Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

The article is nothing but a hit piece, very likely funded by meat industry. I don’t see any theoretical reasons argued here. You cannot write off future potential based on current state of technology. It’s like you will look at mainframe and say that there will never be a computer in every home. The thing that matters is rate of change over time.

Write’s Law dictates that as the total production capacity increases, cost exponentially declines. This law is the driver of Moor’s law and it is exactly why we can enjoy so many modern conveniences ranging from TVs to refrigerators that was initially affordable to only ultra rich. The cause of this law is believed to be the fact that far many more brains looks at various parts of production pipelines and optimizes it relentlessly. Cultured meat factories may look expensive today but over next couple of decades, they can become norm compared to traditional industry.



sort by: page size:

I feel like this is just a statement that the market for meat is supermassive and you can't just overnight have your production capacity at comparable levels to that of the entire country.

Meat itself used to be a niche luxury item.


> It is much cheaper to operate a couple of large national-scale factories to produce plant-based meat alternatives...

This whole paragraph is exactly right, and exactly why factory meat is set to rapidly lose market share to plant-based substitutes. The market forces are unstoppable.

I'll add that the lesson of COVID's meat processing labor disruptions will not be lost on retailers and retaurant chains.


Are the companies getting costs under control? I remember reading an article last year [1] about how the cost curve isn't looking favorable.

1: https://thecounter.org/lab-grown-cultivated-meat-cost-at-sca...


Once you get away from point of service, I think two things kick in that make it really unlikely that any stage before it would substantially increase the % that goes to labour costs:

1) economies of scale, factory farming employs very few people per pound of meat produced, having been subject to a lot of automation. Likewise, supply chain areas like storage and shipping move a lot of product per employee.

2) 'butchers' and similar jobs are relatively high skill and likely pay above minimum wage anyways. They also have better economies of scale. But at any rate, it's unlikely professional butchers are particularly involved in producing meat for fast food burgers and likely 1 or 2 low wage employees in a factory are doing all the manual labour involved in producing meat for hundreds of burgers.

At any rate, I don't think the null hypothesis can really be that every level of the supply chain has the same level of labour costs.


I don't agree at all. Even today, meat from a good butcher is quite affordable. A much bigger part of the cost is physically visiting the butcher, since there's far fewer of them.

It does tie in with two-income families (households are more time-poor) and other changes in the economy, it's not just commoditization.


In the future a 'meat industry' will be seen as some kind of barbaric horror.

Which is indeed one of the strongest arguments against industrialized meat production.

This. Part of the benefit is that it raises the cost of producing meat. Mass animal cruelty will be ended mostly by economics.

If they disappear, of course they won't be an issue anymore.

But I'm assuming he means that with a reduced demand for meat, it would mean that factory farms are going to have to find ways to reduce costs. And they're already doing their best to operate at the bare minimum. So any cost cutting measures will come at the expense of animal welfare.


this comment makes no sense.

You're at the same time arguing "meat producers had to adapt to external guidelines to be able to continue selling their products"

and "government imposing external guidelines for producers to be able to continue selling their products would be inefficient".

Or am I misunderstanding your point?


Absolutely, price and timing are important.

I have a simple question: Do you think industrial meat factory are needed to feed us comfortably and affordably.

And by us I mean humanity. Not the US, not the west. All of us on this rock.


An article I read recently makes a similar point on maximizing only one side of supply and demand and the effects for consumers and “quality”, in this case, how animals are killed. Good read: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/7/8/21311327/farmers...

It is in there under the "With the pandemic, now the food supply has been exposed as too consolidated. Even hedge funds are saying it, when hedge funds are worried you should be worried as these are the wealth extractors." [1]

Too much consolidation and waste due to super efficiency that is inflexible like code that is too coupled and specialized for a certain cpu over being flexible.

Right now pork is being wasted as slaughterhouses and meat packing has been reduced dramatically in the US since the 90s, larger facilities, less of them. Too efficient that it created a security issue and potential national security attack vector. Everything is not as localized, so there are choke points in our food supply that become massive backlogs.

>In 1977, the four largest meat processing firms constituted just 25% of the market, claims Bond. Today, they control 85% of the slaughter market, as well as some 35% of cattle ranches and around 65% of the entire chicken industry, he said.

> Since 1990, the number of slaughter houses, excluding poultry, has declined by 46%, from 2,709 establishments to just 1,461 establishments.

[1] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/hedge-fund-blames-us-meat-...


There was no judgment towards the meat buyer in my comment at all. The issue I have is with big factory farming, optimising for cost over every other metric.

Meat production is not that much more humane in Europe to be honest.

It's difficult to humanely produce meat at the same scale and price as industrial meat production.


Indeed. It's probably both subsidies for meat production and high margins for the fancy new meat replacements. Looks like there's a need for more competition.

Meat is interesting... when I read this at first I was taken aback, thinking that while there might be 1-3 years lag in producers responding to demand, surely meat is nearly a pure commodity without market power being involved?

Then I remembered slaughterhouses:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2021/12/10/rec...


Everyone is focusing on the "ethical" issue of killing animals but in fact I think this issue does not matter to the majority of the global meat market. Instead I think the ecological factors (greenhouse gas emissions from meat production) and economic factors (could theoretically be cheaper, easier to manage, and more efficient than a farm) will be the primary drivers here.

Also, funny to imagine someone walking into a16z with just a piece of chicken and walking out with a $3 million check.


You're right, there are very humane farms out there. You're right, demand for meat is only going to keep growing. You're right on many points; I'm just trying to point out that the sticker prices you see on "humane meats" in the grocery store could easily be far less humane than the farms that feature on those documentaries, giving a skewed perception of what "humane meats" actually cost to produce.
next

Legal | privacy