Water Use in Cellular Agriculture: Facts

David Bell
Dec 2
13 min read

Producing meat without draining resources. Cellular agriculture - a method of growing meat from animal cells - uses far less water than conventional meat farming. Here's the comparison:

Beef: Traditional farming requires up to 15,400 litres of water per kilogram, while cultivated beef uses just 367–521 litres - a reduction of up to 96%.
Pork and Poultry: Cultivated meat also outperforms these, with water efficiency ratios of 5:1 for pork and 2.5:1 for poultry.
Feed Crops: Much of the water in traditional farming goes into growing animal feed. Cellular agriculture eliminates this, drastically cutting water needs.

Controlled production environments, water recycling systems, and precise management make cellular agriculture far more water-efficient, while also reducing pollution from runoff and waste. This approach could help conserve global freshwater resources and improve water quality as the world faces increasing water scarcity.

Key takeaway: Cultivated meat uses less water, reduces pollution, and offers a scalable way to produce food with minimal impact on water supplies.

Water Use: Cellular Agriculture vs Conventional Meat Production

Producing traditional beef requires a staggering 15,400 litres of water per kilogramme, whereas cultivated meat needs just 367 to 521 litres per kilogramme - a potential reduction of up to 96% [6]. This stark contrast underscores the efficiency of cellular agriculture when it comes to water use.

The benefits don’t stop with beef. Across other meat types, cellular agriculture consistently uses less water: the water efficiency ratio is about 7:1 for beef, 5:1 for pork, and 2.5:1 for poultry when compared to conventional methods [6]. Globally, meat and animal products contribute to roughly 27% of the total water footprint of human activity [6].

Traditional livestock farming further amplifies water demand, particularly through the irrigation of feed crops. In the United States, livestock production and the croplands used to grow feed account for nearly one-third of all freshwater withdrawals [3].

How Much Water Does Cellular Agriculture Save?

Let’s break down the water-saving potential of cellular agriculture. When powered by renewable energy, cultivated meat can use 78% less water than conventional meat production, and some studies suggest reductions as high as 90% [7][8].

These savings could have a profound impact globally. A complete shift to cellular agriculture by 2050 could free up 83% of agricultural land, equating to around 9.6 million square kilometres - an area that could be repurposed for other uses [1]. This shift would also significantly cut irrigation needs, as much of the freshwater used in agriculture supports crop irrigation.

Beyond cutting water consumption, cellular agriculture addresses water pollution. It eliminates agricultural runoff and waste from livestock, which currently account for 47% of total phosphorus loss in the food supply chain [1]. By 2050, a full transition to cellular agriculture could reduce phosphorus losses by 51%, leading to cleaner water in affected areas [1].

Why Does Cellular Agriculture Use Less Water?

The dramatic water savings of cellular agriculture stem from several key factors.

No need for large-scale feed crop irrigation is one of the biggest contributors. Conventional livestock farming relies heavily on water to grow feed crops like maize. In contrast, cellular agriculture produces meat in controlled facilities. While some agricultural inputs, such as glucose derived from maize, are still required, the overall demand for maize is expected to drop from 1.2 billion tonnes in 2020 to 883 million tonnes by 2050 - a projected 26% decrease [1].

Controlled production environments also play a crucial role. Cellular agriculture operates in closed-loop bioreactor systems, allowing for precise water management. These systems can treat and recirculate water used in processes like cultivation, filtration, and purification. This is a stark improvement over conventional farming, where outdated irrigation methods and poor resource management lead to the loss of about 40% of water used in agriculture [4].

Advanced recycling technologies further enhance efficiency. Reverse osmosis systems can recycle up to 75% of the water used in culture mediums, with some industry setups achieving over 90% water recycling. Research from Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona has shown that recycling water can save 40% of daily irrigation needs, while retaining 35–54% of essential nutrients [6]. These innovations highlight the resourcefulness of cellular agriculture in managing water sustainably.

Additionally, cellular agriculture avoids the 50% water loss commonly seen in conventional sprinkler systems due to evaporation, runoff, and transit inefficiencies [4]. Closed-loop systems maintain consistent water use year-round, unaffected by weather conditions [6]. By eliminating the need for water in livestock sanitation, processing, and drinking, cellular agriculture not only reduces water use but also sets the stage for ongoing advancements in water management technologies.

