SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-can't-believe-it's-not-bacon dept.
El Reg reports
Months before the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared bacon a carcinogen, American boffins may have found a solution: algae that tastes just like bacon, but without the bad bits the Doctors at WHO say could cause your untimely demise.
The eukaryote[1] in question is called Dulse (Palmaria sp.) and, as explained Oregon State University, is already in demand as a tasty addition to various recipes. Boffins at the University had been experimenting with a new strain of the plant designed to boost growth of abalone, a delicious and expensive shellfish. Results were good: abalone grew faster on a diet of modified Dulse than they did on other foodstuffs.
And then one of those things happened that is supposed to happen at Universities: folks from the business school met folks from Marine Science Center and asked if they were working on anything that might be a good project for students.
Thus did Dulse attain the status of a "specialty crop" at Oregon's Food Innovation Center. From that collaboration some of the algae, which apparently resembles "translucent red lettuce", found its way into a frying pan wielded by Chris Langdon, a professor in the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at OSU.
"When you fry it, which I have done, it tastes like bacon, not seaweed. And it's a pretty strong bacon flavor", Langdon says.
Those among you who, on WHO's advice, have stopped eating bacon can't start planning a hangover in anticipation of a virtuously restorative fry-up because Dulce production isn't exactly happening in bulk. It's not hard to imagine that will change after WHO's bacon-killer: OSU announced its find in July and now has a potential market it could only dream of at the time.
[1] A eukaryote is any organism whose cells contain a nucleus and other organelles enclosed within membranes.
Previous: Bacon, Burgers, and Sausages Are a Cancer Risk, Say World Health Chiefs
(Score: 2) by Mr Big in the Pants on Wednesday November 04 2015, @06:55AM
There is a reason most salt water farms are located in the sea itself or use water piped from it: Salt water tanks are rather expensive (esp. large scale) and relatively high maintenance; but doable. Not sure how cost effective it would be though. Lobsters are probably not going to help that equation much due to the time to maturity. Farming shrimp might net higher yields?
I have heard the average cost/month for a 120G tank in the vicinity of 50-60 US but this will vary of course - especially if you can utilize natural light. It would be hard to make this cost effective after you include setup costs and maintenance time - that is a LOT of seaweed.
In contrast, fresh water aquaponics is far easier to scale (e.g. ponds and pipes) and can also be used to provide nutrients for common vegetables which grow quickly also. They are already a well proven system and can be made to be very low maintenance. (plants act as nutrient removal etc)
Fresh water crayfish are also farmed in my country in a limited capacity but they are EXTREMELY territorial and require a large surface area to scale but again are low maintenance.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday November 04 2015, @11:15AM
Why wouldn't their lives be shorter? That's not a dietary problem beyond possible starvation. These are people living in the extreme north prior to the invention of modern transportation. You make it sound like the lack of veggies made them malnourished. And that's not really the case.
(Score: 2) by Mr Big in the Pants on Thursday November 05 2015, @12:19AM
I assume you replied to the wrong post??
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Thursday November 05 2015, @01:13AM
I have a close friend who is an expert in seawater fishtanks.
You can't just put seafish in seawater, you need the entire ecosystem.
Unfortunately, Ann asked me to feed her beloved seafish and shellfish while she was out of town. I did so but I didn't understand that she wanted me to feed them every day, she didn't actually tell me too.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by Mr Big in the Pants on Thursday November 05 2015, @02:10AM
I did not say you did, hence the high monthly bill (even for small tanks) compared to freshwater? Also setup costs are VERY large in comparison.
So yes I agree with you, high maintenance and high cost.
And we have not even touched on a food system needing to have its health and safety monitored also.
It is not advised to eat fish from any typical aquarium setup for example...although people obviously do but then people also drink and drive etc...