Every decision about what foods we include in the daily menu has an impact on health, the family economy and, also, the planet. Food production generates 20% of greenhouse gases and consumes 70% of drinking water. It is estimated that by 2050 the world population will be around 9.7 billion inhabitants (about 2 billion more than today) and that the production of food products will multiply by 70% to respond to so much demand. So that this equation does not destroy the environment, it is necessary to change the way we understand food and make room for R&D in agriculture.
The first is already a reality in developed countries, whose citizens increasingly assume that health cannot be separated from a healthy diet. What is to come in the coming years is a true revolution in the way food is grown, incorporating artificial intelligence, robotics and molecular biology.
It is not science fiction: in a short time it will be common to prepare menus achieved thanks to FoodTech and AgTech (technologies applied to the food and agricultural industry). But changes are already occurring, as stated by the private bank Julius Baer in its FoodTech report.
From scientists at the World Health Organization (WHO) to those at the University of Navarra, the opinion is unanimous: reducing the consumption of products of animal origin and increasing the percentage of plant foods are associated with higher health indicators. (less cholesterol, fewer cardiovascular pathologies, longer life expectancy and lower incidence of some cancers). This decision also reduces the environmental impact: 15,000 liters of water are necessary to produce one kilo of beef, compared to 25 liters for one kilo of lentils.
Despite the recent controversies about steaks, the pattern is undeniable: the same report from the private bank Julius Baer speaks of ‘stagnation’ in red meat consumption as a turning point after four decades of exaltation in which consumption doubled . Compared to barbecue culture, veganism, vegetarianism and the flexitarian diet are rising positions, especially among younger people.
Something as simple as replacing beef with legumes three days a week for a year saves water equivalent to 16 Olympic swimming pools, according to estimates from the calculator of the Meat Free Mondays movement, promoted by Paul and Stella. McCartney. And simply eliminating it one day a week saves greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to driving from Madrid to Cádiz (647 kilometers).
Something similar happens with milk. Whether for ethical reasons or due to lactose intolerance, more and more citizens are opting for their coffee with oat, soy or almond milk. They also go into yogurt and tofu. The problem of providing less calcium or vitamin D is normally solved by supplementing these foods with these micronutrients, but of plant origin.
‘Would you eat a hamburger made with laboratory-grown meat?’ was the headline in the press when the first results of meat cultures from animal cells that did not involve sacrifice were made public. An achievement for defenders of animal dignity and a benefit for the health of consumers, since, by proliferating in sterile atmospheres, antibiotics are not used. The challenge is to make it as tasty as farm-raised and, of course, make it affordable. According to Bloomberg, there are more than 70 startups developing all types of animal products in the laboratory.
Bill Gates and the co-founder of PayPal, Peter Thiel, have already invested in this promising sector. The European Commission and Bpifrance, the French public investment bank, financially support Gourmey, a company that aims to replicate foie gras without resorting to aggressive techniques against ducks. The company has already raised 10 million dollars for this project. With all this, it is estimated that laboratory-grown meats could account for 35% of the total market by 2040.
However, Julius Baer’s study highlights that plant-based alternatives to meat are expensive. A pound of Walmart’s factory-raised beef burger in the United States can cost $2.85, while a pound of Beyond Meat’s Beyond Beef burger costs about $8. In order to truly compete with the traditional meat market, current prices would have to fall.
Living in big cities and eating locally grown salads may be getting closer. In 1999, Dickinson Despommier referred to vertical farms as a skyscraper farming utopia, but in 2011 the first vertical farms began operating in Singapore, Chicago, South Korea and Japan. The crops are arranged on kilometer-long shelves along old urban warehouses and even in containers. Instead of fertile soil, the roots are immersed in water with the necessary nutrients or left in the air and sprayed with nutritional solutions. In the absence of sun, LED lights are used.
The system – which is one of the innovations included in Julius Baer’s document – presents five great advantages: space saving, possibility of growing within large cities, minimization of pests due to the sterile atmosphere and accelerated plant growth by ensuring better conditions in terms of light and irrigation, as well as optimization of water since it circulates in a closed circuit. Among the drawbacks, a probable increase in the electricity bill and the enormous investment to set up these agricultural plants (around 4 million dollars).
These problems mean that, for now, they are only useful for producing sprouts and small crops of green leaves, which are very easy to grow. But its role will be relevant in the not-too-distant future, as shown by the 6,500-square-meter plant set up by Singapore Airlines and Aerofarms near Newark Liberty Airport (New Jersey) to supply fleets with freshly harvested pak choi and kale.
The FAO estimates that a third of food ends up in the trash can. WWF raises the count to 40%. Making efficient cooking and adjusting the shopping list to the real needs of each house would help reduce this waste. The food industry takes up the baton and provides high-tech solutions: computerized warehouses to extend the life of food, robots that collect at the right time and sustainable packaging that prolongs the useful life of food are some of those solutions.
The technology applied to crop fields would have delighted Isaac Asimov: in addition to genetically modified seeds to resist pests or droughts, in the not too distant future drones will be added that map the terrain to record in real time how the plantations are progressing. , tractors with optical sensors to plant seeds exactly in the right spot or devices with scanners that detect and eliminate weeds with lasers or ultrasound, thus minimizing the use of herbicides. The developers of these technologies believe that their use of herbicides could be reduced by 90%. This would mean savings for farmers and, for consumers, food with less chemical residues.
Although all these factors and innovations are important, the main and decisive challenges for feeding the world in the future are food and water security. According to Julius Baer’s report, the innovations described are mostly driven by trends in the developed world, while the problem of undernourishment occurs in developing countries.
Therefore, there is a discrepancy. Currently, people in developed countries focus a lot on the innovations described, but the challenges to feeding the world go beyond that. Weak institutions, lack of infrastructure and limited access to water continue to prevail and prevent affordable access to food.
From a global perspective, increasing the quantity and quality of production combined with a reduction in input factors will be crucial for food suppliers to keep pace with changing and growing demand.