Challenges in Measuring Water Use

When it comes to comparing water consumption figures in cellular agriculture, inconsistency is a recurring issue. For instance, one study estimates cultivated beef requires 367 litres per kilogramme, while another suggests 521 litres per kilogramme[5]. These differences arise from how water use is defined, measured, and reported. Some studies focus solely on the freshwater entering a facility, while others consider every litre circulating within the production system, including recycled water. This lack of standardisation highlights the importance of understanding how terms like blue water and recycled water are used in practice.

Blue Water and Recycled Water Explained

To grasp water consumption in cellular agriculture, it’s crucial to differentiate between blue water and recycled water. Blue water refers to freshwater taken from natural sources - such as tap water, groundwater, or surface water from rivers and lakes - that isn’t returned to its source in the same condition. In cellular agriculture, blue water is typically used in tasks like preparing culture media, cleaning equipment, and processing the final product.

Recycled water, on the other hand, is treated and reused within the facility. Cellular agriculture often utilises closed-loop systems, where water circulates through bioreactors, filtration units, and purification processes multiple times. Studies that focus only on freshwater inputs report lower water usage, whereas those accounting for recycled water present higher figures. This distinction sheds light on why water use estimates can differ so greatly, even for the same production processes.

Variables That Affect Water Use Calculations

Several factors contribute to the complexity of calculating water use in cellular agriculture, beyond just definitions:

Culture media composition: The nutrient-rich liquid used to grow cultivated cells varies significantly across facilities. Some formulations require more water for dilution, while concentrated, serum-free media can reduce water needs compared to traditional serum-based options. The efficiency of cell growth per unit of media also impacts water use per kilogramme of product. Additionally, producing media components like ammonia water, ammonium sulphate, and glucose can add to the overall water footprint.
Facility design and location: Modern facilities equipped with advanced water recycling systems, closed-loop bioreactors, and efficient filtration technologies tend to use less water compared to older setups. Local climate also plays a role, influencing cooling water needs, while access to wastewater treatment infrastructure determines how much water can be economically reused.
Energy sources: The type of energy powering cellular agriculture indirectly affects water use. For example, solar photovoltaic (PV) energy requires 1.3 times more water per kilowatt-hour than wind energy. If the global food system were to transition to cellular agriculture powered by wind energy, it could demand about 14.6 petawatt-hours by 2050, compared to 15.8 petawatt-hours if solar PV were used[1].
Methodological scope and time frame: Researchers may choose to measure only direct water use in bioreactors or include indirect water use, such as that required for producing inputs, generating electricity, and constructing facilities. Over time, as facilities optimise operations, water use per kilogramme of product often decreases. Additionally, the choice of functional unit - whether measuring water use per kilogramme of product, per kilogramme of protein, or per calorie - further complicates comparisons.
Water quality considerations: Conventional livestock farming significantly contributes to water pollution, with agricultural runoff and livestock waste accounting for around 47% of total phosphorus loss in the food supply chain[1]. Some studies account for this by assigning a "water quality credit" to cellular agriculture, comparing its avoided pollution to traditional methods. Others, however, treat water quantity and quality as separate metrics.

Recognising these variables and methodological differences is key to making sense of water use claims and comparing the diverse approaches within cellular agriculture.

Water Recycling and Production Advances

The cellular agriculture industry is making strides in cutting water usage, thanks to recycling technologies and improved production techniques. These developments tackle one of food production's biggest challenges: freshwater scarcity. By adopting closed-loop systems and fine-tuning culture media, facilities are achieving levels of water efficiency that traditional agriculture simply can't match.

How Water Recycling Reduces Consumption

Recycling water represents a major shift in how food production handles this critical resource. Unlike traditional methods, cellular agriculture uses controlled indoor systems to recycle water, allowing it to be reused across multiple production cycles instead of being discarded after one use.

One of the standout technologies here is reverse osmosis, which can recover up to 75% of the water used in culture media, with some advanced setups achieving even higher rates. A study by Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona found that these systems could save 40% of daily irrigation water while retaining 35–54% of essential nutrients, setting a high standard for efficient facility design [6].

Some industry leaders have taken this even further, implementing systems that recycle over 90% of water in cultivated meat production. These systems don't just purify and reuse water - they ensure that the recycled water meets the same quality standards as fresh water, even after multiple cycles.

The benefits go beyond conservation. Recycling water also cuts costs by reducing the need for sterilisation and wastewater treatment. Facilities designed with recycling in mind from the start perform better than those retrofitted later. Plus, the controlled environment ensures consistent water management year-round, avoiding the unpredictability of weather-dependent farming.

That said, recycling water while maintaining bioreactor efficiency is no small feat. Facilities must carefully monitor and remove waste products without losing essential nutrients needed for cell growth. Tackling this challenge is key to improving recycling rates and supporting optimal production conditions.

