science

14702 readers

127 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

435

Bill Gates-backed startup makes ‘butter’ out of water and carbon dioxide (www.zmescience.com)

submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

212 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 154 points 3 months ago (8 children)

My thought was "I doubt you can make fat only with hydrogen and carbon", but fats/lipids are literally hydrocarbons. Adding other elements changes the taste, so it isn't necessary to have mammals anywhere in the production chain.

Very interesting and probably not the first time this is/has been done. It seems quite obvious.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It's quite obvious at a theoretical level but not easy in terms of figuring out the actual process. A lot of science like that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

According to the savor team, it was quite easy for them:

“We start with a source of carbon, like carbon dioxide, and use a little bit of heat and hydrogen to form chains which are then blended with oxygen from air to make the fats & oils"

I want to guess they are glossing over a complicated enzyme they created, or other form of reagent.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

That's like saying you can build a nuclear bomb by smashing pieces of uranium together. Technically true, but it's a lot more complicated than that.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

Yeah, they're definitely glossing over a lot of things. They don't even mention the source of co2 or even a real timeline.

load more comments (4 replies)