The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
Life Sciences
The Environment
Does lab-grown meat have a smaller carbon footprint?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Does lab-grown meat have a smaller carbon footprint?
1 Replies
3747 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
thedoc
(OP)
Forum Admin
Hero Member
510
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 21 times
Does lab-grown meat have a smaller carbon footprint?
«
on:
03/10/2013 07:30:02 »
Amy Moser asked the Naked Scientists:
You state in the podcast about the lab grown meat that it has a smaller "carbon footprint".
I question this, as someone who has grown cells in a lab and know the large amount of plasticware, chemicals, and growth factors that are needed. This does not even take into account the energy needed for the incubators, sensors, and autoclaves (to sterilize everything). Not to mention the people needed to monitor and handle the cultures. While eventually they MAY be able to grow these in suspension (hard to believe with muscle cells) and eliminate some of the plasticware, but all the other issues will remain. Considering that meat producing animals can be raised on non-arable land, replacing them with other crops may not be feasible.
amy
What do you think?
«
Last Edit: 03/10/2013 07:30:02 by _system
»
Logged
CliffordK
Naked Science Forum King!
6596
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 61 times
Site Moderator
Re: Does lab-grown meat have a smaller carbon footprint?
«
Reply #1 on:
03/10/2013 09:46:11 »
Is this the podcast,
Growing meat in the lab
?
Certainly the demands of lab scale processing are different from industrial scale processing, and it is likely that most of the equipment in an industrial facility would be reused, and efficiency would be maximized. It is a good point though that everything would have to be rigorously sterilized. Plus, one might need to run an artificial heart/lung, dialysis, and some kind of artificial liver. We can produce sugars, starches, vitamins, and etc using both organic and lab processes. Your typical table sugar is fairly pure, I think. Consider the complications of infection with
total parenteral nutrition
. Hopefully it could be grown without bathing the "meat" with antibiotics.
Could one generate power with electrically stimulated contractions?
You are right, however, that we aren't particularly efficient at replicating the efficiency of organic processes. Thus, improving the process efficiency would be an uphill battle. And, much of the farmland, say in Texas, either needs irrigated (bringing in other issues), or may be best suited to the cattle industry. Of course, most of the cattle is at least finished in a feed lot, and doesn't go directly from the range to market.
Waste from lab grown meat could be tightly managed, hopefully avoiding the development of prions.
Logged
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...