Cultivated Meat Projected To Be Cheaper Than Conventional Beef by 2030

And produced with a much lower environmental footprint


The San Francisco–based company Just Eat grows cultivated chicken nuggets in vats from real chicken muscle and fat cells; you can buy them at restaurants in Singapore. The Israeli startup Aleph Farms recently unveiled its lab-grown ribeye steak. These nuggets and steaks are just the beginning, according to a new life cycle analysis by researchers at the Dutch consultancy CE Delft.

The report seeks to project how the cultivated meat industry will evolve over the coming decade. It specifically focuses on comparing the costs and environmental footprints of conventional and cultivated beef production.

By 2030, the Dutch researchers project, the costs to produce a kilogram of cultivated hamburger will fall to $5.66, which compares favorably with the current wholesale price of  90 percent lean ground beef at $6.20 per kilogram. They also expect cultivated meats to use much less water, land, and nutrients than conventional livestock production, and to emit considerably less greenhouse gas too. Assuming a 30 percent renewable energy use, the overall environmental impact of cultivated beef in 2030 will be about 90 percent lower than for conventional beef, they conclude. For example, cultivated beef is projected to produce 93 percent lower greenhouse gas emissions and to use 95 percent less land for nutrient production.

Meanwhile, animal-free dairy production is moving forward. For example, Perfect Day Foods uses fungi to ferment plant nutrients into proteins identical to the ones found in conventional milk. These proteins can be blended with other ingredients to produce liquid milk, ice cream, yogurt, and cheeses. Perfect Day says its milk proteins are already 40 percent cheaper than those from conventional cow milk. It also releases 80 percent less greenhouse gas emission, and it uses 98 percent less water and almost no land.

Right now, 50 percent of the world's 104 million square kilometers of habitable land is used for agricultural production. Of that land, 77 percent (44 million square kilometers) is used for livestock and dairy production. If cultivated beef and fermented dairy replaced just half the meat and milk the world's people eat and drink, an area nearly the size of North America could be allowed to revert to nature.

NEXT: Biden's Coronavirus Relief Plan Will Probably Cost a Lot More Than $1.9 Trillion

Meat Dairy Biotechnology Conservation Greenhouse gases

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

187 responses to “Cultivated Meat Projected To Be Cheaper Than Conventional Beef by 2030

  1. Fuck that, Bailey.

    You can eat your bugs and stem cell cultures all you want. I’m sticking to the cloned cows.

    1. If you’re prepared to pay for it, then so be it. But if they can make a steak that looks, cooks and tastes like the real thing, but for half the price, then I don’t care what it’s made of.

      1. “But if they can make a steak that looks, cooks and tastes like the real thing …”

        They can’t and they won’t. The only thing that will make it palatable is that you will have eaten it for so long (with a heavy handed helping of government coercion) that you will have forgotten what real meat tastes like.

        See Tofu

        1. Well, I’d give it a chance, I guess. Tofu isn’t meat in any way shape or form and is a terrible meat substitute if you want something that remotely resembles meat. So I don’t think that’s a very good benchmark. This fake meat actually is animal muscle cells, so it might have a chance at coming close to the real thing. I’ll believe it when I see it, though.

          1. “I’ll believe it when I see it, though.”

            You will see it, when you believe it. 🙂

            1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are FD much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
              on this page…..VISIT HERE

            2. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earningsC X are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
              on this page…..VISIT HERE

        2. Just to nitpick, tofu isn’t meat. It’s much, much closer to cheese, both in production and in usage. In any case, substituting anything for tofu is a recipe for disaster, but tofu is pretty good where used as intended.

          1. The moral dimension of the entire project to replace real meat with lab grown meat is likely to result in a bevy of inane future regulations that will prohibit the manufacturing of lab grown meats that too closely resemble the taste of real meat.

            May 5, 2057

            “Ultimately, for humans to permanently move beyond the consumption of meat, the production of which has historically been devastatingly destructive and insulting to the whims of Gaia, we cannot permit any appetite for meat to remain in the collective human consciousness. Those who consume lab grown meat containing a taste profile adequately analogous to animal derived meats are the last remnants of a hostile, barbaric existence which the majority of the world’s advanced societies have long abandoned. It is time for us to take that next step and join the modern world. Let’s just say it: lab grown meats are not okay. If we are ever to transcend the savagery of the human condition, lab grown meat products must be categorically prohibited. Progress should not be stymied by the objections of a stubborn, dangerous and, quite literally, bloodthirsty minority.”

