Anticipatory Life Cycle Analysis of In Vitro Biomass Cultivation for Cultured Meat Production in the United States

Mattick, Carolyn S.; Landis, Amy E.; Allenby, Braden; Genovese, Nicholas

doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b01614

Cited by 277 publications

(231 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

201

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although with large uncertainty ranges, life cycle analyses indicate that the overall environmental impacts of cultured meat production could be lower than those of most conventionally produced meat (Tuomisto and Teixeira de Mattos 2011;Mattick et al 2015). However, a great deal of research is still needed to establish an industrial-scale culturing system (Fayaz Bhat and Fayaz 2011).…”

Section: Alternative Protein Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review

Huis

Oonincx

2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

581

381

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With a growing world population, increasingly demanding consumers, and a limited amount of agricultural land, there is an urgent need to find alternatives to conventional meat products. Livestock production is, moreover, a leading cause of anthropogenic-induced climate change. To mediate this, more sustainable diets are needed, with reduced meat consumption or the use of alternative protein sources. Insects are promoted as human food and animal feed worldwide. In tropical countries, edible insects are harvested from nature, but overexploitation, habitat changes, and environmental contamination threaten this food resource. Therefore, sustainable harvesting practices need to be developed and implemented. We provide examples of (1) aquatic insects whose populations are threatened by pollution, (2) caterpillar species in Africa that are disappearing due to overexploitation and habitat change, (3) edible insects species that are considered pests in agro-ecosystems, and (4) edible insect species that can be conserved and enhanced in forest management systems. Insect farming can be conducted either on small-scale farms or in large-scale industrialized rearing facilities. We review the environmental sustainability of insect farming compared to livestock production. The major environmental advantages of insect farming compared to livestock production are as follows: (1) less land and water is required; (2) greenhouse gas emissions are lower; (3) insects have high feed conversion efficiencies; (4) insects can transform low-value organic by-products into highquality food or feed; and (5) certain insect species can be used as animal feed or aqua feed. For instance, they can replace fish meal, which is becoming increasingly scarce and expensive.However, edible insect species intended for production should be screened for risks to humans, animals, plants, and biodiversity.

show abstract

Section: Alternative Protein Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review

Huis

Oonincx

2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

581

381

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After estimating the potential environmental impacts of large-scale cultured meat production compared with conventionally produced European meat products, Tuomisto and Teixeira de Mattos (2011) reported that artificial meat used 82 to 96% less water. According to Mattick et al (2015), although artificial meat could require less land and agricultural inputs than livestock products, energy use would be more intensive due to the replacement of biological functions with industrial equivalents. Even so, the consumer acceptance of cultured meat products remains unknown and as a result such production is unlikely to be marketable in the near future (Hocquette, 2016).…”

Section: Overview Of Strategies To Reduce the Water Use Of Ruminant Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

BOARD-INVITED REVIEW: Quantifying water use in ruminant production1

Legesse

Ominski

Beauchemin

et al. 2017

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The depletion of water resources, in terms of both quantity and quality, has become a major concern both locally and globally. Ruminants, in particular, are under increased public scrutiny due to their relatively high water use per unit of meat or milk produced. Estimating the water footprint of livestock production is a relatively new field of research for which methods are still evolving. This review describes the approaches used to quantify water use in ruminant production systems as well as the methodological and conceptual issues associated with each approach. Water use estimates for the main products from ruminant production systems are also presented, along with possible management strategies to reduce water use. In the past, quantifying water withdrawal in ruminant production focused on the water demand for drinking or operational purposes. Recently, the recognition of water as a scarce resource has led to the development of several methodologies including water footprint assessment, life cycle assessment, and livestock water productivity to assess water use and its environmental impacts. These methods differ with respect to their target outcome (efficiency or environmental impacts), geographic focus (local or global), description of water sources (green, blue, and gray), handling of water quality concerns, the interpretation of environmental impacts, and the metric by which results are communicated (volumetric units or impact equivalents). Ruminant production is a complex activity where animals are often reared at different sites using a range of resources over their lifetime. Additional water use occurs during slaughter, product processing, and packaging. Estimating water use at the various stages of meat and milk production and communicating those estimates will help producers and other stakeholders identify hotspots and implement strategies to improve water use efficiency. Improvements in ruminant productivity (i.e., BW and milk production) and reproductive efficiency can also reduce the water footprint per unit product. However, given that feed production makes up the majority of water use by ruminants, research and development efforts should focus on this area. More research and clarity are needed to examine the validity of assumptions and possible trade-offs between ruminants' water use and other sustainability indicators.

show abstract

“…In vitro meat production has to date supplanted a bovine, ovine or porcine body with a technological one, as serum supply systems supplant blood vessels and sterile laboratory conditions supplant white blood cells. As Mattick et al (2015a) comment, what was previously the result of 'internal biological functions (temperature regulation, digestion, oxygenation, nutrient distribution, disease prevention, etc. ) fueled by agricultural energy inputs (feed)' (p. 11946) must thus be performed by industrial energy.…”

Section: Relative Silences In Promissory Depictionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benevolent technotopias and hitherto unimaginable meats: Tracing the promises of in vitro meat

Jönsson

2016

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, in vitro (Latin: in glass) meat researchers strive to overhaul meat production technologies by producing meat outside animal bodies, primarily by culturing cells. In the process, meat should become healthier, more environmentally friendly and kinder to animals. In this article, I scrutinize (and problematize) this promissory discourse by examining the world that proponents envision alongside the world from which promises emerge. First, I trace the increasing number of publications striving to pinpoint the nature of in vitro meat to unveil the creation of an in vitro meat canon wherein perceived possibilities become taken for granted. Second, I investigate how the promissory discourse is often relatively silent on key aspects of how this technology could remake the world. Wet laboratories, animals and end products become foregrounded at the expense of political economy and the biophysical properties of cultured cells. Thus, questions concerning how funding requirements shape representations of this new technology, together with in vitro meat’s particular socio-spatial and socio-ecological implications, become problematically de-emphasized.

show abstract

Anticipatory Life Cycle Analysis of In Vitro Biomass Cultivation for Cultured Meat Production in the United States

Cited by 277 publications

References 29 publications

The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review

The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review

BOARD-INVITED REVIEW: Quantifying water use in ruminant production1

Benevolent technotopias and hitherto unimaginable meats: Tracing the promises of in vitro meat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About