 |
| Image by artist: Justin M Maller |
The sampling of the first cultured meat burger took place yesterday. The two tasters selected pronounced it to be texturally like meat, but too low in fat for ideal flavor.
Experts estimate we're ten years away from tweaking the composition for taste and production methods to reach a reasonable price point before it will be available to consumers. This seems an appropriate time to reprint some musings from last year, when a worldwide focus on creating a cuitured meat slaughter-free alternative was spured by a prize offered by animal rights group, PETA. This, along with commitment to funding research by the Dutch government with the goal of dominating this future global market by leading in the early development (and patenting) of the process, led to the burger we saw this week. Following are some possible implications over the longer term.
Vat-grown "cultured meat" is coming soon.. The first hamburger is expected to be produced next year in the Netherlands, led by Professor Mark Post of Maastrich University, and production of pork sausage isn't far behind. PETA is offering a million dollar reward for the production of a palatable chicken nugget replacement. There have been three meetings of the international In Vitro Meat Symposium, where the world-wide coordination of research was discussed as an important goal. Research programs are being considered or funded by governments around the world, including by Brazil, a top beef producer; and private companies (often in the area of organ replacement research, which has technological overlaps) are examining or adding this as a new potential profit center.
The long-term possible implications for the world go far beyond our diet, encompassing global warming, pollution and possibly creating huge social shifts as land becomes more available.
Experts estimate we're ten years away from tweaking the composition for taste and production methods to reach a reasonable price point before it will be available to consumers. This seems an appropriate time to reprint some musings from last year, when a worldwide focus on creating a cuitured meat slaughter-free alternative was spured by a prize offered by animal rights group, PETA. This, along with commitment to funding research by the Dutch government with the goal of dominating this future global market by leading in the early development (and patenting) of the process, led to the burger we saw this week. Following are some possible implications over the longer term.
Vat-grown "cultured meat" is coming soon.. The first hamburger is expected to be produced next year in the Netherlands, led by Professor Mark Post of Maastrich University, and production of pork sausage isn't far behind. PETA is offering a million dollar reward for the production of a palatable chicken nugget replacement. There have been three meetings of the international In Vitro Meat Symposium, where the world-wide coordination of research was discussed as an important goal. Research programs are being considered or funded by governments around the world, including by Brazil, a top beef producer; and private companies (often in the area of organ replacement research, which has technological overlaps) are examining or adding this as a new potential profit center.
The long-term possible implications for the world go far beyond our diet, encompassing global warming, pollution and possibly creating huge social shifts as land becomes more available.
To produce cultured meat there will still have to be donor herds, and boutique artisan real meat producers will undoubtedly still exist, but the days of seeing grazing herds in the countryside as a matter of course could cease to be a part of the human experience for the first time in human history since we evolved from hunter -gatherer societies. As any source protein could be replicated, also for the first time in human history, fishing could practically cease to exist other than as for as a sport or hobby.
What the permanent loss of this connection to all of the previous generations of humanity will bring with it is a subtle and perhaps unknowable question. What we can be reasonably sure of is that it will have at least as substantial a societal impact as our freeing ourselves from animals as a primary form of transportation with the invention of the combustion engine just over a hundred years ago.
Perhaps the change will be even more resonant, as having already lost the transportation aspect, by additionally losing the association of herd animals as a food source, we will have severed our last connection to farm animals other than as pets or exotic rarities.
Perhaps the change will be even more resonant, as having already lost the transportation aspect, by additionally losing the association of herd animals as a food source, we will have severed our last connection to farm animals other than as pets or exotic rarities.
Each aspect leads to a new potential chain of likely societal changes. Consider the 70% of arable land currently being devoted to grazing- what will the sudden availability of so much previously occupied space do to the form of society and our economy? The normal economic forces of supply and demand would logically result in vastly reduced and therefor theoretically more universally available and better quality land at all levels of society. Importing agricultural items may no longer make economic sense with so much land freed up from grazing. Certainly, competition should be fierce and prices in decline.
Just as the substantial reduction of the European population was perhaps the greatest catalyst for the Renaissance and blossoming of ideas and social change that followed, this social class reshuffling could have long and far-reaching implications.
And what will be done with this land? Farming it for agricultural purposes might serve to feed the people that live on that land, but the vast availability of land would seem to naturally reduce the evolution of large agricultural uses. Who would willingly work as labor on someone else’s farm if they could instead have their own?
Perhaps smaller extended-family compound-style agrarian groups will form to share and divide tasks. Again, it’s a nod to the micro village-centered past, but adapted for the future. If this is indeed the way things develop, it would require a massive change for large-scale factory crop production to adapt to continue to be relevant. With multiple close-by sources of produce all competing , the entire marketplace will be altered.
