Tony Seba is coming for your cheese, and says 100% solar is easy.

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Seems to depend on the location. We have areas where farmland has broke $10,000 an acre. From the farmers I've talked to payback on that land is about 45 years, depending on how the interest is calculated on a loan.

It makes absolutely no sense, except there are existing farms that have to buy that land, farms in this area need to scale up in size to remain profitable.

The age of small family farms are coming to an end, they're simply not profitable anymore.

If I had millions of dollars to invest, certainly some of it would be spent buying land.
 
Does that western Kansas land have good water? I know some areas there it’s decreased quite a bit.
 
Saw a technical seminar today by an academic engineer who claims to be a pioneer in lab grown meat research. His students have founded some of the recent startup companies in this space.

Overall, I was unimpressed... costs per unit cell mass are a few orders of magnitude (like three, orr 1000x) too expensive at the moment.

Strategies for reducing costs were to optimize the process (more cells per reactor volume) and that has, after years of research netted a factor of a few. But since they need to use media that doesn't contain fetal bovine serum, FBS (which is, no surprise, expensive, and not available at scale), they lose a factor of a few relative to conventional media that does contain FBS. So, after 5 years of heavy research, they are back to square one, growing a small number of cells per volume as well as before, but without bovine product inputs (other than a large stream of fresh stem cells).

The other strategy was to scale to 250000 liters, which is the room-sized reactors used for yeast and bacteria nowadays (to make heme for impossible burger, and other products). And said that no one had ever cultured animal cells successfully at that scale, nor could any of the startups afford to build such a reactor (esp given that it would just be a non-working prototype). At that scale, animal cells are simply torn apart by the shear stress of the mixing impellers required to keep everything suspended and oxygenated. Fungi and yeast have cell walls and can take that stress no problem.

Oh, and the cells he is growing don't grow in suspension... so they would have to be engineered to do so (hasn't happened yet) or grown on neutrally bouyant beads. In the lab, people use plastic beads for this, but that would make a 90% microplastic burger...so no go. He is looking into making fungus-derived edible beads, to skip the step of separating the cells from the beads (which would likely kill or break them up).

I was sitting there going, 'WTF, why not make a plant of fungus based protein matrix (already cheap at scale), engineered for correct exture and macronutrients, and then load it with precision fermented animal proteins to nail the taste?' And it appears that heme gets you about 80% of the way on taste. IOW, the impossible foods approach.

And then his next to last slide talked about founding a new center to engineer such 'hybrid' products (combining a plant/fungal matrix with a small amount of animal cells or proteins). And I went... 'Ah, he's not dumb!'

In the Q and A he mentioned that 'Folks love the impossible burger for taste and texture, but I've never tried one.' < < head explodes > >

So, if this were the Apollo program and the Moon race, this is NASA shooting off bottle rockets while the Soviets are building the N1, and Werner von Braun doesn't bother to find out what the soviets are even up to. ;lol
 

Hope that URL works.
In NL, tasting of lab grown meat has just been made possible. But sausage, not the structure of meat (!). And a small $100 sausage. (That's not three orders of magnitude, but still.)
 
On the other hand, population will keep increasing in the US. Demand for land (for one use or the other) will thus too.
True on the population. The land use statement is based on? The strong dollar reduces US ag exports. Current Wheat prices are low. Not below operating expenses but not high enough to survive back to back crop failures.

To put some numbers in perspective. Diary 20 million
Does that western Kansas land have good water? I know some areas there it’s decreased quite a bit.
Personally no. We had a 200 acres of irrigation but it has not been irrigated since 1990. There is some locally but aquifers are dropping and wells are deep.
 
True on the population. The land use statement is based on?
the fact that people need space - to live, and to grow food?
 
the fact that people need space - to live, and to grow food?
But if you believe Tony we won’t need nearly as much land. I’m torn. The major growth with be Africa and India. What prospects do they have to increase production? (I don’t know). A 2% increase in US ag annually for 5 years is my best guess as the upper limit. Sure we could farm more acreage but I don’t see that happening given the short term trends in the next 24 months.
 
But if you believe Tony we won’t need nearly as much land. I’m torn. The major growth with be Africa and India. What prospects do they have to increase production? (I don’t know). A 2% increase in US ag annually for 5 years is my best guess as the upper limit. Sure we could farm more acreage but I don’t see that happening given the short term trends in the next 24 months.
The US population is increasing, and (together with sea level increase), that'll only lead to more land use - one way or another.
I have yet to see a place where land use goes down. Even in France (with notoriously decreasing rural population), land use (as in not leaving it to revert to nature) is not decreasing.

edit: despite promises of techno optimists, world wide land use for agriculture keeps increasing.
The US has started increasing again since 2013, Europe slightly decreasing (but importing from elsewhere).
The increase (world wide) is much slower though since 2010.
 
Last edited:
Well, in addition to reductions in grazing land and feed for dairy cows, we can also wind down the corn ethanol debacle. All of that will release a ton of land.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dznam

Hope that URL works.
In NL, tasting of lab grown meat has just been made possible. But sausage, not the structure of meat (!). And a small $100 sausage. (That's not three orders of magnitude, but still.)

My speaker yesterday told a story that at a conference, one of the lab grown meat startups (for sushi grade tuna) was going to bring samples for everyone to try.

But there was some problem with production, and they only brought three small squares of tuna sashimi. And then they held a raffle to see who would be the lucky three. One of the speaker's students got lucky and was able to try it.

