Thread by @AukeHoekstra

Some sunday ruminations on how renewable energy and meat replacements could simply make us happy and harmonious without starting a culture war.

First of: green growth doesn't mean less prosperity. Going from fossil fuels to renewable energy is not a sacrifice. On the contrary.

Resistance doesn't come from the latest science but from old thinking and fossil interests.
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

And while our ecosystem is fragile, energy is not scarce.
So we should worry about resource use and pollution, not about energy.

I urge the sympathetic people in the degrowth movement to update this part of their belief system.
innovationorigins.com/tomorrow-is-go…

On the other hand, neoliberalism is proving to be just as unsuccessful at creating sustainable happiness as the former soviet union.

It's time to move beyond those extremes.

I like @KateRaworth, @MazzucatoM and @PikettyLeMonde but there are many choices.

https://twitter.com/timparrique/status/1264442600389566464

If you ask me we should pay less attention to economic science. It's more interested in money than happiness. It pretends to be an exact science but its theories cannot be falsified. And its homogenous rational actor model is at odds with psychology and other social sciences.

I have some ideas about how economic models could be improved, especially with regard to the energy transition. hindawi.com/journals/compl… I think multi-level agent based models are the way to go but I might be wrong.

Constructing these models will be my focus for the coming five years with NEON. tue.nl/en/news/news-o… I don't know if this will lead to a revolution but I am confident we will find better pathways to zero emission energy and mobility.

But what we will not cover in NEON is agriculture and that caught my eye today. Because even if you are not a tree hugging animal loving vegan like me you should still be able to see that agriculture needs improvement. theguardian.com/environment/20…

The way I see it we can optimise within the current paradigm but that means even more monoculture that's bad for biodiversity and no fun to look at. It also means more animal cruelty and more dangers of diseases like COVID-19. I think it's a dead end.

For me it's evident that:
- we should use less water (aquifers are drying up);
- monoculture is bad and boring; and
- slaughterhouses are cruel and stupid.

It's time to ask how real innovation could enable us to live in harmony with nature again.

Meat is the most interesting product in this respect.

I would implore everybody not to start a culture war by claiming 'meat is bad' because I think it would delay things.

But ask yourself this simple question:
why do people like meat?

You can probably think of many reasons but how many of you think people like meat because they crave the animal suffering and the inefficiency?

Once you accept cruelty and inefficiency are unwanted by-products it becomes obvious that we can design them out of the process.

Instead of breeding, feeding and slaughtering animals we should use 'plant based meat replacement' or 'lab grown meat'.

If you get past the fact that it's new, you understand it is much simpler. It is also not cruel and will be cheaper, more efficient and healthier.

Some people claim that this 'Frankenfood' will not be accepted. I find that almost comical.

Do you know how the junk that is currently popular is made?

Have you ever worked in a slaughterhouse? (I have.)

Lab grown meat will be a far less objectionable process.

I'm sorry if this sounds too simple.

But to me replacing slaughterhouses is just as obvious as replacing coal fired power plants.

A few years ago, any criticism of meat was a political third rail. Politicians and researchers steered clear.

But because of people like you and me who dare to speak up, it's becoming normalized. Let's keep it up!

This should also lead to more scientific research not funded by vested interests.

What do we like about meat, exactly?

How can we produce what we like sustainably?

We should be spending tens of billions of dollars on that research, not a few million here and there.

So for me renewable energy and meat replacements are not cultural, tribal or ideology driven.

They don't deny our human cravings.

They are simply the logical answer to the question: how can we get what makes us happy in a way that doesn't destroy the ecosystem.
/end