A California-based startup called Savor has figured out a unique way to make a butter alternative that doesn’t involve livestock, plants, or even displacing land. Their butter is produced from synthetic fat made using carbon dioxide and hydrogen, and the best part is —- it tastes just like regular butter.

  • Stern
    link
    fedilink
    3610 months ago

    Sounds like margarine with more chances to shit myself

  • @mipadaitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2810 months ago

    Interesting way to get fat alternatives, people are already used to eating fake butter regularly, so it probably wouldn’t take much to add this to our diet.

  • @phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    2410 months ago

    The biggest question which is barely alluded to in the article is cost. If it can’t compete with mass produced butter at cost and scale then it’ll just be another “alternative” which is good but not as big.

    They also mention that they compared emissions and land use but give no aspect of what synthetic processes are used (I’d assume they at least have provisional patents on the “how to” already).

    • @ganksy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      810 months ago

      Could be subsidized as a “real” carbon offset. That could make it competitive with other butters. Assuming it’s actually legit.

      • @explore_broaden@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It wouldn’t offset much, given the upper price for direct air capture here https://www.iea.org/commentaries/is-carbon-capture-too-expensive at a little under $350/ton, and assuming a pound of ‘butter’ comes entirely from CO2 (some will by hydrogen based on the article, but assuming that’s negligible) that means at most the credit should be 16¢ per pound, which is 3.4% of the average cost of a pound of butter ($4.69, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU0000FS1101). My cost of butter is below average and it’s still only a 4.5% subsidy.

        Edit to add: if you count the CO2 production from obtaining the milk used for real butter against the cost as well (let’s assume the resources for this process and the process of making milk into butter are similar), it seems like producing a pound of butter is emits around 4 kg of CO2, which nets you another $1.4 on each package of butter (if you use the lower number for carbon capture this is a total of $0.6 including the pound of capture from above). This is actually pretty significant, so if there was a tax for greenhouse gas emissions to cover the cost of recapture it would help a product like this be more viable.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      Yeah, that’s always the thing with these technological solutions, you practically cannot compete with plants. They involve barely any work, nor machinery, for the output they deliver.

      • @Telodzrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        010 months ago

        Terroir is essential to any natural food product. The impurities are what make it good, not something which detracts from the whole.

  • @Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1610 months ago

    If it tastes and spreads like a tub of Land o Lakes then I’ll probably try it. I don’t care where the hell it comes from as long as it tastes correct.

  • Ephera
    link
    fedilink
    1310 months ago

    Fat and oil production from animal and plant-based sources are collectively responsible for about 3.5 billion tons of CO2

    You cannot be serious that animal-based and plant-based are grouped in this figure. Plant-based is likely close to carbon-neutral, and only not net-negative, because of transport, cooling etc., which will also be necessary for this artificially created fat…

      • Ephera
        link
        fedilink
        210 months ago

        Yeah. But since farm animals are often fed from farmed plants these days, animal-based tends to be worse by quite a solid factor. This article puts butter at 4x worse than margarine, for example: https://www.forkranger.com/blog/is-margarine-a-sustainable-alternative-for-butter/

        How plant-based compares to this new process still needs to be seen for sure. If it’s just a machine you can plug in at the store and everyone can get their butter like out of an ice cream machine, without transport and cooling chain, then it’s likely a lot better.
        But at this point, I don’t expect the process to be much more efficient than what plants are doing, which means you’d still need a ton of energy and particularly also land area for it.

  • @cmbabul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1310 months ago

    If this were to take off France and the US South by themselves could eat us out of climate change in a matter of months

    • @CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      1710 months ago

      Even if it is – I’m interested in seeing how it performs. Feed some rats 3-5x the recommended amount, see what happens. Have some long term studies.

      If it is the same as what we use, right now, for a lessened cost or environmental impact, that is still worth exploring.

  • Caveman
    link
    fedilink
    1110 months ago

    Don’t want to be a hater but doesn’t this basically create fat without nutrients? It feels like this is reinventing margarine albeit in a cool way.

      • Caveman
        link
        fedilink
        510 months ago

        They’re from the same class yes, but is it also going to contain vitamins A, D, E and K2 or contain fatty acids like Conjugated Linoleic Acid or Butyric acid?

        I’m trying to point out that factory produced fats will most likely lose out on the health benefits of butter as a source of fatty acids.

  • @nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    910 months ago

    I wonder if they can use CO2 that comes from industrial carbon capture, or if it needs to be something purer that takes a lot of energy to produce.

    Also, I’m not sure if we can get industrial volumes of hydrogen from sources other than fossil fuels now. Its been a while, but last I checked it was coming from things like byproducts from reformers.

    • FauxPseudo
      link
      fedilink
      610 months ago

      It would need to be food grade CO2. So breweries would be a good source.

  • Liz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    810 months ago

    Yo this would be great for some actual proper carbon sequestration. Make some butter from the air and pump it back down into the wells.

      • Liz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        110 months ago

        So I have limitations with videos, but the argument that capturing carbon is costs more energy than it took to put into the air is valid as long as we’re still dumping carbon in the air. But, we have to stop putting carbon in the air and we have to start taking it out again.

        • completely agree with you, but until the whole world stops dumping it in the air (classic) carbon capture is worthless. I’m interested if this thing of making butter can be worth it, because you’re not just removing CO2, you are also making something that would have required farming a cow, which is much more resource intensive.

          I guess we’ll need some studies done on the topic

    • @vxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If you plant more trees, there wouldn’t be enough space for the cows to get milk and make butter.

      I guess the calculation always works, even when people apply methods they use to discredit EVs