No Beef, Lamb, Milk and Cheese Within 25 Years Under Net Zero, Government-Funded Report Confirms

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Achieving Net Zero in 25 years would need a “complete transformation” of the UK’s agricultural and food system that would in effect mean a diet devoid of beef, lamb and all dairy products, according to the latest work from the Government-funded UK FIRES. Look at the research that governing elites commission and read, not what they say. UK FIRES takes an absolute view of Net Zero and bases its work on existing technologies, not the pie in the sky inventions still to come and the whacky schemes that cannot reach economic scale. UK FIRES is an influential body since it takes a rare honest approach to Net Zero. Among the horrors outlined in its latest report is a future reliance on highly-processed food – industrial test-tube sludge in other words. Using labs to produce just 0.4% of the projected demand for meat in 2030 would involve a capacity “20 times that of the current pharmaceutical industry”, observe the authors.

The need to collapse the existing agro-food system is said to present opportunities for the creation of “hybrid” food products. Animal fat, presumably from non-belching beasts, can be processed to give “definitive flavour and mouth feel of meat” and these can be combined with plant-based ingredients. Alternative proteins (not detailed, but there is much support elsewhere for fly larvae and mealworm flour) might be used in highly processed foods. In future, notes UK FIRES, processed plants might include ingredients from precision fermentation or cultivated fats. These are all held together by half of the chemistry lab including stabilisers, colourings, E numbers and preservatives – though UK FIRES inexplicably fails to give the detail on this. And not forgetting masses of salt and sugar, a common staple of so-called healthy processed foods designed to give them a semblance of pleasant taste.

Utterly disgusting – readers might prefer to lay in stocks of the dog’s kibble as a healthier and more appetising alternative.

The land currently occupied by productive and generational farmers would see “radical shifts”. The required changes to achieve absolute Net Zero emissions from food systems “would present many opportunities”, argues UK FIRES. There would be competition for “environmental services” and this presumably would include such “opportunities” as nature-destroying wind turbines and solar dead zone parks. Rewilding and carbon capture or sequestration are mentioned. Planning and support for land use “transformation” is said to be needed, and it is said to carry the promise of “large social and environmental benefits”. At this point, it might be observed what a grand start the current anti-farmer Labour Government has made by slapping a recent 20% death tax on small family farms that are passed onto the next generation, or not as the case may now be. That should help clear a bit of space for the new enclosing aristocracy, the subsidy-hunting windmill rentiers.

UK FIRES is funded by a £5 million Government grant and its team of academics is led by Professor Julian Allwood, Professor of Engineering and the Environment at Cambridge University. In the past, its absolutist work forecast a world where Britain would lose 75% of its energy, where flying and shipping along with beef, lamb and dairy would be banned, while bricks, concrete and glass would almost cease to exist. These are all reasonable forecasts if hydrocarbons are suddenly removed from a modern industrial mix. But the academics’ brutal appraisals scare the horses at a time when the British Prime Minister is telling porkies that Net Zero will not affect people’s lifestyles.

The message has probably gone out to tone it down a bit on the banning front, so the latest report on agricultural and food supply is more nuanced. So it is more that we can transform food supply, it will all be a great adventure and economic opportunities will be created everywhere – that sort of guff, straight out of the Ed Miliband songbook. Slashing farmland acreage but boosting pharma-food is supposedly meant to reassure, although such reassurance is unlikely to survive when confronted with reality.

However as we have seen, the authors behind UK FIRES are Net Zero absolutists and the message is still that all greenhouses gases must be removed from agriculture. UK FIRES says this is a complete transformation, which is one way of describing a societal and economic disaster in the making. Artificial fertilisers which use hydrocarbons to add nitrogen to the soil have massively boosted crop yields around the world over the last few decades. Without their use, food supplies would halve, leading to mass starvation and death. With restrictions on the use of imported goods that have connections to hydrocarbons, Britons would gradually starve to death in their millions. Net Zero fanatics, which sadly include many British legislators, somehow draw other conclusions, the better we assume to sustain their virtuous egos.

