This article supplied by Troy Media.

 By Sylvain Charlebois

Would you eat ice cream made from recycled plastic?

Producing butter without cows, pastures or crops—using only carbon and hydrogen synthesized in a laboratory—sounds like science fiction. Yet in an era of climate urgency and resource constraints, it is being framed as the next frontier in food innovation. A new wave of philanthropists and investors is betting on disruptive technologies to reimagine how we eat.

One such player is Savor, a Chicago-based company partly backed by Bill Gates, who has become a prominent supporter of climate-focused food startups. The firm says it has created a product indistinguishable from traditional butter.

Unlike margarine, made from plant oils such as soybean or canola, this butter contains no animals or crops. Its fat molecules are built in a lab from carbon dioxide captured from the air and hydrogen drawn from water, processed through heating and oxidation. The result mimics the molecular structure of fats found in beef, cheese or vegetable oils, without a single acre of farmland.

Savor claims its butter would have a far smaller environmental footprint than traditional dairy. Commercially, the company is targeting a market launch within 12 to 18 months, likely at a premium comparable to organic butter. On nutrition, however, the company has said little. That leaves a larger question for consumers: will lab-made foods ease the strain of record grocery bills or simply add another pricey product?

Molecular agriculture, sometimes called synthetic or cellular food production, means building foods molecule by molecule in a lab instead of growing them on farms. It has gained traction across categories from meat to seafood to coffee. These products are marketed as climate saviours, but what really drives consumer choices, labelling, price, taste and nutrition, often comes second.

Sometimes the race for novelty veers into the absurd. In 2023, a UK company claimed it could make ice cream from recycled plastic. One has to wonder how far we are prepared to go in the name of saving the planet. And novelty isn’t the only risk: history shows that even once-celebrated food science can backfire.

Trans fats, for example, were once hailed for improving texture and shelf life, only to be banned after their damage to public health became undeniable.

This points to a deeper cultural and economic tension. Food is not simply about producing calories with minimal resources. It is also an expression of culture, heritage and pride, rooted in centuries-old traditions. According to the Food Sentiment Index published by the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University earlier this year, just nine per cent of consumers cite the environment as their main purchase driver.

Cellular and molecular agriculture has its place, but it must be guided by the right motivations. Efforts that play God or lean on eco-authoritarian narratives risk alienating the very consumers they hope to attract. Credible pathways must integrate the cultural, economic and sensory dimensions of eating. In Canada, this connection is especially strong in dairy and agriculture, which remain both economic pillars and cultural touchstones.

The future of food will not be defined by lab breakthroughs alone. Success will hinge on taste, transparency, affordability and respect for tradition.

In the end, not all of us aspire to eat like Greta Thunberg.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

This article supplied by Troy Media.

 By Sylvain Charlebois

Since March 3, Canadian importers have been paying an additional 25 per cent tariff on imported coffee. This counter-tariff, introduced as part of Ottawa’s retaliatory response to a trade dispute triggered by new United States duties on Canadian agricultural exports earlier this year, directly affects a product that isn’t even grown in Canada.

Coffee is up 19 per cent—and global markets aren’t to blame. Ottawa’s political posturing is burning your wallet, one cup at a time

Canadians are paying 19 per cent more for ground coffee this year—and it’s not because of global supply issues. It’s because of a self-inflicted policy
mistake: a 25 per cent tariff imposed by Ottawa on imported coffee, a product Canada doesn’t even grow.

Many consumers may attribute the spike to global market volatility, especially after coffee futures soared to a record high of more than US$4.40 per
pound in February. But that explanation no longer holds—futures have since dropped by more than 30 per cent, yet retail prices remain stubbornly high. So, what’s driving this divergence?

The answer lies, in part, in trade policy.

Since March 3, Canadian importers have been paying an additional 25 per cent tariff on imported coffee.

This counter-tariff, introduced as part of Ottawa’s retaliatory response to a trade dispute triggered by new United States duties on Canadian agricultural exports earlier this year, directly affects a product that isn’t even grown in Canada.

Unlike dairy or poultry, coffee has no domestic farming sector to protect. These tariffs aren’t shielding Canadian producers—they’re punishing
Canadian consumers and businesses.

To grasp the scale of this impact, consider the size of the industry. According to Introspective Market Research, retail coffee sales in Canada total more than $2.7 billion annually and are projected to grow steadily over the next decade. Meanwhile, coffee shops and quick-service restaurants, from Tim Hortons to independent cafés, generate an additional $6.4 billion per year. Tim Hortons alone sells more than five million cups of coffee per day.

This is not a fringe sector; it’s a critical part of both our economy and our culture.

Ironically, the U.S.—our supposed trade adversary in this case—doesn’t grow coffee either. Yet both countries are now entangled in a tariff tug-of-war that serves no practical purpose. The same logic applies to tea, which is also subject to retaliatory measures.

The tariffs were introduced under the Trudeau government in a broader geopolitical strategy that often felt more performative than pragmatic. Trudeau’s combative approach to trade, seemingly crafted on a whiteboard without regard for economic fallout, may have resonated politically, but it ignored basic economic principles. Consumers were never part of the equation.

In contrast, Prime Minister Mark Carney appears to be taking a more measured approach. Tariffs on U.S. alcohol and citrus products remain, but those can be sourced from other markets with relatively little disruption. Coffee and tea, however, are a different matter. There are no alternative domestic sources. The cost of these tariffs is being passed directly to roasters, grocers, restaurants, and ultimately, to the consumer.

Compounding the problem is the volatility of American trade policy under U.S. President Donald Trump, which continues to inject uncertainty into food markets. Tariffs come and go with the political winds, forcing companies to engage in “buffer pricing.” Much like travelers buying insurance for
unpredictable weather, companies build in extra costs to guard against political surprises. It’s effectively a tax on unpredictability, and it’s now embedded in the price Canadians pay at the till.

And while consumers might not feel the same pinch at their local café, where coffee is a smaller fraction of the total cost of a cup, the grocery aisle tells a different story. That’s where the full weight of these policies lands.

Whether a new trade agreement can be reached by the self-imposed July 21 deadline—or a damaging 35 per cent tariff Trump has set for August 1 can be avoided—remains uncertain. But what should be obvious is this: both Canada and the U.S. need to keep essential agri-food imports like coffee and tea out of their geopolitical fights.

Canada has a vibrant coffee ecosystem, built on roasting, innovation and consumer culture, not cultivation. There is no economic rationale for taxing it. Canadians shouldn’t be paying more for their morning brew just to send a symbolic message to Washington.

It’s time Ottawa led by example and scrapped these pointless tariffs.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.