            – Sen. Loqueeshaw Gonzalez-Shapiro-Cohen-Bridges-Ling Chen III, Jr. (CCP)

            1. Well yeah, leftists will always seek to impose their moral standards on us (not themselves) by force. It’s the nature of religious zealots. That doesn’t make tofu prepared as tofu (instead of as a meat substitute) bad.

            2. This is kind of like the culinary version of removing all traces of the memory of “evil men” like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Which by the way, the shitbag Bailey claimed that he would boldly stand up and oppose back when they starting in on guys like Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Of course he was lying, but most of us weren’t actually fooled.

              1. Anybody roped into believing this sudden pivot into the “alternative meat market” has anything to do with legitimate demand, or sustainability, or environmentalism will be shocked to discover that it is just another socio-ideological mental trap foisted by international oligarchs for the purposing of conditioning the plebs to accept the fact that their future consists of drinking meat goo in a pod, while emerging once a day to rain down their affections on the glorious Party Leaders that got rid of guns, votes, and those dirty insurrectionists.

                They’ve learned nothing from 2020, and probably never will.

                1. Geiger’s great-grandfather: Anybody roped into believing this sudden pivot into the “horseless carriage market” has anything to do with legitimate demand…

                  1. Dumbass.

                  2. “Geiger’s great-grandfather: Anybody roped into believing this sudden pivot into the “horseless carriage market” has anything to do with legitimate demand…”

                    TDS-addled lefty shits NEVER argue the facts at hand; the hypothesize some other condition and argue that. Most of us understand ‘strawman’, but TDS-addled lefty shits are too stupid to understand.

                    1. LOL, we are talking about a new food technology, and you are trying to bring up the tired “lefty shit”.

                      There is no partisan left/right correct way to think on this issue (yet). It’s not even an “issue”.

                      That leaves partisans like you not knowing what to think because you’re not used to having your own thoughts.

        3. You are making an analogous argument to “horseless carriages will never replace horses”.

          1. But retards will replace intelligent people.

            You are proof.

          2. For what purpose?

            Steak is a luxury item, not a staple. I eat steak because I like steak and I can afford steak. I seriously doubt that this will be replaced by lab meat.

            Ground beef substitute is much more of a staple and much more attainable, but Taco Bell has already mastered the art of imitation ground beef.

            1. Ask not for whom the Taco Bell tolls–
              It clones for thee.

              Ron should get back to us when they CRISPR a veal demiglace sequence into milk cows.

            2. I doubt lab-grown steak will come down in price enough to compete with natural steaks, since its a very different process to produce a properly marveled steak artificially, than to produce a tub of ground meat.

              As the article notes, its the lab-grown ground beef that will rival natural, but I suspect as demand for natural drops the price will drop also, since a lot of it is cuts and scraps that would go to waste anyway

              1. Of course, if the price of the rest of the carcass goes down because it has a hard time competing, then the new equilibrium will settle with the price of steaks going up (since the price of raising cattle will not go down significantly as a result, and cattle ranchers will be bankrupted until the supply and demand curves for steak intersect at a price that will support raising cattle).

              2. “marbled”

                1. When it’s well-marbled it’s a marvel.

          3. “You are making an analogous argument to “horseless carriages will never replace horses”.”

            You are full of shit.

        4. Sounds like a John argument anytime driverless cars came up. Anything that engineers can achieve, it will achieve. It’s practically inevitable. So if it is possible to have meat that’s indistinguishable from a carcass, it will happen.

          1. The question is does it solve a problem that actually exists?

            1. Depends on what you define as a problem. I’m of the opinion eating mammals brings several nutritional benefits, but I can’t help but feel remorse for the killing of creatures that are so highly developed. I feel decidedly less remorse for the harvesting of birds and little remorse for the harvesting of simple fish. So an engineering solution to the problem of harvesting mammalian meat without killing mammals is desirable to me, yes. I would pay a market premium for such an indulgence; if it can compete at market price with natural meat then we have a large incentive to culturally adopt the eating of engineered meat. Bailey lists all the pros of that in the article.