He asked the student afterwards what he thought, and the student said 'It was alright.' When asked if it tasted like real tuna the student said 'I grew up vegetarian, and so have never had tuna. How would I know?' ;lol
 
  • Haha
Reactions: begreen
If that's the level of market research these folks do, it's not surprising it's not going well...
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodgeek
I just looked out my back window and there were 2 rabbits in the yard. As I look around there’s food running around everywhere. I look at lakes and there’s muscles on the bottom and fish all over.

We don’t need to have synthetic meat, as a society we need to get better at catching it, lol. It’s everywhere!
 
Well, in addition to reductions in grazing land and feed for dairy cows, we can also wind down the corn ethanol debacle. All of that will release a ton of land.
I wouldn't count on farming for fuel disappearing. I see it transitioning to soybean oil. Northern New England states ad northern tier states with high seasonal heating demands and rural areas have a high penetration of heating oil for home heating and to a lesser extent propane. The current crop of cold climate heat pump refrigerants and physics in general means that most existing homes have issues with relying on100% heat pump tech and generally require a backup fossil fuel (or wood) as the efficiency of air source units rapidly approach that of electrical resistance heat. The grid as currently configured really is not set up to support a wholesale shift to electric heating demand in deep winter. The backup plan is to shift fossil fuel users to biofuel blends initially with a complete shift to 100% biofuel. The only current commercially viable technology for biodiesel using a domestic crop is based on the use of soy based oil to make a liquid Biofuel, with some further processing, the residual products can be turned into renewable propane. Both are premium cost of fossil based products.

There will be a big market for liquid fueled large trucks and trains for far longer than the car market. Yes EV tech can be applied to hevy trucking and transportation but the economics just are not there yet and will lag the auto EV market significantly. The logical transition fuel is biodiesel and again that is being targeted to be supplied by soy crops.

BTW, land values for forestry land in the northeast is still below $1,000 an acre. There have been several attempts to change that by producing high value chemicals and jet fuel but the reality at this point that fossil based fuels can make them for less. Until carbon taxes or the equivalent come into being, the conversion of biomass to wood is a loser.
 
I wouldn't count on farming for fuel disappearing. I see it transitioning to soybean oil. Northern New England states ad northern tier states with high seasonal heating demands and rural areas have a high penetration of heating oil for home heating and to a lesser extent propane. The current crop of cold climate heat pump refrigerants and physics in general means that most existing homes have issues with relying on100% heat pump tech and generally require a backup fossil fuel (or wood) as the efficiency of air source units rapidly approach that of electrical resistance heat. The grid as currently configured really is not set up to support a wholesale shift to electric heating demand in deep winter. The backup plan is to shift fossil fuel users to biofuel blends initially with a complete shift to 100% biofuel. The only current commercially viable technology for biodiesel using a domestic crop is based on the use of soy based oil to make a liquid Biofuel, with some further processing, the residual products can be turned into renewable propane. Both are premium cost of fossil based products.

I'll take that bet. I don't think biodiesel will be a big thing in the US to replace Home Heating Oil.

I agree about the situation with the built environment in New England, and Northern New England. The data I have seen suggests that users in similar (or colder) climates elsewhere in the US have mostly switched to propane, often many years ago. Given the current (and increasing) domestic supply of 'wet gas' in the US, which includes propane, I think the costs will remain low.

And from a climate perspective, I'm skeptical, and would guess that fossil propane has lower CO2 emissions per BTU than current tech soy-based biodiesel. (Given that Corn Ethanol is neck and neck with heavier gasoline). And that point will almost certainly be even more true if land use costs of the latter are properly taken into account. Please educate me if you have data to the contrary.

Edited to add:
Found this recent review:
It says that GHG emissions are 65-75% lower for bio than fossil diesel, while citing other reviews that suggest more like 50% reduction. I learned something today.

IOW, I think you are describing a northern new england problem, which is a bit of a niche issue. To get rid of HHO, all that is required is to build out the propane delivery systems a bit, and incentivize users to switch. Exactly as happened all over the Northern US.

Propane has about 15% lower CO2/BTU than HHO, closer to 25% if you consider condensing equipment (which is much easier/common to build with propane). This is less than the benefit of switching to 100% bio, and about the same as switching to 30-50% bio blend, depending on which model you like.

Longer term, that propane furnace can be backup in a dual fuel config to a current tech ASHP running on renewables. Or we can hope that in the long term ASHP continue to improve and/or the seasonal supply and storage of renewable electricity is resolved by falling costs.
 
Last edited:
There will be a big market for liquid fueled large trucks and trains for far longer than the car market. Yes EV tech can be applied to hevy trucking and transportation but the economics just are not there yet and will lag the auto EV market significantly. The logical transition fuel is biodiesel and again that is being targeted to be supplied by soy crops.

At the risk of being called a Tesla fanboy... the Tesla Semi appears to be technically and commercially viable. As battery production scales and DCFC costs fall with EV light vehicle production, building out EV heavy vehicles will be straightforward.

Not on the 2-3 year horizon, surely, but on the 5-10 year horizon.
 
Trains should be electric, with overhead wires. Take advantage of the fixed track... No need for flexibility from fuel tanks.
 
Trains should be electric, with overhead wires. Take advantage of the fixed track... No need for flexibility from fuel tanks.
As both EU and China have already electrified their freight trains....