Meanwhile they are unlikely to be interested in the science around nitrous oxide, the gas produced by the fertiliser. It has warming properties, which in common with other greenhouse gases tend to ‘saturate’ at certain levels, a natural process in the infra-red spectrum that has helped regulate the Earth’s climate over the last 600 million years. A recent paper from four distinguished scientists noted that the atmospheric concentration of N2O was only 0.34 parts per million (ppm) and it was growing at just 0.00085 ppm a year. The entire global food supply is being put at risk for warming identified by the scientists at 0.064°C per century.

Interestingly, the press release accompanying the UK FIRE report highlights the complete elimination of greenhouse gases from British agriculture by 2050, but the actual work fails to address a world without artificial fertiliser. This is somewhat surprising given the vast increases in plant vegetation that will be needed for the new food labs. A number of gas-eliminating technologies are mentioned but it is admitted that they are not currently feasible, while more precision fertiliser application is noted. As if this latter action has not already occurred to commercial farmers. The UK FIRES of old would have made a no-nonsense banning statement, but it seems the current authors, like most other Net Zero cranks, simply ignore the issue.  There is of course a good reason for doing this since there are no solutions, except human hunger.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

5 18 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

87 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bill Toland
April 18, 2025 2:04 am

This is yet more confirmation that the British government doesn’t give a damn about the British public.

Idle Eric
Reply to  Bill Toland
April 18, 2025 4:37 am

It’s a bit more nuanced than that.

The government cares about what the public thinks about them, so long as the likes of the BBC are allowed to keep spewing climate propaganda, and the public continues to believe it, the government cares about meeting their expectations on climate change, other outcomes at a later date are somebody else’s problem.

I think we’ve reached a tipping point.

Promises have been made over the last 20 years or so about decarbonization, how renewables would be “free energy”, and moving to low energy technologies would be painless, now the promises are being called in, it turns out that “free energy” is in fact very expensive, and the low energy technologies are far from painless, and more and more people are realizing that they don’t like the reality of being a lot poorer than they should be.

I don’t think the net-zero industry can keep the plates spinning for much longer, the only question is how much damage will be done before the reality becomes too obvious to deny.

Reply to  Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 8:55 am

‘I don’t think the net-zero industry can keep the plates spinning for much longer…’

Nice metaphor! I recall seeing a number of these acts on the Ed Sullivan show.

oeman50
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
April 18, 2025 1:04 pm

Don’t forget Topo Gigio!

Reply to  oeman50
April 18, 2025 3:03 pm

And the Muppets – they were actually funny before they went ‘woke’.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Bill Toland
April 18, 2025 7:50 am

Oh they do care, but just for votes to stay in office and line their pockets.

Rick C
Reply to  Bill Toland
April 18, 2025 9:33 am

It’s all nonsense. The entire movement will collapse when either the economy collapses or the grid does. Doesn’t matter which comes first, as they are codependent. At some point the voters will realize they’re suffering needlessly and vote the idiots out or revolt if the totalitarians manage to end democracy. Perhaps a prosperous and powerful Trumpian USA will set an example of the benefits of scrapping the decarbonization lunacy.

skiman
Reply to  Rick C
April 18, 2025 11:38 am

One might hope so but perhaps not… The vast majority of the public have no concept of how energy and the grid work. Because of this when the grid and other energy issues happen, the gov that created those issues will either out right lie or try to place the blame elsewhere. Same as happened during Texas outages. Even today after many analysis many still blame or try to blame everything but the policies and over reliance on wind. When it happens no one in Gov will step forward to accept that they were wrong just like those that claim socialism/ communism would work if they did it better.

ethical voter
Reply to  skiman
April 18, 2025 4:13 pm

I would add ‘The vast majority don’t know how democracy works’. How else to explain how the imbeciles who infest the halls of power got there. Hopefully they are not representative of the people or the cream of the crop. If they are, man is beyond hope.