              Even if you reject that argument, then the practical problem of making enough animal protein for a growing population will eventually force some to stop eating meat or eat a lot less. The price of meat will grow as human desire outstrips supply. Only a scalable engineering solution (preferably one not based on the misery of millions of living animals) will be able to meet demand.

              1. This gets kinda science fiction-y, but cultivated meat would sure make space colonization more appealing.

              2. I think the idea of solving a problem that doesn’t exist will often create a new problem one didn’t consider. What of the cows? Are they released into the wild to battle new predators, likely ill prepared? Are some used to cultivate the genetic material for the engineered food? How will the engineered food react in the body as oppossed to natural food? We already see genetically altered food have a future effect on unforeseen cancers in some people. Like the wind powers affect of birds, weather etc. What we don’t know, with all of our intelligent solutions, is often revealed as an ‘oops, oh, shit we didn’t expect that outcome’ solution years later.

        5. They can’t and they won’t

          Sure they will, eventually. It’s just a question of when. The market is there. Most people don’t eat tofu as a meat substitute they eat it as tofu.

        6. Exactly. General good quality is already declining in America for a variety of reason (though the high end restaurants are still good for the most part), and with this shit it’s going to go down even more.

          Most Americans today are so fucking stupid though they’ll happily settle for the soylent green.

        7. Exactly. Bill Gates says we will “get used to it”, but abused wives “get used to” the beatings too.

      2. Even more interesting will be when they go beyond trying to recreate existing types of meat, and start creating meat with new flavors and textures.

        I’d also like to see cultivated broths.

        1. Are regular broths no longer sufficient for your daily enema cleansing rituals?

          1. We get it. You’re a crotchety old man who hates change and hasn’t done anything new in at least two decades. Don’t worry, you’ll probably be dead before any of this matters.

            1. I’d be willing to wager I am at least a decade younger than you, and probably at least ten IQ points ahead.

              1. Ok, so you’re a crotchety young man who likes to virtue signal and thinks IQ is somehow relevant here.

                1. And you’re an intolerant bigot that genders strangers without having the courtesy to first ask how they prefer to be identified.

                  The prison is that way, bigot. ——>

                  1. I was wondering how much longer you were going to tolerate those hurtful terrible things ze said.

                    1. #punchafascist

      3. I’m a lot more concerned about the implications of eating lab-grown food than something that occurs naturally. This strikes me as being rooted more in Malthusian scarcity concerns than whether this stuff is actually beneficial.

        Every time I see shit like this, or attempts to clone endangered animals, or any other scientific experiment where humans attempt to play God, I think of this:

        “Don’t you see the danger, John, inherent in what you’re doing here? Genetic power is the most awesome force the planet’s ever seen, but you wield it like a kid that’s found his dad’s gun…I’ll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you’re using here, it didn’t require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn’t earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don’t take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox and now you’re selling it…your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

        1. +100

        2. I doubt it’s a coincidence that this shit is getting pimped right around the same time that John Hammond, er, Bill Gates is promoting the widespread use of synthetic meat.

          1. And feces water.

        3. You didn’t earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don’t take any responsibility for it.

          Manifestly untrue in this case, but okay.

          You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, …

          They’ve been working on this for decades and expect they’ll need another decade to get it right.

          Don’t get me wrong, I love the movie and it’s a great speech, but it doesn’t apply to much in the real world.

    2. Why should I care? We’ll all be dead from climate change by 2030. So say the same sort of experts who claim cultivated beef will be cheaper than natural beef by 2030.

    3. It’s your money I guess.

    4. #BeefItsWhatsForDinner
      There’s a pretty good argument that Gaia wants us to eat more steak. Grazing herds used to cover and fertilize larges swaths of grasslands now turning to desert in their absence.

      How to green the world’s deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory

      I don’t care that much about what Gaia wants. She didn’t consult me on bone cancer and a myriad other things, so fuck her. I’m all for cheap lab grown steaks whether Gaia approves or not.

      As DuPont would say, Better Things, for Better Living.

