Growing up on a cattle ranch exposed me to some of the benefits and problems we face in today's agricultural industry. The world's population will continue to grow and there are not enough resources to provide food for everyone with our current food production techniques. Progress must be made, starting in our generation, for future generations to survive. If technologies are not applied to the food industry, the traditional agricultural practices we currently offer will not be enough to maintain current living standards; hunger will skyrocket globally. Educating the public about technological advances is an essential condition to ensure that they embrace change. Research indicated that the clean meat movement would also have a significant environmental impact. Despite this, many lawmakers wonder who will regulate this type of meat production and whether it will even be feasible on such a large scale. As the debate opens, we must not forget how crucial technological advancements in the food industry will be to our future. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Hunger is a problem all over the world, not just in third world countries, but all around us in the United States. United. We are already failing to meet the needs of the world's population, and clean or cultured meat is an opportunity to change that. The growing global population is expected to reach 9.8 billion by 2050, and food production will need to increase by 100% to support this growth. Technological advances will be responsible for 70% of this increase (Stein, D., 2018). Agricultural production will always exist until, and perhaps even after, scientists find a way to make ribeyes and porterhouses look and taste the same way they come from a lab and an animal. As human populations increase, animal populations will also have to increase; hence increased use of resources like land and water by humans and animals. In a 2011 study by Hanna L. Tuomisto and M. Joost Teixeira De Mattos, the clean meat movement will reduce energy consumption by approximately 7 to 45 percent, with the exception of traditional poultry production. (which is already lower), 78-96. % of greenhouse gas emissions, 99% of land use and 82-96% of water use, depending on the product, compared to “conventionally produced European meat” (Tuomisto , H.L and De Mattos, MJT, 2011). Although variable depending on the product, the conclusion of this study is that the environmental impacts of cultured meat production are overall lower than those of traditionally produced meat. Cultured meat has the potential to overcome various environmental, health and ethical issues that have emerged globally. the consumption of animal products and the industrial agriculture that supports it. Social Studies of Economies and Markets (SSEM) research this year by Michael J. Mouat and Russell Prince showed that the clean meat movement can be a huge “disruption” (in a positive sense) to the world. . If produced on a large scale, it would revolutionize the economics behind food production. Land, water and food would be replaced by laboratories, cell culture media and large petri dishes. The market for new inputs would explode and resources saved through the consumption ofCultured meat would be available for the use of a growing population. However, the effects on traditional farming methods are still unknown, as is how long it will take to reach large-scale production. Despite all the hopes for the future, the realistic time frame it will take to deliver cultured meat at a price competitive with traditionally produced meat is unclear. Producing clean meat on a large scale is much more difficult than what has been done so far on a small scale. The main factor is being able to produce culture media that can meet meat quality standards, while also having an appropriate price. Cultured meat industry leaders want to make a visible impact on the environment, particularly global climate change. From this point on, it will likely take several decades to reach this goal, if it is even possible (Stephens, et al., 2018). Research has shown that this is the case, but this cannot be fully known until other factors, including public acceptance of cultured meat, are observed. The biggest influence on whether clean meat succeeds or not is how the public perceives it. Due to technological advances made in the past, not only in the food industry but also in the health industry, which have not been thoroughly investigated, public trust is not very high. far. Without proper education behind simulated meat, misconceptions could lead to the new technology being completely excluded from the industry, as was the case with bovine somatotropin, or bST. It is an FDA-approved hormone that helps increase milk production in dairy cattle (Tauer, LW, 2016). The simple word “hormone” led to the loss of significant potential for new efficiencies in dairy production, purely because the public did not understand it. the meaning or effects that the addition would have. In a hypothetical choice experiment conducted by Peter Slade, consumers were given the option of purchasing burgers made from beef, plant-based protein, or cultured meat. Willingness to purchase meat and cultured meat burgers was found to correlate with age, gender, views on other food technologies and attitudes towards the environment and agriculture. Consumers were told that all burgers tasted the same and that beef burgers remained the visible favorite. At equal prices, 65% of consumers would still buy the beef burger, 21% would buy the plant-based burger, 11% would choose the cultured meat burger and 4% would make no purchase. Those who opted for plant-based and cultured meat burgers were found to be strongly linked, but not exactly. For example, women were more willing to buy a plant-based burger than a beef burger, but less willing to buy a cultured meat burger than the other two. Overall, individuals who had a positive attitude toward other food technologies and genetically modified organisms were more willing to purchase either of the two nontraditional patties. Due to the current availability of vegetarian burgers, consumers may already be more accepting of a simulated meat burger over a simulated chicken breast or steak. It remains unclear whether consumer preferences may vary depending on the type of meat as well as the simulated meat product. (Slade, P., 2018). Due to uncertainty over the public's willingness to purchase cultured meat, its.