Table 2 Summary of bugs in the scientific literature on insect farming

Bug #1: Overreliance on a handful of old studies with several limitations

A. Many studies performed on a small scale, which may not apply to industrial scales.

B. Assumption that insects can replace meat. However:

a. Due to low consumer acceptability, most investments are for the animal feed production industry, not human food⁴⁶.

b. Numerous alternative proteins could be used instead of either insects or meat⁵⁰.

c. Most insect-based foods are not meat-like products but compete with plant-based products with low environmental impact (pasta, cookies, snacks)⁵¹.

C. Recent studies have indicated that insects use large amounts of water²⁵.

D. Insects are seen as capable of replacing soybeans and fishmeal. However, their current price is not cost-competitive, which may persist in the future⁷.

Bug #2: Assumption that insect farms will use food waste

A. Insects are seen as capable of using large amounts of waste. However, the largest companies mostly use high-quality feeds such as grain-based (co-)products, which are already used in livestock feed, even though several waste substrates are authorised⁶.

B. Significant economic, logistical and regulatory challenges make the use of waste an uphill climb⁶.

C. Risks of contamination when insects are reared on some types of waste.

Bug #3: Cost estimates that do not represent commercial conditions

A. Examples of some limits identified in several insect meal price projections (non-exhaustive)

a. Extremely ambitious use of waste substrates

b. Electricity prices being significantly underestimated

c. Overestimation of bioconversion ratios

d. Assumptions of long equipment lifespans

e. Undervaluation of the cost of some substrates