Aspect	Conventional Meat	Cultivated Meat
Environmental strain	High (deforestation, runoff)	Low
Water recycling capability	Minimal	Up to 75–90%

Advances in Culture Media and Facility Design

Water recycling has been complemented by advances in culture media and facility design, bringing even greater efficiency to cellular agriculture.

Modern serum-free nutrient media has revolutionised water use. Traditional serum-based media required significant water for dilution and preparation. In contrast, food-grade formulations now allow for concentrated nutrient solutions that use less water while still supporting optimal growth.

The composition of culture media plays a big role in water requirements at every stage. Producing nutrient components adds to the water footprint, but optimised formulations reduce both the water needed to dissolve nutrients and the indirect water used in producing these components. For example, some research explores replacing glucose-based media with CO₂ and hydrogen-oxidising bacteria in microbial protein production, cutting water use in media preparation and sterilisation.

Facility design has also evolved to maximise water efficiency. Vertical farming integration within cellular agriculture facilities saves space and improves water management through gravity-fed recirculation systems. Separating production stages - such as cultivation, filtration, and drying - into dedicated zones allows for tailored water management at each step.

Modern facilities rely on automated water recycling systems with real-time monitoring to ensure precision. These systems use multiple purification stages, like microfiltration and reverse osmosis, to maintain water quality. Redundancies in the system ensure production continues smoothly, even if one purification component needs maintenance.

Integrated treatment zones allow water to be reused multiple times before final discharge. Facilities with backup purification systems maintain high standards and consistent production. This approach sets cellular agriculture apart from traditional methods, which focus more on reducing irrigation losses than creating closed-loop systems.

However, achieving the high purity levels required for cell culture is energy-intensive. Multi-stage filtration processes consume significant energy, which can offset some of the environmental benefits. Pairing water recycling with renewable energy sources offers a solution. Solar panels and wind turbines can power water treatment systems, ensuring sustainable operation. By 2050, renewable energy could fully support cellular agriculture, with estimates suggesting a need for 1,530 gigawatts of wind capacity or 1,265 gigawatts of solar capacity to integrate recycling systems efficiently [1].

Looking ahead, the potential for improvement is enormous. Current water usage in cellular agriculture ranges from 367 to 521 litres per kilogramme, an 87% reduction compared to conventional beef production [3][5]. Future advancements in media formulations, facility automation, and water treatment technologies are expected to push water usage even lower. Together, these innovations promise not only to conserve water but to redefine food production as a more efficient and sustainable system. The combination of advanced recycling, optimised media, and renewable energy integration creates a model that traditional agriculture simply can't replicate.

Impact on Global Water Resources

The potential of cellular agriculture to conserve water goes far beyond the immediate benefits seen within individual production facilities. Through advancements in water recycling and facility design, this technology has the power to reshape how we manage one of our most crucial resources on a global scale. By addressing major challenges like agricultural land use and water quality, cellular agriculture offers a promising alternative to traditional farming.

Reducing Land and Water Demand

By 2050, cellular agriculture could reduce land use by an impressive 83%, freeing up approximately 9.6 million km² for other purposes[1]. This significant reduction stems mainly from eliminating the need for livestock grazing areas, which currently account for 84% of agricultural land used for livestock[1]. With less land required for growing feed crops, the demand for water used in irrigation would also drop. This is particularly impactful given that agriculture consumes 70% of global freshwater resources, with much of it going toward crop irrigation[2][4].

In the United States alone, livestock production, along with the feed crops it depends on, accounts for about one-third of all freshwater withdrawals[3]. Cellular agriculture eliminates the need for these extensive irrigation systems, allowing freshwater resources to be redirected toward drinking water, industrial use, environmental needs, and other essential applications.

A reduction in maize demand further contributes to water savings. If cellular agriculture fully replaces traditional methods, maize demand could drop to 883 million tonnes by 2050, down from 1.2 billion tonnes in 2020[1]. Since maize is a water-intensive crop, this shift could save billions of cubic metres of freshwater currently used for irrigation.

These savings are particularly vital for regions struggling with water scarcity. Areas like the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia, and Australia could see reduced pressure on their groundwater aquifers, enabling aquifer recovery and more sustainable freshwater supplies. Additionally, the land no longer needed for agriculture could be restored to natural ecosystems like forests, wetlands, or grasslands. This restoration would enhance water infiltration, help recharge groundwater, and stabilise local water cycles. Together, these changes promise not only water savings but also improved water quality.

