{"id":263839,"date":"2023-06-25T20:56:33","date_gmt":"2023-06-25T18:56:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=263839"},"modified":"2023-06-25T20:56:35","modified_gmt":"2023-06-25T18:56:35","slug":"lab-meat-a-pharma-product-with-huge-carbon-footprint","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=263839","title":{"rendered":"Lab Meat: A Pharma Product with Huge Carbon Footprint"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Science Matters<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Tyler Durden reports at zerohedge Lab-Grown Meat Gets Green Light On US Menus.<\/strong><\/a> Excerpts in italics with my bolds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The World Economic Forum\u2019s dietary blueprint for the masses<\/strong>\u00a0is becoming a reality as\u00a0lab-grown meat, bugs, and plant-based foods<\/strong>\u00a0are quickly being adopted under the guise of solving \u2018climate change.\u2019 The latest move by elites and governments to reset the global food supply chain is\u00a0US regulators approving the sale of meat cultivated from Chicken cells.<\/strong>\u00a0This makes the US the second country worldwide, besides Singapore, to approve the sale of lab-grown fake meat.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Agriculture Department approved Upside Foods and Good Meat to begin selling<\/strong> \u201ccell-cultivated\u201d or \u201ccultured\u201d chicken meat from labs<\/strong> in supermarkets and restaurants.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cToday\u2019s watershed moment<\/strong> for the burgeoning cultivated meat, poultry and seafood sector, and for the global food industry,\u201d Good Meat said<\/strong> in a statement.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Researchers conducted a life-cycle assessment of the energy needed and greenhouse gases emitted in all stages of production and compared that with beef.<\/strong> One of the current challenges with lab-grown meat is the use of highly refined or purified growth media,<\/strong> the ingredients needed to help animal cells multiply. Currently, this method is similar to the biotechnology used to make pharmaceuticals.<\/strong> This sets up a critical question for cultured meat production: Is it a pharmaceutical product or a food product? -UC Davis<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf companies are having to purify growth media to pharmaceutical levels, it\u00a0uses more resources, which then increases global warming potential,\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0according to lead author and doctoral graduate Derrick Risner, of the US Davis Department of Food Science and Technology. \u201cIf this product continues to be\u00a0produced using the \u201cpharma\u201d approach, it\u2019s going to be worse for the environment and more expensive than conventional beef production.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The scientists<\/strong> considered the \u2018global warming potential\u2019 to be the carbon dioxide equivalents emitted for each kilogram of meat produced \u2013 and found that the global warming potential (GWP) of lab-based meat using these purified media is up to 25 times greater than the average for retail beef.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study is Environmental impacts of cultured meat: A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment  <\/strong><\/a>Derrick Risner et al. (UC Davis) 2023.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Interest in animal cell-based meat (ACBM) or cultured meat<\/strong> as a viable environmentally conscious replacement for livestock production has been increasing, however a life cycle assessment for the current production methods of ACBM has not been conducted.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Currently, ACBM products are being produced at a small scale and at an economic loss<\/strong>, however ACBM companies are intending to industrialize and scale-up production.<\/strong> This study assesses the potential environmental impact of near term ACBM production.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Updated findings from recent technoeconomic assessments (TEAs) of ACBM and a life cycle assessment<\/strong> of Essential 8\u2122 were utilized to perform a life cycle assessment of near-term ACBM production<\/strong>. A scenario analysis was conducted utilizing the metabolic requirements examined in the TEAs of ACBM and a purification factor<\/strong> from the Essential 8\u2122 life cycle assessment was utilized to account for growth medium component processing.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The results indicate that the environmental impact of near-term ACBM production
is likely to be orders of magnitude higher than median beef production
if a highly refined growth medium is utilized for ACBM production.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1 is a process flow diagram of a fed-batch ACBM production system with associated energy requirements.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lifecycle Impact assessment (LCIA)<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

After all the inputs were identified and consolidated,<\/strong> a life cycle impact assessment was completed utilizing data and methods from the E8 LCA, OpenLCA v.1.10 software and OpenLCA LCIA v2.1.2 methods software. The tool for reduction and assessment of chemicals and other environmental impacts<\/strong> (TRACI) 2.1 was the LCIA methods utilized in the OpenLCA LCIA software, and these results were combined with the facility power data<\/strong> to determine the potential environmental impact of the production of 1 kg ACBM (wet basis).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scenario analysis<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

All scenarios utilize a fed-batch system as described in the Humbird (2021) TEA.<\/strong> Energy estimates from the Humbird TEA are utilized in all scenarios. Growth medium components were assumed to be delivered to the animal cells as needed and the build-up of growth inhibiting metabolites such as lactate or ammonia are not accounted for unless specifically stated in the scenario. The growth medium substrates are also assumed to be supplied via fed batch to achieve the highest possible specific growth rate in the production bioreactor. The three minimum\/base scenarios<\/strong> were defined utilizing data from the Risner et al. and Humbird TEAs then a purification factor was applied<\/strong> based on the results from a LCA which examined the environmental impact of fine chemical and pharmaceutical production (Wernet et al., 2010).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each of the three base scenarios were examined independently and then