And, if the large-scale farming is substantially reduced, what will this mean in the implications of being able to produce large quantities of crops for operations like alternative fuels, and in the lack of need for shipping and trucking that this will naturally create.
As it stands, manufacturing will soon be local and no longer require any specialized machining due to the 3D copy technology that is already being slated for mass access. This should logically result in a waning need to transport manufactured goods as well. Our seas would not only have few fishing vessels due to cloned fish availability, but also would have little need for container shipping for manufactured goods. This may result in the closing or re-purposing of port towns as they compete for the remaining reduced shipping and fishing business. Countries that base their economies on food or manufacturing export could find themselves struggling for viability and ports towns that have existed for centuries may shrink to obscurity if they can't find new ways to continue to be relevant and viable economically and culturally.
Is this desire for small-scale human contact a reaction to the newly effortless ability to have anonymous instant contact with the world through technology, when we are likely more naturally wired for intimacy of human-to-human level contact? Perhaps it’s a renewed need for the nostalgia or reassurance of simple face-to-face, village-scale contact to balance the largely mind-based friendships on the net. If so, this may validate the additional effort required to go to the direct source of a product, as lack of anonymity becomes rarer and more therefor more valuable. If so, what might this new society - with one of its feet firmly in the macro and the other just as planted in the micro- look like?
Just as the substantial reduction of the European population was perhaps the greatest catalyst for the Renaissance and blossoming of ideas and social change that followed, this social class reshuffling could have long and far-reaching implications.
And what will be done with this land? Farming it for agricultural purposes might serve to feed the people that live on that land, but the vast availability of land would seem to naturally reduce the evolution of large agricultural uses. Who would willingly work as labor on someone else’s farm if they could instead have their own?
Perhaps smaller extended-family compound-style agrarian groups will form to share and divide tasks. Again, it’s a nod to the micro village-centered past, but adapted for the future. If this is indeed the way things develop, it would require a massive change for large-scale factory crop production to adapt to continue to be relevant. With multiple close-by sources of produce all competing , the entire marketplace will be altered.
And, if the large-scale farming is substantially reduced, what will this mean in the implications of being able to produce large quantities of crops for operations like alternative fuels, and in the lack of need for shipping and trucking that this will naturally create.
As it stands, manufacturing will soon be local and no longer require any specialized machining due to the 3D copy technology that is already being slated for mass access. This should logically result in a waning need to transport manufactured goods as well. Our seas would not only have few fishing vessels due to cloned fish availability, but also would have little need for container shipping for manufactured goods. This may result in the closing or re-purposing of port towns as they compete for the remaining reduced shipping and fishing business. Countries that base their economies on food or manufacturing export could find themselves struggling for viability and ports towns that have existed for centuries may shrink to obscurity if they can't find new ways to continue to be relevant and viable economically and culturally.
In another strange divergence, this turn towards cultured meat seemingly
directly opposes an ever-growing momentum towards natural, organic,
locally-grown smaller more personal and human-scaled food sources.
People are increasingly concerned about verifying the source and purity
of their food and wanting a personal relationship with the source when
possible. The village-level connection of a wine tasted with the maker
at the winery, bread bought from the hands that baked it, a conversation
with the farmer who grew the produce are increasingly valued. Also
there’s a distinct movement towards a direct connection with the food
itself; so much so in fact, that suburban chicken coops have become
commonplace, even trendy.
Is this desire for small-scale human contact a reaction to the newly effortless ability to have anonymous instant contact with the world through technology, when we are likely more naturally wired for intimacy of human-to-human level contact? Perhaps it’s a renewed need for the nostalgia or reassurance of simple face-to-face, village-scale contact to balance the largely mind-based friendships on the net. If so, this may validate the additional effort required to go to the direct source of a product, as lack of anonymity becomes rarer and more therefor more valuable. If so, what might this new society - with one of its feet firmly in the macro and the other just as planted in the micro- look like?
Change is inevitable, but the speed and essential social fabric altering scope of that change is increasing exponentially. It seems wise to step back for a moment and consider we want this future to look like if we want some hope of directing and shaping that change.
I was discussing this broadly with a friend, who works in an area that encourages considering future social changes from technology, and he commented that it seemed a matter of “either get on the train or get run over by it!” I rather think that when things change so quickly, it’s impossible for that change to be monolithic, and this allows many small avenues to slip around and over the big changes to present themselves. Humankind is amazingly adaptive, and the cleverest and luckiest will find or create brand new niches and solutions so as to thrive in and bring meaning to this changing environment.
I welcome your thoughts and comments and wild speculation!
No comments:
Post a Comment