      1. Ron: If cultivated beef and fermented dairy replaced just half the meat and milk the world’s people eat and drink, an area nearly the size of North America could be allowed to revert to nature.

        Nature had massive herds of grazing mammals before humans discovered how tasty they were.

  2. I just can’t enjoy my food unless I know it suffered.

    1. It had to be fear sweat!

    2. There’s always hunting! Maybe this will lead to more land for hunting.

      1. Hunting requires guns. Eeeeek!

        1. Real men chase down deer and kill them with their bare hands. Women are allowed to use knives.

        2. Bow + Arrow + Deer = Meat.

          1. The Nuge.

    3. I know these soy beans suffered, but this soy burger tastes like crap.

    4. so it’s like your sex

      1. Only with your mom.

    5. When I buy eggs, I always get the extra large ones.
      I just feel better knowing the hen really suffered for ’em.

  3. an area nearly the size of North America could be allowed to revert to nature.”

    Why when you let cows roam they fertilize the land and eliminate underbrush that helps stop ladder fires. Just because something uses land does not make the land un usable. when we go camping in the Sierra nevada we encounter free range cattle all the time and guess what the lions and bears and all sorts of other things are still there as well.

    1. Get in your pod and eat your bugs!

      1. “Get in your pod and eat your bugs!”

        And be grateful!

    2. A lot of grazing land is unfit for other purposes. Removing all those cows won’t turn west Texas into a forest.

      1. But it will make for a damn good golf course for members of the patrician class.

        1. And a ranch for raising, you know, cattle. For their consumption only of course.

          1. “BOOOOM!!! Headshot! Conked that fat bitch heffa’ right in the face with ma’ golf ball!”

          2. “This is the Duke of Lubbock’s land, and you’re poaching on his property!”

            1. Soon to be wed to the Duchess of Amarillo. Or, as she is more affectionately know to her subjects, the Yellow Rose of Texas.

      2. Yeah, but then we can bring the bison back and let them roam free!

        1. And gambol about the plains.

          1. “Gamy” as hell; corn-finished beef didn’t show up for nothing.

            1. “…corn-finished beef didn’t show up for nothing.”

              This. The small ranchers I’ve talked to (and I’d like to hear SM76’s opinions on the subject), shake their heads at people demanding grass-fed beef. Hey, if people want to pay a lot more for an inferior product, knock yourself out.

      3. And cows are the only thing that can turn range grass into something edible, meat. Range grass is not edible for humans.

        1. A gun at the back of your head will make it edible real fucking quick.

          1. Thank you sir, may I have another?

    3. But the Experts know better.

    4. “…an area nearly the size of North America could be allowed to revert to nature.”

      Not that you’ll be allowed to visit any of it, serf. It’s for Party members only. That camping in the Sierra Nevada will be a thing of the past too. I guess you could walk there, but ‘free market incentives’ will prevent you from simply hopping in your truck and driving there.

      1. I’m sure it will be on a high speed rail route.

        1. The high speed rail will only connect government-approved tenements to government-approved workplaces

          1. And prisons.

    5. Hopefully we will see more of this type of thing:

      Also, old technologies tend to stick around when new ones are invented. They do become more niche, though. I can’t find a link right now, but someone once took a Sears catalog from 100 years ago and found that virtually everything sold in it is still being manufactured somewhere.

      1. So, what you’re saying is you don’t have a cite?

        1. Yes, that is exactly what I said.

          1. So, no cite, huh?

            1. I’ve seen an old Sears catalog, and while in general old technologies are still utilized (such a pre-electric appliances) they are made with modern materials to modern standards.

              1. Thank goodness!

      2. someone once took a Sears catalog from 100 years ago

        If his argument held the least bit of water, he would’ve used a 2021 Sears catalog.

      3. Where is the cite?

      4. A little less than 100 years ago you could order a Thompson submachine gun through Sears (not the wishbook though). I suppose now you could get one built to order in the Darra Adam Khel bazaar.