with the purification factor applied for a total of six scenarios in the assessment.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Results<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The LCIA was conducted on both the base scenarios and scenarios with purified growth medium components. The GWP for all ACBM scenarios (19.2 to 1,508 kg of CO2e per kilogram of ACBM)<\/strong> was greater than<\/strong> the minimum reported GWP for retail beef (9.6 kg of CO2e per kg of FBFMO)<\/strong> (Poore & Nemecek, 2018). The GWP of all purified scenarios<\/strong> ranged from 246 to 1,508 kg of CO2e per kilogram<\/strong> of ACBM which is 4 to 25 times greater than the median GWP of retail beef<\/strong> (\u223c60 kg CO2e per kg of FFBMO). Without purification of the growth medium components, the GWP of the GCR scenario is approximately 25% greater than reported median of GWP of retail beef (Poore & Nemecek, 2018).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It should be noted that the system boundary of this LCA stops at the ACBM production facility gate and\u00a0does not include product losses, cold storage, transportation, and other environmental impacts associated with the retail sale of beef.<\/strong>\u00a0Inclusion of these post-production processes would increase the GWP of ACBM products.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 3 illustrates the difference in the GWP of retail beef and cradle to upstream ACBM production gate.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Discussion<\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Our results indicate that ACBM is likely to be more resource intensive than most meat production systems<\/strong> according to this analysis. In this evaluation, our primary focus has been on the resource intensity of the growth mediums. We have largely focused on the quantity of growth medium components<\/strong> (e.g. glucose, amino acids, vitamins, growth factors, salts, and minerals) and<\/strong> attempted to account for purification requirement of those components<\/strong> for animal cell culture. We also acknowledge that our analysis may be viewed as minimum environmental impacts<\/strong> due to several factors including incomplete datasets, the exclusion of energy and materials required to scale<\/strong> the ACBM industry and exclusion of the energy and materials needed to scale industries which would support ACBM production.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Animal cell culture<\/strong> is inherently different than culturing bacteria or yeast cells due to their enhanced sensitivity to environmental factors, chemical and microbial contamination.<\/strong> This can be illustrated by the industrial shift to single use bioreactors for monoclonal antibody production to reduce costs associated with contamination (Jacquemart et al., 2016). Animal cell growth mediums have historically utilized fetal bovine serum (FBS)<\/strong> which contains a variety of hormones and growth factors (Jochems et al., 2002). Serum is blood with the cells, platelets and clotting factors removed. Processing of FBS to be utilized for animal cell culture is an 18-step process<\/strong> that is resource intensive due to the level of refinement required for animal cell culture.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, the authors believe that commercial production of an ACBM product utilizing
FBS or any other animal product to be highly unlikely given this high level of refinement.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Critical assessment of the environmental impact of emerging technologies<\/strong> is a relatively new concept, but it is highly important when changes to societal-level production systems are being proposed<\/strong> (Bergerson et al., 2020). Agricultural and food production systems are central to feeding a growing global population and the development of technology which enhances food production is important for societal progress. Evaluation of these potentially disruptive technologies from a systems-level perspective is essential for those seeking to transform our food system. Ideally, systems-level evaluations of proposed novel food technologies will allow policymakers to make informed decisions<\/strong> on the allocation of government capital. Proponents of ACBM have hailed it<\/strong> as an environmental solution that addresses many of the environmental impacts associated with traditional meat production.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Upon examination of this highly engineered system, ACBM production appears
to be resource intensive when examined from the cradle to production gate
perspective for the scenarios and assumptions utilized in our analyses.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our environmental assessment is grounded<\/strong> in<\/strong> the most detailed process systems available that represent current state-of-the-art in this emerging food technology sector.<\/strong> Our model generally contradicts previous studies<\/strong> by suggesting that the environmental impact of cultured meat is likely to be higher than conventional beef systems, as opposed to more environmentally friendly. This is an important conclusion given that investment dollars have specifically been allocated to this sector with the thesis that this product will be more environmentally friendly than beef.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

In sum, understanding the minimum environmental impact of near term ACBM is highly important for governments and businesses seeking to allocate capital that can generate both economic and environmental benefits (Zimberoff, 2022). We acknowledge that our findings would likely be the minimum environmental impact due to the preliminary nature of our LCA<\/strong>. This LCA aims to be as transparent as possible to allow the interested parties to understand our logic and why we have developed these conclusions. We also hope that our LCA will provide evidence of the need for additional critical environmental examination of new food and agriculture technologies.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bottom Line:<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOur findings suggest that cultured meat is not inherently better for the environment than conventional beef.<\/strong> It\u2019s not a panacea,\u201d said corresponding author Edward Spang, an associate professor in the Department of Food Science and Technology. \u201cIt\u2019s possible we could reduce its environmental impact in the future, but it will require significant technical advancement to simultaneously increase the performance and decrease the cost of the cell culture media.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even the most efficient beef production systems reviewed in the study outperform
cultured meat across all scenarios (both food and pharma), suggesting that
investments to advance more climate-friendly beef production may yield
greater reductions in emissions more quickly than investments in cultured meat.<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The World Economic Forum\u2019s dietary blueprint for the masses\u00a0is becoming a reality as\u00a0lab-grown meat, bugs, and plant-based foods\u00a0are quickly being adopted under the guise of solving \u2018climate change.\u2019 The latest move by elites and governments to reset the global food supply chain is\u00a0US regulators approving the sale of meat cultivated from Chicken cells.