VincentWolf
Good industry to invest in!
LeahC
Oh of course, once again its easier to change the environment and nature instead of simply changing our diets which has proven to be detrimental to both the world and ourselves. Next thing you know people will be raping the sea of yet another vital organism. Its simple, stop growing cows and instead use the land for plant based food (plants clean the air and create oxygen) - research has shown meat is a very in-efficient way of feeding people, if this was done there would be enough land and food produced to feed a population of 1.5 times that of earth currently. Instead of all the poverty in the world. besides, in a world where we are looking at sending people to colonize Mars etc, surely we don't need to kill living creatures so that we can live! Rant over.
Rockyredneck
What is needed is to isolate the why. Perhaps a cheap synthetic product could be developed that would prevent mono-cropping the sea (a development that appears repugnant to me.)
yawood
@LeahC. But it doesn't taste as good as meat.
fb36
@Rockyredneck: That is what drug companies often do. They find a useful chemical from a plant, create a synthetic (and simpler) version of it (which can be patented, unlike the natural version, and easier to produce) and sell it for any price they want. But the problem is the synthetic versions of drugs come with dangerous side effects, unlike the natural versions!
StWils
Rocky is mostly right. But instead of making a synthetic substitute perhaps existing typical feedstock plants such as alfalfa can incorporate the needed biochemistry. And Leah can pound salt, no way does creamed bugs or funky plant salsa ever come close to replacing an actual thick steak!
Qiltroll
It's not the burp that will kill ya.
byrneheart
I hardly think mono cropping would be a problem. 262 miles is tiny. I could easily see a licensing system like that for oyster farmers giving square mile cropping permissions.
habakak
LeahC...we currently produce enough calories to feed a population of about 10 billion people. The problem is in distribution and the food not grown where it is needed.
And don't decide for the world what they can and can't eat. Humans have always worried about some apocalypse.
Nathaneal Blemings
Just because it cant be patented doesnt mean its not worth recreating in a lab, and even if you recreated a synthetic version that was abit different for the purpose of patenting it, its really anyones guess if it would have negative effects.
Atleast we have a very promising discovery on how we can stop methane, i honestly dont think it would be that costly to isolate and reproducing whatever chemical it is to be added to feed. A couple things however. Notice how it said it reduced 99% of methane, meaning likely some of the gut flora that produce methane were immune to it, it stands to reason that like antibiotics the gut flora might develop a resistance.
Also worthy of mentioning, as of late we are discovering how important gut flora is to our(humans) health, if our gut flora gets out of whack it can cause all sorts of diseases or conditions... if we eliminated these gut bacteria it could have a negative effect on the cows health, maby. And to the guy saying 262 miles is tiny, remember this is only talking about whats needed for australia alone, for the rest of the world there would need to be alot more, and the cost of growing that much seawould over that much area would be very cost prohibitive, atleast if it was only used for cowfeed.