Rick C
Reply to  skiman
April 18, 2025 4:42 pm

It was democrat lies and incompetence that got them tossed out and put Trump and Republicans in control. When the grid goes down and people start freezing or are not able to find food they will blame whomever is in power. Lies won’t stop the revolt.

April 18, 2025 2:22 am

Like this….

better
Reply to  Leo Smith
April 18, 2025 6:12 am

That looks like a woke-style Net zero by 2050 “improvement”
Hair shirts? Sod houses? Peat moss for heat? Moccasin shoes? Bows and arrows?
.
CO2 IS AN ABSOLUTELY VITAL GAS/INGREDIENT FOR GROWING FLORA AND FAUNA; NET ZERO IS A SUICIDE PACT
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-an-absolutely-v
.
The IPCC, etc., has dubbed CO2 as having magical global warming power, based on its own “science”
The IPCC, etc., claims, CO2 acts as Climate Control Knob, that eventually will cause runaway Climate Change, if we continue using fossil fuels.
Governments proclaimed, Go Wind and Solar, Go ENERGIEWENDE, go Net zero by 2050, etc., and provided oodles of subsidies, and rules and regulations, and mandates, and prohibitions to make it happen.
.
MAGA and burn, baby, burn, may lead to a slightly greater CO2 ppm in atmosphere, which is an absolutely essential gas/ingredient for creating: 1) increased green flora to support abundant fauna all over the world, and 2) increased crop yields to feed 8 billion people. What is not to like?
.
The slogan Net-zero by 2050 to-reduce CO2 is a super-expensive suicide pact, to increase command/control by governments, and enable the moneyed elites to get richer, at the expense of all others, by using the foghorn of the government-subsidized/controlled Corporate Media to spread scare-mongering slogans and brainwash people.
.
But, at about 30% annual W/S on the grid, various costs increase exponentially.
The weather-dependent, variable/intermittent W/S output, often too-little and often too-much output, creates operational difficulties that become increasingly more challenging and increasingly more costly/kWh to counteract, as proven by the UK and California for the past 5 years, and Germany for the past 10 years.
.
All three have “achieved” near-zero, real- growth GDPs, the highest electricity prices/kWh, and stagnant real wages for almost all people, while further enriching the elites who live in the poshest places.
.
Their angry, over-taxed, over-regulated native populations are further burdened by the elites bringing in tens of millions of uninvited, unvetted, poor, uneducated, inexperienced folks from all over; a chaotic, culture-clashing burden the native populations never voted for.
.
All that W/S money uglified the countryside, killed fisheries, tourism, viewsheds, etc.
But the climate is not any different than 30 years ago, even though, atmosphere CO2 increased from 280 ppm in 1850 to 420 ppm in 2025, 50% in 175 years.
During that time, world surface temps increased by about 1.5 C, only about 0.5 C can be attributed to CO2, with the rest from: 
1) Long-term cycles, such as coming out of the Little Ice Age,  
2) Earth surface changes, due to increased agriculture, deforestation, especially in the Tropics, etc. 
3) Urban heat islands, such as about 700 miles from north of Portland, Maine, to south of Norfolk, Virginia, forested in 1850, now covered with heat-absorbing human detritus. Japan, China, India, Europe, etc., have similar heat islands

HB
Reply to  wilpost
April 18, 2025 6:28 am

link gives a page not found message

April 18, 2025 2:32 am

Fortunately I’ll probably be dead before we get to this stage. Currently we feed dried calci worms to the garden birds and hedgehogs but I damned if I am going to eat them.

Rod Evans
April 18, 2025 2:32 am

Looking on the bright side, I will definitely not be alive in 25 years time…..
I will buy my son a course in butchery so he will be able to raise the stock on our land to feed his family protein from meat. I am suggesting he initiates a new ‘religion’ called Fatted Calf Carnivores which will allow him to slaughter said bests with a prayer only and no restrictions on faith based practices such as daily meat consumption and milk/dairy intake.
Oh course, this all presuppose the UK will be a nation in 25 years time. At the present rate of change it is possible the UK will be absorbed into the Greater European Califate by then, which could present some restrictions on the rights of other religious faiths….