Improving Water Quality by Reducing Waste

Beyond reducing water consumption, cellular agriculture offers a way to enhance water quality. Conventional livestock farming is a major contributor to water contamination, with nutrient runoff and waste polluting waterways. For instance, about 47% of the total phosphorus lost in the food supply chain comes from nutrient losses linked to traditional farming methods[1].

Replacing livestock farming with cellular agriculture could reduce phosphorus losses by 51% by 2050[1]. This improvement is largely thanks to the controlled, closed-loop systems used in cellular agriculture facilities. These systems manage and recycle nutrient solutions within contained bioreactors, preventing the kind of runoff that occurs with open pasture systems. By contrast, traditional farming often allows manure and fertiliser runoff to contaminate water, leading to eutrophication and harm to aquatic ecosystems.

Additionally, a reduced need for feed crop production means less reliance on synthetic fertilisers, which are another source of water pollution. Cleaner water systems benefit not only ecosystems but also reduce water treatment costs for communities downstream of intensive farming operations.

The combined benefits of cellular agriculture create a ripple effect of conservation. A dramatic reduction in land use is paired with significant cuts in water use - some studies suggest up to an 87% reduction in water use per unit of product[3]. These changes also align with broader environmental goals, such as a potential 52% decrease in annual greenhouse gas emissions compared to current agricultural practices[1]. Together, these advancements support global sustainability efforts, including the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 6, which focuses on the efficient and sustainable management of water resources.

Conclusion

Cellular agriculture offers a groundbreaking way to conserve water in food production. Cultivated meat requires significantly less water compared to traditional beef farming. This is largely because it eliminates the need for water-intensive processes like growing feed crops, which are a cornerstone of conventional livestock farming.

Additionally, it reduces other environmental burdens such as excessive land use and nutrient runoff. Advanced water recycling systems, capable of recovering up to 90% of the water used during production, further boost efficiency. Controlled production facilities ensure stable, year-round output, unaffected by unpredictable weather conditions [6]. These efficiencies make cellular agriculture a vital step towards meeting the challenges of food production in a water-scarce world.

This innovation comes at a critical juncture. Agriculture currently accounts for 70% of global freshwater withdrawals, with 40% of that water wasted due to mismanagement [4]. For regions already grappling with water shortages, cellular agriculture provides a tangible solution by easing the strain that conventional livestock farming places on local water supplies.

However, this shift is about more than just saving water; it’s about rethinking how we produce food in an era of limited resources. By embracing cellular agriculture, both individuals and policymakers can contribute to creating a food system that safeguards freshwater reserves while still delivering real meat - without the heavy environmental toll of industrial farming. This represents a step towards a resilient and resource-conscious way of feeding the world.

To explore more about how cultivated meat tackles ethical, environmental, and sustainability issues, visit The Cultivarian Society for science-backed insights.

FAQs

How does water usage in cellular agriculture compare to traditional farming for producing meat for a more sustainable future?

Cultivated meat, a key innovation in cellular agriculture, requires far less water than traditional livestock farming. By bypassing the need to raise animals, it eliminates water-heavy activities such as growing feed crops, caring for livestock, and handling waste.

Although the exact numbers depend on the type of meat and production techniques, research indicates that cultivated meat could slash water use by as much as 80–90% compared to conventional beef farming. This offers a promising way to tackle water scarcity while contributing to a more sustainable food system in the UK and beyond.

How does water recycling in cellular agriculture benefit the environment?

Water recycling technologies play a crucial role in cellular agriculture, especially in the production of cultivated meat. These systems drastically cut down water usage compared to conventional livestock farming by reusing water within the production process.

This method not only conserves precious resources but also reduces waste, making it a key step towards a more resource-efficient future. By easing the demand for freshwater - a resource that is becoming scarce in many regions - these advancements contribute to creating a food system that’s both efficient and environmentally conscious.

How could cellular agriculture affect global water use and farmland needs by 2050?

Cultivated meat, a key innovation in cellular agriculture, offers a promising way to cut down on global water use and agricultural land demands by 2050. Unlike traditional livestock farming, it sidesteps the need for growing feed crops or maintaining large herds, resulting in significantly lower water consumption.

Beyond water savings, cellular agriculture could release substantial tracts of land currently tied up in grazing and feed production. This change has the potential to curb deforestation, protect biodiversity, and open doors for rewilding or more sustainable land practices. By incorporating cultivated meat into our diets, the global food system could become more efficient, addressing pressing issues like water shortages and land degradation while reducing its environmental footprint.