        1. Nowadays you have to order your Thompson Submachine gun from Ruben Mendiola in Florida.
          He has two that are unfired, new in box for $25,000 each.
          You can inspect them when he transfers it to your NFA dealer in your state.
          I suggest a better .45 caliber full auto sub gun is a Mac 10 in .45 from Ruben for $8,000 and a Lage slow fire upper for $985.
          Now for $8,985 you have a modern full auto with better ergonomics and is much lighter, with rails for a red dot and vertical foregrip.
          Too bad Sears is out of business

      5. Eating animals isn’t “old technology” it’s fundamental nature.
        The protein from red meat is what allowed the human brain to grow and start down the path to being able to think abstractly, including of idiotic ideas like veganism.

        1. It’s about to become old technology.

          But my point was that old technology remains useful and tends to stick around more than one might think.

          1. True.
            Witness the technology used to post in the Reason comments section.

            1. True that.

        2. Do you have a cite for that? I’m sure the protein in general was extremely helpful for people who lived active lifestyles, as it would naturally lead to muscle and organ fitness. But I’m less sure of the brain thing. Extra calories maybe?

          Surely humans have been eating hunted or scavenged game longer than we’ve been eating grains.

          1. Fat. Brains need a lot of fat.

      6. “Hopefully we will see more of this type of thing:…”

        I have no idea why that is desirable.

        1. You do realize that I was taking about the new prairie reserve, not fake meat. Or do you have something against nature preserves?

      7. Hopefully we will see more of this type of thing: Prairie org

        John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt had similar ideas. They were cancelled for them of course. Are you a dissident now?

  4. So that means Congress can now ban meat by 2030.

    1. Then congress will be on the menu.

      1. Perhaps at first, but…

        Many of my relatives are cattle ranchers, and are dead set against all of this, of course. However, I have way fewer relatives who are cattle ranchers as I did about three decades ago. It’s not the thriving family business it once was, and that is caused by all kinds of pressures from the popular diet changing to Brazilian beef imports.

        On the other hand, growing all this lab meat is going to require inputs like lots of protein and other inputs. Is that ultimately going to come from some kind of farming? Farmers might be quite happy with cultivated meat.

        1. Provide a cite please

          1. In all seriousness, if anyone can provide a cite on what raw materials this cultivated meat will require, and where those raw materials will come from — I’m very interested in seeing it.

            1. We will provide you with a cite when you finally share a link to that disturbing video of Officer Sicknick getting his head clubbed into a pool of raw mashed potatoes by a gang of fire extinguisher wielding Trump supporters while the “fine people” from Charlottesville raise their tiki torches in the background and howl at the moon.


              1. Goldilicks Gorillashit can ALWAYS be relied upon to fill a void, when a totally respectful question is raised!

                Fill the void, that is, with ANOTHER void, a howling, hungry, empty, ravenous, all-consuming void of unquenchable thirst for infinite dominion over ALL inferior life-forms, where ALL inferior life-forms == those who are NOT the PERFECT Being == Goldilicks Gorillashit!!!

                1. Fuck off, White Knight. Your pathetic socking is …. fuck, I already said pathetic.

                  Fuck off, sarc.

                  1. Don’t bother replying; flag, refresh.

  5. “Projected To Be ”


  6. Hooray! It costs less, but tastes like shit!

    1. If you eat nothing but shit, and have nothing to compare it to, it may as well be filet mignon.

      1. BOOM! Mind blown.

      2. The Squirrel needs to weigh in on that comment.

    2. this taste like moose turd pie. but its good pie though.

    3. Hooray! It costs less, but tastes like shit!

      Like Sizzler…

  7. Trying to figure out which is more realistic, a real self driving car by 2030 or cultivated meat. At this point, my money’s on cultivated meat– but not as environmentally friendly as we’re told.

    1. I reckon that if they develop the technology to cultivate meat and other organs for human consumption, they will be probably able to cultivate a brain. They can then install that brain into a car, and the brain can drive. But will they have to keep the brain coked up all the time?

      1. If it’s a woman’s brain, will it be a bad driver?

        1. What is a “woman”?

          1. A womanx

        2. It’s not bad, it just stops for directions every 5 miles like any sane person would.

    2. Cultivated meat way easier than safe self-driving cars.

      The self-driving car idea could be simplified to a more modest biggest-bang-for-the-buck goal of getting cars to drive on highways with, say, embedded guidance systems. But as long as the goal is driving in any place, under any conditions, it’s a very hard problem.