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rod Evans
April 19, 2025 9:35 am

Anglostan, Caledonistan, Cambriastan, and Hibernistan.

A happy little debunker
April 18, 2025 2:45 am

“Soylent green is people…” – 1973

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  A happy little debunker
April 18, 2025 7:28 am

+100 First thing I thought of after reading this post.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  A happy little debunker
April 18, 2025 7:53 am

I was late to the game, but I also posted it.

Walbrook
April 18, 2025 2:50 am

What are we going to wear, lots of fertiliser needed to grow cotton, hydrocarbons needed for synthetics and sheep, they fart.

Decaf
Reply to  Walbrook
April 18, 2025 3:17 am

Corn husks and fig leaves.

Reply to  Decaf
April 18, 2025 4:21 am

I’d like to see that- AI go to work and show us. 🙂

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 18, 2025 4:48 am

I’d like to see that

Not these days with the average Brit being a lump of lard

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Walbrook
April 18, 2025 7:54 am

We will have nothing and we will be happy. Sounds like a slogan for a nudist colony.

Ed Zuiderwijk
April 18, 2025 3:23 am

Some ideas are so idiotic that you must be an academic to believe in them.

strativarius
April 18, 2025 3:23 am

The need to collapse the existing agro-food system

Starts by inheritance taxes to reduce the amount of land under the plough.

Forget that huge gas find in Lincolnshire…

Lincolnshire has become the UK’s solar farm capital” https://www.lincolnshireworld.com/news/environment/the-reason-lincolnshire-has-become-the-uks-solar-farm-capital-5086242#

Ed Miliband’s solar blitz has ruined my life’‘Wild west’ planning rules threaten to turn countryside cottages into solar islands
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-sunday-telegraph/20250413/282140707214124

Can’t be seen from Primrose Hill •••

••• https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primrose_Hill

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  strativarius
April 18, 2025 5:38 am

And ….

“straight out of the Ed Miliband songbook”

he calls his chamber pot “songbook ” ?

Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 3:27 am

It sounds mad, but the problem is that the Climate Change Act 2008 more or less imposes a duty on ministers to accept and implement these proposals.

I’m sure CCA 2008 will get repealed at some point, the question is how much damage before it is?

Nick Stokes
April 18, 2025 3:29 am

Andy,
Here is a plot I made to show how your wrongly calculated anomalies are spurious, in particular the WWII spike. It corresponds to your earlier actuals plot

comment image

and is meant to be the same as the orange curve. In the black curve I just averaged as you do, with a 5 yr smooth. Then I calculated climate means – ie 1961-90 averages for each grid and month. I replaced the actual T wherever reported with those averages. So there is now no weather information at all; just climate. Each grid/month has the same T for every year, unless it is NA.

That gives the red curve. But still there is the big WWII spike, and the curves are very similar. Your results do not reflect measured weather. They reflect the varying populations of hot and cold climates in the dataset. Just artefacts.

comment image

strativarius
Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 18, 2025 3:38 am

Out of interest, Nick…

Are you an omnivore, a vegetarian, vegan or bug eater? I think we should be told.

Mr.
Reply to  strativarius
April 18, 2025 9:46 am

what have religions got to do with it?

Idle Eric
Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 18, 2025 3:42 am

And this is relevant to the thread because………………?

Reply to  Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 3:48 am

He is, as usual, a bit confused, and posted in the wrong Thread.

Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 18, 2025 9:45 am

That’s a pretty average graph, Nick.
(geddit?)

You need bigger crayons if you’re trying to make a point.

(some nit-picking pedant is going to tell me that actually, smaller crayons should be used if pointiness is the objective)

April 18, 2025 4:05 am

Net zero in particular, and the climate panic in general are Neo-Prohibition movements to abolish the domestication of fire, and in the process almost everything we think of as “food.”

