If you're trying to bring a new product to market don't you want to rely on the infrastructure that already exists? What's the alternative if you want to make an impact quickly?
Sure, KFC, PizzaHut, etc. have contributed significantly to increases in meat consumption, but isn't that exactly the place to start?
Just like BP, Shell, etc. are diversifying away from fossil fuels, the companies you mentioned likely see the writing on the wall. Considering the fact that they already have supply chains in place to support a significant portion of the population, using them as a proxy to get alternative meats to people at a reasonable cost seems like the path of least resistance.
Agreed, these companies in many ways have despoiled the land as you said but their real motivation is generating profit, they don't necessarily care about the food being low quality, they care that it's good enough for people to buy it and cheap enough to sell it.
If alternative meats drive the same demand, or more, as regular meats and can be sold at similar margins, and as a byproduct the companies can say they're on the alternative meats train, I think you'll see them come onboard.
My parents, who are as far from alternative meat fans as you can find, are in complete alignment that eating meat isn't going to be nearly as commonplace in 30 years as it is today and are interested in investing in alternative meat producers just due to the fact that society is trending in that direction.
Of course you've got the rise of countries coming out of poverty whose populace is going to expect to eat a bunch of meat which is why it's critical that we get economies of scale, distribution, etc. nailed down now before they acquire a real taste of beef grown on an industrial farm, instead we need options for them to buy alternative, or potentially lab grown, meats.
Doing so would have the benefit of generating massive amounts of innovation in how food is produced while, hopefully, reducing relative and absolute greenhouse gas emissions.
Is the problem meat diets? Or capitalism and the food industry? Locavorism seems to be a much better idea than vegetarianism - in terms of human ethics and of benefits for the planet at least.
Sure, KFC, PizzaHut, etc. have contributed significantly to increases in meat consumption, but isn't that exactly the place to start?
Just like BP, Shell, etc. are diversifying away from fossil fuels, the companies you mentioned likely see the writing on the wall. Considering the fact that they already have supply chains in place to support a significant portion of the population, using them as a proxy to get alternative meats to people at a reasonable cost seems like the path of least resistance.
Agreed, these companies in many ways have despoiled the land as you said but their real motivation is generating profit, they don't necessarily care about the food being low quality, they care that it's good enough for people to buy it and cheap enough to sell it.
If alternative meats drive the same demand, or more, as regular meats and can be sold at similar margins, and as a byproduct the companies can say they're on the alternative meats train, I think you'll see them come onboard.
My parents, who are as far from alternative meat fans as you can find, are in complete alignment that eating meat isn't going to be nearly as commonplace in 30 years as it is today and are interested in investing in alternative meat producers just due to the fact that society is trending in that direction.
Of course you've got the rise of countries coming out of poverty whose populace is going to expect to eat a bunch of meat which is why it's critical that we get economies of scale, distribution, etc. nailed down now before they acquire a real taste of beef grown on an industrial farm, instead we need options for them to buy alternative, or potentially lab grown, meats.
Doing so would have the benefit of generating massive amounts of innovation in how food is produced while, hopefully, reducing relative and absolute greenhouse gas emissions.