What’s the beef about artificial meat?

A survey of almost 3,700 people found that almost one third of people would switch to alternative protein products if they had a positive climate impact.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report 2022 states that climate change is a grave and mounting threat to well-being and the health of the planet, with the world facing unavoidable multiple climate hazards with global warming of 1.5 degrees, and that ambitious accelerated action is required to make rapid, deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
As methane traps 80 times more heat than carbon dioxide over the 20 years after it has been generated and has a mean half-life of nine years in the atmosphere, compared with more than 100 years for carbon dioxide, cutting methane is the single most effective method of radically curtailing global warming and climate change over the next 25 years, giving us breathing space to emerge from reliance on fossil fuels.
Some 42% of human-caused methane emissions derive from agriculture – mostly from burping livestock, manure, and paddy fields. Altered feed and herd management will have minimal impact. Significant inroads could be made by dietary change – eating less meat. Seldom in the world of climate change is there a solution so stuffed with win-wins. The most recent evidence suggest that methane cuts can reduce the likelihood of passing climate tipping points.
We have been slamming our heads against the wall on climate change for long enough. We need a near-term win on climate change – methane abatement can do that. The single most promising way of achieving this without removing meat entirely from the diet is artificial or plant-based meat.
The global population increased from 2.5bn in 1950 to 7.7bnn in mid-2019 and is expected to reach 9.7 billion people in 2015. Meanwhile global economic development and urbanisation are leading to the rise of a more affluent middle class with changing eating habits. Populations in Asia are shifting from traditionally vegetarian diets to those containing increasing amounts of meat and dairy products. Overall, the demand for meat is expected to grow by 73% and dairy by 58% from 2010-2050.
A recent report from the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) states that meat and dairy production use 83% of farmland and causes 60% of agriculture’s greenhouse gas emissions but provides only 18% of calories and 37% of protein. Moving human diets from meat to plants or alternative meats means less forest is destroy for pasture and fodder growing and less emissions of GHGs produced by cattle and sheep.
The term ‘artificial meat’ appeared in the early 2000s and referred initially to food produced from certain plants that after transformation would taste very similar to traditional meat. Now ‘artificial meat’ refers to meat produced by a new process in which meat is prepared from the stem cells of real meat from living animals. This is what we mean when we refer to ‘lab-grown meat.’ The stem cells are put into a serum in which the grow and multiply. An edible scaffold is used to orient this growth to form a three-dimensional structure. It takes a few months to produce edible meat. This is quicker than traditional meat production which can take up to a year. Under ideal conditions, two months of in vitro meat production from a few muscle cells from a pig could deliver thousands of tonnes of pork meat.
The BCG report stated that, for each dollar, investment in improving and scaling up the production of meat and dairy alternatives resulted in seven times more greenhouse gas reductions than green buildings and 11 times more than zero- emission cars.
Investment in alternative proteins, both plant-based fermented products and cell-based meat has jumped from $1bn in 2019 to $5 billion in 2021. Alternatives make up 2% of meat, egg and dairy products sold, but this will rise to 11% in 2035 on current growth trends, BCG said.
It is predicted that Europe and North America will reach ‘peak meat’ by 2025, at which point consumption of conventional meats will start to fall, according to a separate BCG report in 2021. A report from AT Kearney consultancy in 2019, predicted that most meat products people eat in 2040 will not come from slaughtered animals.
"Widespread adoption of alternative proteins can play a critical role in tackling climate change," said Malte Clausen, a partner at BCG. He refers to the "untapped climate opportunity – you’re getting more impact for your investment in alternative proteins than in any other sector in the economy." Malte suggests a move towards plant- based meats could also alleviate food crises.
"You are cutting out the middleman whether it’s a cow, a pig, or chicken. If instead of feeding all these crops to animals, and then eating the animals, you just use the crops directly for human consumption, you need less crops overall and therefore alleviate the constraints on the system."
The potential for artificial meats to have a significant impact on society and the economy was summarised by the European Environment Agency in 2020. From a health perspective, in vitro production could offer ways to control the composition of meat, including levels of saturated fat, linked to cerebrovascular disease. The widespread use of antibiotics to prevent disease in livestock living at close quarters would be reduced – this has the potential to have a significant and important impact in reducing antibiotic resistance. Similarly, the use of hormones for growth promotion as occurs in meat production outside of EU countries, would be reduced. Artificial meat production could lead to better welfare for animals.
From a socio-economic perspective, the agricultural sector could be badly affected by reduced employment in livestock farming. If this technology becomes viable, policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) would be directly affected, necessitating support to farmers as they transition away from livestock farming.
While artificial meat is perceived as an environmentally friendly alternative to livestock farming, recent evidence suggests that as artificial meat production is more energy intensive, much of the reduction of artificial meat’s climate impact depends on the use of renewable energy sources in the production systems.
In terms of pressure on land and water systems, hypothetical models suggest that artificial meat could have less environmental impact than beef and possibly pork but more than chicken and plant-based proteins.
Alternative meat production including plant- based and artificial meats has the potential to support the achievement of social, economic, and environmental goals by protecting ecosystems, slowing down land degradation and improving food security as well as promoting the transition to a low carbon economy.
- Dr Catherine Conlon is Senior Medical Officer in the Department of Public Health, St Finbarr’s Hospital, Cork and former Director of Human Health and Nutrition, safefood.
CLIMATE & SUSTAINABILITY HUB