I'm Karthik, a scientist by training in biochemical engineering and systems/quantitative biology. I've been keen on the Effective Altruism movement since first hearing about it on Sam Harris' podcast in 2016. I'm particularly motivated by the problem of farmed animal agriculture, and have steered my life and pursuits accordingly. I currently work as a Data Scientist at Climax Foods to develop next-generation vegan food products. And I've also authored a book about the impending end of animal agriculture--focusing on how poor and inefficient animals are as a production system (the "technological" argument against animal ag). Book is titled After Meat, and more info is here: https://aftermeatbook.com/
Wiki Contributions
Comments
The details will matter as far as what will have the most impact.
If she's starting another plant-based burger or milk company, a la Beyond Meat or Oatly, then I'd say she can't add so much value because there's already a ton of activity solving that problem. But if she has novel solutions; for example, a new way to make semi-solid lipids at scale, then she can add a lot. Semi-solid lipids are a problem for nearly every alternative food effort; there two "natural" options with coconut oil and palm oil. Also, for what it's worth, many of these companies are struggling with hiring. So rather than starting her own startup, she could join and help an impactful one. That'd likely provide even more safety.
And likewise, with the non-profit, the details matter too. I write that fighting agriculture subsidies is the biggest barrier to the alternative food revolution. At the time of writing, I couldn't find any organization addressing this problem specifically (likely because lobbying efforts are capped for non-profits). If our wunderkind is willing to tackle that, then she could have a substantial impact.
The reports largely echo my worries about the tractability and feasibility of cultured (in vitro) meat. When I talked with my friend at GFI about it, she sent me this post that GFI authored, in particular responding to the Counter article: https://gfi.org/cultivated/tea-statement/
The post indicates that there's more information beyond what's available publicly and that these companies and investors are well-versed with the challenges. I know the post rings of a "trust us; we know what we're doing" sentiment and asks for a lot to be taken at face value. So, the Truth is out there, but, unfortunately, hidden under trade secrets.
As far resource allocation goes to have the most impact, I wouldn't eliminate cultured meat funding completely, but I would reduce it compared to plant- and fermentation-based technology. It's hard to prognosticate how certain technologies will fare, and so I prefer a hedging, diversified portfolio approach. For that reason, it's good to have cultured meat R&D efforts. Cultured meat may even help in a specific way, such as supplying a few key ingredients but never forming into an entire meat replacement.
Secondly, it's clear that we just need more public disclosure in the cultured meat space. I wouldn't mind more academic efforts tackling the problems and publishing papers.
Private funding for alternative food is eye-popping, to say the least. "Buzzy" is a good descriptor :)
I hesitate to make any proclamations on what's too much or too little, as it does depend on the counterfactual. I think the problems that Beyond Meat are trying to solve are worthwhile. Giving them cheaper capital helps their efforts. Glad it's going there versus, say, Palantir.
I spent Chapter 9 discussing specific funding opportunities, but I thought of a couple of ones since the book went to the presses:
If we could pay for a team to sit down and calculate all this, then I think that would pay dividends. It's boring and unsexy, but, man, it would be so impactful.