The movement is FAR more comprehensive that the movement to prohibit beverage alcohol. Thus, it far wackier and less feasible. All forms of fire and animal metabolism emit “greenhouse gases.” Thus, you can only eliminate greenhouse gases by eliminating life. “Death to all” is not a feasible policy for a better world.

This is what comes of a general public poorly educated in hard sciences like physics, chemistry, biology, and biochemistry. Chanting “follow the science” is a mantra that has little to do with inquiry, experimentation, and precise measurement that are the stuff of real science.

People who are mentally crippled by ignorance, fear and loathing, appear to have the upper hand in a relative handful of Western countries. If they continue to pursue self-destructive policies based on ignorance, they will fall into eclipse. Advanced societies have done worse during previous episodes of civlizational collapse. It’s possible that the West could end up like the Easter Islanders or the Mayas, where the people are still there, but know little of their own past.

However, you can be confident that not everyone will fall into eclipse. Europe crawled back from the Dark Ages, and China crawled back from their decline from 1500 to the 1980s.

Reply to  tom_gelsthorpe
April 18, 2025 4:24 am

America will lead the way.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 18, 2025 7:58 am

Help me Obi Wan. You’re my only hope.
— Star Wars

abolition man
April 18, 2025 4:25 am

Human beings evolved their enlarged brains by killing and eating (mostly) large ruminant animals! Without the high quality fats, proteins, and cholesterol, easily available and digestible, in meat and dairy products the human brain cannot fully develop, nor long thrive!
Without widespread animal husbandry there is no organic farming, nor productive use of the ~75% of agricultural land that is fit only for pasturage! Too bad the NutZero wacko’s BS can’t be used as fertilizer; sadly, it only packs a stink, and comes up short in N, P, and K!

Editor
April 18, 2025 4:31 am

I read the whole report. I would have to re-read it to make sure that I read it correctly, but there are limits to this human’s endurance. The report wiped out ruminants as a source of food pretty quickly, but if I read correctly it went on to wipe out every other kind of food as well because none of them were “absolute zero”. Food imports were ruled out too. And all of it – absolutely all of it – was presented as great opportunity. The worse the problem the more they painted it as an attractive opportunity. Orwellian, in spades.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
April 18, 2025 5:01 am

I think fooling around with people’s food supplies is going to be a tipping point.

Who wants a government bureaucrat determining what you eat?

Idle Eric
Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 18, 2025 5:35 am

Who wants a government bureaucrat determining what you eat?

As a wartime measure, maybe, in truth we’d probably be much healthier if they did, but otherwise, no thanks.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 7:59 am

Even as a war time measure it was not telling you what to eat, it was rationing what was available.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 3:23 pm

Prior to WWII rationing, FDR’s New Deal government burned crops and poured milk down sewers in an attempt to raise farm prices at the same time many Americans were going hungry. The rationale behind this was that falling farm prices were considered by the proto-Keynsians of that time to be a factor in the deepening the Great Depression.

KevinM
Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 18, 2025 12:10 pm

Nobody wants “a government bureaucrat determining what you eat?”
Too many people want “a government bureaucrat determining what” everyone else “eat[s]?”

Idle Eric
Reply to  Mike Jonas
April 18, 2025 5:34 am

I’m starting to wonder if they’ve been infiltrated by anti-net-zero activists, they’re actually speaking the truth about what net-zero entails and the result is so absurd that nobody could possibly contemplate it as a course of action.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 7:57 am

That end result of net zero will be absurd doesn’t phase the climate activists one little bit.

As I’ve mentioned here on WUWT before, my pro net zero relatives in California and in New York state strongly believe that a quick transition to wind and solar will cause the price of electricity to fall — even while their own electricity bills are rising as more wind and solar is being added to the grid.

Their belief in net zero and in the alleged benefits of a transition to wind and solar is unshakeable. They will deny that their energy lifeboat is sinking even while the cold water of the net zero ocean is swirling around their feet.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Mike Jonas
April 18, 2025 7:59 am

The first to jump out was no milk. What about the kids?

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 8:58 am

What kids?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
April 18, 2025 12:47 pm

You understand.