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":263854,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818090,691818076,691820480,691818154,691818108],"class_list":{"0":"post-263839","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-warning","9":"tag-co2","10":"tag-cultured-meat-production","11":"tag-net-zero","12":"tag-world-economic-forum","14":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0vx42nun7txysxnr1wqoh.webp?fit=1600%2C900&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-16Dt","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":257211,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=257211","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":0},"title":"Bill Gates funded Lab-grown meat \u2018could be 25 times worse for the climate than beef\u2019 \u2013 \u2018Highly energy intensive\u2019 \u2013 \u2018Meat\u2019 grown in steel vats from stem cells from animal","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/05\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Cultivated meat is made by growing muscle tissue from stem cells. Meat produced from cultured cells could be 25 times worse for the climate than regular beef unless scientists find ways to overhaul energy-intensive steps in its production.","rel":"","context":"In \"3D Printed Steak\"","block_context":{"text":"3D Printed Steak","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=3d-printed-steak"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00screen_shot_2021-10-20_at_2.59.17_pm.webp?fit=1200%2C696&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00screen_shot_2021-10-20_at_2.59.17_pm.webp?fit=1200%2C696&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00screen_shot_2021-10-20_at_2.59.17_pm.webp?fit=1200%2C696&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00screen_shot_2021-10-20_at_2.59.17_pm.webp?fit=1200%2C696&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/00screen_shot_2021-10-20_at_2.59.17_pm.webp?fit=1200%2C696&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":242454,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=242454","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":1},"title":"The Great Food Reset: \u2018Lab-grown meat\u2019 harvested in \u2018massive steel vats\u2019 edges closer to fed approval & U.S. dinner plates \u2013 As EU approves human consumption of worms & crickets","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"31\/01\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\"You Will Eat lab-grown 'meat' and bugs -- and Be Happy. Or so the forces of the Great Food Reset believe.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-1347.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-1347.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-1347.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-1347.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-1347.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263192,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=263192","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":2},"title":"Lab-Grown Meat Suffers Significant Setback With Shocking New Scientific Findings","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"21\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Lab-grown meat is up to 25 times worse for the environment since it needs \u2018pharmaceutical-grade\u2019 production to make it fit for human consumption. In particular, there is a need to remove\u00a0endotoxin\u00a0from the cultured mix, a substance that in concentrations as low as one billionth of a gram per millilitrie can\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Beef\"","block_context":{"text":"Beef","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=beef"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0lab-grown-meat-accaptance.jpg?fit=1200%2C913&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0lab-grown-meat-accaptance.jpg?fit=1200%2C913&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0lab-grown-meat-accaptance.jpg?fit=1200%2C913&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0lab-grown-meat-accaptance.jpg?fit=1200%2C913&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0lab-grown-meat-accaptance.jpg?fit=1200%2C913&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":264646,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=264646","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":3},"title":"Lab-grown chicken approved & Black Rock\u2019s Larry Fink is ashamed of ESG","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In Episode 369 of District of Conservation, Gabriella digests two news stories. First, the advent of lab-grown meat, cultured chicken being approved for sale, and what it means from agriculture. Then she breakdowns the ESG movement and BlackRock CEO, Larry Fink, confessing he likes ESG but not the name. Tune\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Black Rock\"","block_context":{"text":"Black Rock","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=black-rock"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0cfact-lab-meat.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0cfact-lab-meat.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0cfact-lab-meat.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0cfact-lab-meat.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/0cfact-lab-meat.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":212700,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=212700","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":4},"title":"CFACT\u2019s Morano talks Great Food Reset on \u2018Unfiltered with Dan Bongino\u2019","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/08\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"CFACT\u2019s Marc Morano raised the alarm about possible food shortages and limited access to meat thanks to the Great Reset agenda of the World Economic Forum during an interview on \u2018Unfiltered with Dan Bongino\u2019 on Fox News. Morano: \u201cWe know that Bill Gates\u2019 goal is to get us to stop\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-270.png?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-270.png?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-270.png?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-270.png?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253836,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=253836","url_meta":{"origin":263839,"position":5},"title":"Blame rice for global warming!? \u2018Rice is to blame for around 10% of global emissions of methane\u2019 \u2013 \u2018Rice cannot be ignored\u2019","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"21\/04\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The climate agenda cannot handle a decentralized world. They need to control the means of production, the distribution of food, and control of the movement of people.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate change cult\"","block_context":{"text":"climate change cult","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change-cult"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0AdobeStock_93506554.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0AdobeStock_93506554.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0AdobeStock_93506554.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0AdobeStock_93506554.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/0AdobeStock_93506554.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263839","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=263839"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263839\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":263856,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263839\/revisions\/263856"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/263854"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=263839"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=263839"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=263839"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}