      1. Will be solved sooner than you think.

        1. I don’t think generalized self-driving cars will be easily and safely solved, but you may be right. I could be totally wrong.

          But, like I said, cars that can drive themselves on a highway with some helpful electronics built into the highway to help the cars, that is totally doable. And it would confer about 80% of the benefit for about 20% of the effort.

          1. I could be totally wrong.
            That is to be expected.

          2. Lane alerts, hazard warnings and GPS are standard in a lot of cars. What would it take for the programming to be upgraded a touch without anything on the roadways? Maybe signals would have a broadcasting element.

      2. The self-driving car idea could be simplified to a more modest biggest-bang-for-the-buck goal of getting cars to drive on highways with, say, embedded guidance systems.

        I hate to break it to you, but George Stephenson invented the long-haul/dedicated highway, embedded-guidance transportation system in 1814. Now, if you want to get fancy and power your system with electricity, then Robert Aberdeen has only beaten you by 184 years. And if you want to get really high-tech; hybrid powered, long haul/dedicated highway, embedded-guidance transportation systems have only been in use for ~100 yrs.

        1. I think you just made my point that it isn’t a hard problem. Of course, it’s 2021 so we’d have to do it with computers and stuff.

      3. Self driving cars are an incredibly simple concept.
        High enough quality/accuracy sensors and GPS with up to date mapping is all you need.
        The problem so far has been inadequate sensors. The problem that will always exist will be dealing with human drivers on the same road, as well as the unexpected.

        1. OK, that’s the input devices. Now you’ve got the hard part of controlling a speeding vehicle in a highly unpredictable environment, with deadly consequences if you get it wrong.

        2. A simple concept, perhaps, but quite difficult to implement. In any AI system, one of the hardest things to accomplish is to know what information is irrelevant and can be ignored. The human brain is really good at this. Programming a computer to do it is really hard. Though it has advanced more in the past decade or so than I had expected.

        3. “…incredibly simple concept.” lol, sure is.

    3. It will only be cheaper in environmental costs if you pretend.

    4. This is revisionist speculative fiction scientism. You start from a false premise, ignore it when convenient, and invoke the incredulity iteratively.

      Both pastures and parking lots are evil. Once we have self-driving cars, parking lots will go unused. That will free up the land and water necessary to make cultivated meat cheap and plentiful. Then we can return the exhaustively spoiled prairies which are unfit for bovine to roam on, back to the buffalo.


      Both pastures and parking lots are evil. Once we have cultured meat, currently malnourished minds will be smart enough to figure out how to make cars drive themselves. Then, when we no longer need parking lots, we can return them, as unspoiled prairies, back to the buffalo.

      The real problem is that Ron’s not rigorous enough to do actual science, not imaginative enough to create a convincing speculatively fictional world on par with the thin plot of a video game, and not stupid enough to be stuck convincing people to accept Nuka-Cola caps as currency.

      1. Lmao.

        Well done, again.

  8. Article from 2040 says cultivated fake meat causes cancer. Book it.

    1. At least to the same degree real meat causes cancer.

      1. Cite?

  9. Perfect Day makes casein and whey. They don’t make the full profile of milk proteins. They don’t make a liquid milk.

    Their proteins can be used as a substitute for milk proteins in things like ice cream, but they don’t have a way to make actual milk, since that contains more than 25 different proteins, plus fats.

    So, yay, you can have artificial cheese food substitute.

    1. TOFU!

    2. If they pass enough carbon or sin taxes on beef then it might be cheaper.

      1. or over regulation and environmental suits, it worked well for getting rid of nuclear energy

    3. “you can have artificial cheese food substitute”

      Great! I was an all-American kid who grew up on Velveeta. Slap some on some SPAM and I’m happy!

      1. Explains the brain damage.

        1. Snob.

          I also ate Jello with chunks of canned pineapple and Cool Whip. And it was free gin’ delicious!

          1. Did you also eat paint chips?

            1. I think I’ve got you figured out: your mom never loved you enough to make you Jello with Cool Whip and pineapple chunks.

      2. so you translated that level of distinction to your politics

      3. LOL, the two dimmest dimwits in the commentariat replied.

        1. And the lowest-watt bulb posted this.

        2. Not true.

          While you left a comment, Tony didn’t.