Sapper2
April 18, 2025 4:46 am

Sadly, April 1st has been. This ‘study’ probably missed its target publication date for that. Has anyone checked up the authenticity of the named authors?

April 18, 2025 4:59 am

What none of these guys ever answer is the simple question: why? Why do they want the UK to do this? It cannot affect the UK climate, or the global climate. There is no reason to think it will improve health. What on earth is it about?

Rod Evans
Reply to  michel
April 18, 2025 5:20 am

It is the instruction sheet for genocide.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Rod Evans
April 18, 2025 8:00 am

Self-inflicted. Read The Population Bomb if you want to review the instruction manual.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  michel
April 18, 2025 7:47 am

Why do they do this ? Because they have been given a lot of research money to do it.Whether they actually believe what they say is difficult to know. Their earlier reports are equally ‘La La Landish’ and reading them I sometimes think they are taking the mickey.

Reply to  Dave Andrews
April 18, 2025 2:50 pm

I think you’re right – in addition to the salary and expense accounts and the etc., Miliband always has that kinda look on his face. Unlike Starmer who looks dazed and confused 24/7, these other pretend-socialists also get their jollies from taking the piss out of the people who are paying them to take the piss. Weird, but lucrative. What a crap legacy.

Reply to  michel
April 19, 2025 2:13 am

The climate panic is a mass mania like the kookier episodes described in Charles Mackay’s 1841 book, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.”

The book describes how cults, even large swaths of entire societies, sporadically fall into the grip of a moral panic. “The world will end” unless they climb way out on a limb with some goofy, unprovable and undisprovable program to avert the apocalypse.

Witch manias, investment bubbles, doomsayers gathering on mountaintops waiting for The End — it’s all happened before, and will happen again. In the meantime, hope that the view from that proverbial limb gets unbearable after a while, and the panickers start crawling back to earth.

MrGrimNasty
April 18, 2025 5:19 am

Story Tip.
The BBC obviously forgot to publish this one on April 1st. ‘Carbon’ removal from seawater.
All the chemicals and energy required? It’s beyond insane, even if the end result was necessary in the first place.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr788kljlklo.amp

Idle Eric
Reply to  MrGrimNasty
April 18, 2025 5:40 am

As a research project, maybe it makes sense, I’m not too worried about £3 million on new technologies when the cost of windmills/solar is in the tens of billions.

Will it ever come to anything? I doubt it, but that’s why you do research.

hdhoese
Reply to  MrGrimNasty
April 18, 2025 10:08 am

That’s all we need to sterilize the ocean, or rather the tiny piece that they could take out. “charred coconut husks?”

Circa 1980 there was actually some serious interest in this, but as Stommel, a real oceanographer, pointed out, just a curiosity. Might tell them as they will need the power to suck out and acidify sea water. Wait until they discover “double diffusion” convection.
Stommel, H., A. B. Arons and D. Blanchard. 1953. An oceanographical curiosity: The perpetual salt fountain. Deep Sea Research. 3(2):152-153.
Stern, M .E. 1960. The “Salt-Fountain” and Thermohaline Convection. Tellus, 12: 172-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1960.tb01295.x

hdhoese
Reply to  hdhoese
April 18, 2025 10:10 am

That’s the link to the journal, this to the paper.
https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v12i2.9378

Tusten02
April 18, 2025 5:25 am

Net Zero means no growth at all, if net zero means a total elimination of CO2. Including all you morons peddling “net Zero”!

April 18, 2025 5:35 am

Apart from Lamb I eat these along with pork, poultry and other meats like rabbit every day of the week.
Neither I nor my two brothers eat lamb. We grew up in a house in the middle of nowhere in Perthshire without electricity. Neighbouring farmers would give us whole or half a lamb two or three times a year. We would live on that in various forms for 2 or 3 weeks. Now the smell of cooking lamb puts me off eating. If somebody cooks lamb for me, unlike vegans, I don’t refuse to eat it. On the other hand I feel that Lizzie Bordon was deserving of sympathy over rancid mutton stew!

