the bottom. If the bioreactors are too large, this pressure can cause damage to the cell structure, thereby causing the process to break down. Unless a workaround can be found, this could ultimately limit the size of the largest bioreactors that can be used on a commercial scale, which in turn would be likely to have cost implications in the long run. Similarly, processes may need to be adapted as cellular agriculture moves to commercial scale. Extending the technology from one type of cell/product to the next is also far from straightforward, as each different cell line is likely to require a different growth medium and particular growing conditions. Purification of the cells from the ‘soup’ in the bioreactor may also differ. Lastly, the scale-up phase may present different challenges depending on the various characteristics of each type of cell. As discussed above, MeaTech plans to have a demo facility for beef products within the next two to three years. A cultured chicken fat pilot plant is also expected in this timeframe. In September 2021, MeaTech announced that it had manufactured over 500g of cultivated fat biomass in a single production run, and, as discussed above, in December 2021 it announced it had printed 3.67oz (104g) of cultured steak. '''Cost''' Currently the main cost challenge within cellular agriculture is the cost of the growth medium, which needs to be optimised for each cell line. At present, most growth media are available in lab-scale quantities only, thus making them cost-prohibitive on an industrial scale. For obvious reasons, both the specific characteristics of cell lines and the growth media they require are considered commercially sensitive and proprietary information, therefore there is not much public information available. In February 2020, the Good Food Institute (GFI) published a paper in which it estimated that the cost per litre for standard growth medium was $377, which translated to a cost per kg of meat of c $8,600. The paper discusses various scenarios under which this could be improved, including reducing the concentration of certain ingredients (by optimising the process), replacing some ingredients with cheaper alternatives, and reducing procurement costs by improving sourcing. In addition, the bio-fermentation process could improve and thus require a lower average volume of medium. The GFI estimated that under the most optimistic scenario, the cost per litre would fall to $0.24, allowing the cost per kg of meat to fall to $1.37 (the two main drivers of this being reducing the concentration of the growth factors required and scaling up the two most expensive ones such that their cost is significantly reduced). The much-touted number in the alternative protein industry is the cost of the first cultivated meat burger, which is placed at around €250,000 (it was developed by a Dutch scientist in 2013, although the CEO of Mosa Meat has subsequently stated that the real number is ‘a bit higher’). The cost has come down significantly but, for the product to become a viable alternative to conventional meat, something in the region of cost parity is required. As Nick Halla, senior VP International at Impossible Foods, has said, ‘you’ll buy the product once based on novelty, you’ll come back if the taste is good and if there are benefits such as nutrition and sustainability, and you’ll buy it in the long run if the value is right.’ The other side of the equation in terms of achieving anything close to price parity is the cost of conventional meat. Edison Investment Research notes that COVID-19 has driven up prices as the meat industry in many regions has suffered from labour shortages and increased freight costs. As concerns regarding climate change and sustainability come to the fore, Edison Investment Research could see governments start to reduce some farming subsidies or indeed introduce some form of taxation on carbon emissions caused by farming. This would cause cost increases for conventionally farmed produce. '''Regulation''' As discussed above, cultivated meat is not currently approved for sale in any jurisdiction apart from Singapore. That said, as cellular agriculture becomes closer to commercial viability, Edison Investment Research would expect more regulators to examine and approve the product. Edison Investment Research notes that regulation changes by jurisdiction, but also by product: for example, cultivated seafood would only require approval by the FDA in the United States, while cultivated meat requires both FDA and USDA approval in the United States. Edison Investment Research notes that in the EU, approval would be required both by the European Food Safety Authority via the Novel Food Regulation and individual countries. Furthermore, approval will be required for each different product and, potentially, using different components (such as edible scaffolds) would require a new safety review each time. Farming lobbies are powerful worldwide, especially in the United States and the EU. Edison Investment Research would expect farmers to lobby aggressively against the approval of cellular agriculture, and potentially try and dissuade consumers from switching to cultivated food.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Stockhub may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Stockhub:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)