  10. If they pass enough carbon or sin taxes on beef then the lab meat might be cheaper.

    1. Exactly. The cost of real meat is already artificially inflated by mandating feeding corn to cars.

  11. You may say you’re never going to eat it, but do you think the politicians in California are going to give you a choice?

  12. I’m not worried. Ron Bailey is so consistently wrong he’ll be waking up in Hell before the fake meat and robot cars ever catch on.

    1. He won’t wake up. He’ll get in his car and, halfway to his destination, wonder where he’s going and why it’s so hot. He’ll tell the car to pull in to the local fast food joint for some food and a cool drink. They’ll apologize that they’re out of water and ice but they’ll serve him lower grade food than McDonalds at twice the price. After about 3 days of this; penniless, dying of thirst, and disgusted with eating fortified alginate, it will start to dawn on him.

      1. Ha!


  13. How are they going to replace all the byproducts (waste) that is used in hundreds of industries?

    1. No more hotdogs?

    2. I was going to mention it in reply to Bubba Jones’ comment about Perfect Day above. Until about 30 yrs. ago cheesemakers were selling a small fraction of sweet dairy whey back to farmers to fortify animal food and dumping the rest down the drain. Until bodybuilders started looking for a cheap, abundant source of protein, it was considered unfit for human consumption. Making it from dedicatedly from scratch just guarantees that your product is less cheap and less abundant.

    3. I love it when people come out with “The Native Americans used every part of the animal”. Well, guess what, they were nothing compared to how thoroughly every part of a slaughtered animal gets used now.

      1. Not to mention that, as anyone who’s hunted large game knows, with stone tools and handmade weapons they were almost certainly chasing wounded animals for days and then skinning them alive with stone tools (*if* they caught/found them). Making the matadors who torment bulls for 20 or so minutes before running a sword through their heart (where it hasn’t been banned by law as being inhumane) look like humanitarians in comparison.

      2. The NA ran whole herds off a cliff and the ate what they could and carried some of what left away. Most of the herd was left rot.

  14. Yea, and nasty tasting oleo is cheaper than butter.

  15. Is there a way to blank out the articles and just read the comments?

  16. Didn’t someone once say “Give me meat or give me death!”?

  17. I think this is also called soylent green.

    1. That’s dead people.

  18. Franken-food?

    Fuck that.

    Stick your “environmental footprint” up your ass.

  19. “Assuming a 30 percent renewable energy use, the overall environmental impact of cultivated beef in 2030 will be about 90 percent lower than for conventional beef, they conclude.”

    Found the problem with their premise right here.

    1. People will freeze and starve to death way more efficiently than with conventional methods.

  20. We went from a trend away from processed foods to eating fresh, local, natural food. Now processed fake meat? No thanks, when I drive by the farm the whole herd should get nervous.

  21. Fusion power has been just 10 years away since the 1980s.

    1. I thought it was 20.

  22. “Revert to nature”, i.e., become U.S. Government property? I think I’ll keep my free-range, grass-fed beef, thank you.

    1. I like mine corn fed, thank you, so we grow our own, on grass, then finish on dry hay and corn. They are so good!!!

  23. Well for the weekend steak dinner, no. But for the hamburger casserole during the week sure.

    1. It doesn’t surprise me in the least that you’d pay the price of a steak to eat mystery meat casserole.

  24. Well, sure, Bailey. Put enough regulatory taxes on cows and enough subsidies behind fake beef, that will happen. Kind of like reliable fossil fuel power vs wind / Solar.

    I’m not surprised that one of Reason’s “libertarians” thinks that’s a winner.

    1. The unintended consequences could be frightening: This would cause irreparable damage to veganism. Do we really want to eradicate a world religion like that? Those vegans will have to replace their religion with something. That something could be even more dangerous than their current ideology.

  25. ‘an area nearly the size of North America could be allowed to revert to nature’.
    And the dry grass the cows did not eat will burn like you would not believe. Animals are part of the balance of nature. It used to be buffalo, now it is cows,

  26. If it can’t be produced in your own kitchen, it isn’t real food.

  27. Let the free market decide. Whatever it does, I’m sure it’ll be racist!

Comments are closed.