Idle Eric
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
April 18, 2025 6:25 am

Can’t say I particularly like lamb myself, always feels and tastes a bit greasy to me, and worst of all I’ve got an enormous leg of the stuff in the fridge waiting for me on Sunday. 🙁

Mint sauce exists for a reason.

strativarius
Reply to  Idle Eric
April 18, 2025 7:05 am

So does Alka Seltzer

Reply to  Ben Vorlich
April 18, 2025 7:28 am

Sorry, can’t agree with you concerning lamb. Given a choice, I’ll take lamb over beef or pork any day of the week.

Why is lamb so expensive in Cornwall, where I live? The fields here are full of sheep.

Reply to  Graemethecat
April 18, 2025 3:00 pm

I don’t know if this still goes on, but I’m from Yorkshire and have seen (and eaten) a lamb or two in my time, but by some quirk of marketing or whatever, Welsh lamb was considered the thing. So it was more profitable to ship the living chops, steaks and shanks to Wales, let them roam around a bit before they were ermmm, shall we say, silenced.

In honour of this thread, I just bought some lamb chops, and I grow my own sustainable mint sauce.

I don’t know if there are any movie buffs on here, but better than liver and fava beans with a nice Chianti, eh?

April 18, 2025 6:14 am

Well another goverment BS…either this western idiocy is put to an end peacefully or by other means.
Hmm looking on the world map coloured in rainbowy and unbearable stupidity perhaps it might be a good idea to learn russian despite my age..? ol chinese (sarc?)

Jeffy
April 18, 2025 6:51 am

I saw a reference to lab grown meat and fake meats. Didn’t the researchers get the message that these things are either impractical or unwanted? Surely they will give it a try only to find it will fail, and then offer crickets as a backup plan.

This also assumes the electrification of everything and everyone can diet when the wind doesn’t blow.

KevinM
Reply to  Jeffy
April 18, 2025 12:18 pm

Lab (factory) grown meat sounds like a solvable problem. I expect it will be available long before fusion energy.

Reply to  KevinM
April 18, 2025 3:05 pm

It’s already here. Never tried it though and probably never will. I call anything like this bogus meat and a lot of start-up companies have been funded around it. I don’t think they’re doing too well as investments, but I might be wrong.

Jeffy
Reply to  Jeffy
April 20, 2025 7:00 am

One problem for lab grown meats is they have been banned by a number of states and countries. These meats are not yet available because they are still expensive. The process uses stem cells that are engineered to be immortalized so they can divide forever. Not sure if this leads to any safety concerns, the FDA doesn’t seem to think so.

antigtiff
April 18, 2025 7:10 am

Uh, Net Zero depends on China ….India and a few other places.

Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 7:49 am

Note that there are no energy demand assessments for the factories that produce those “hybrid” food products.

Just remember Soylent Green is People!

Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 8:03 am

I have a supply of and eat Boca Burgers.
Definitely not close to a hamburger or chicken paddy by any stretch of the imagination.
Lower in sodium and fat is the driver.
I really want a real cheeseburger!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 8:42 am

chicken paddy”

Do they grow rice alongside the chickens?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
April 18, 2025 12:49 pm

Language police caught me.
patty

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
April 18, 2025 6:00 pm

Police, right.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
April 21, 2025 11:47 am

Guilty. Will M. Mann’s lawyers defend me?

old cocky
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
April 18, 2025 8:43 pm

Perfect for satay chicken and rice.

Westfieldmike
April 18, 2025 12:03 pm

You can’t achieve something that’s not feasibly possible to achieve. So don’t worry. It’s an eco wet dream to make money and crush the population. We ain’t having it.

April 18, 2025 1:18 pm

That’s odd, not one of the climate troll stall-warts has dropped in to say this is a good thing and they they will be glad when it happens 😉

Not one of them wants to eat meat made from fly larvae… ie maggots !!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  bnice2000
April 18, 2025 6:02 pm

They’re too busy hunting and gathering.