Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Eating Cicadas and Other Bugs Could Be Sustainable and Delicious

News Feed
Wednesday, June 5, 2024

Joseph Yoon: Maybe it’s a delicacy. Maybe it’s something that we enjoy doing. Maybe we just want to have a butter-fried, chocolate-covered cicada because it’s delicious.Rachel Feltman: If your lawn is currently flooded with cicadas, you might be looking for a way to get rid of the noisy little invaders. But have you thought about just—eating them?Some cultures consider insects a delicacy, and billions of humans eat them on a regular basis. Others relegate bug consumption to schoolyard dares and those weird little novelty lollipops, remember those? But increasingly, skeptical folks are coming around to the idea that insects might just taste good.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.[CLIP: A character speaks in The Lion King: “Slimy, yet satisfying.”]Feltman: And I’ve brought in my favorite insect-eating ambassador and chef Joseph Yoon to tell us all about nymph kimchi, deep-fried cicadas and other delicious dishes you can prepare with ingredients plucked fresh from your backyard. For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman.Yoon: My name is Joseph Yoon. I’m the chef and founder of Brooklyn Bugs and also an edible insect ambassador.And we have had a lifelong love of insects, but we’ve never really considered eating or cooking them in a serious manner until 2017, when an artist approached us to work on an art project to help conquer her fear of insects by eating them. And I said yes immediately because I love to think about ways to integrate art into my life and into my work.When I began researching edible insects I came upon the [United Nations’] FAO, the Food and [Agriculture] Organization, report in 2013 Edible Insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security. And this report was and continues to be my guiding North Star. And it really profoundly had an impact on me to think that we can take something so visceral and so, so weird for a lot of our American counterparts and then to think that it can address food security and sustainability, health and nutrition, workforce activations, and livelihoods and environmentalism—this became a tremendous source of motivation and inspiration for me.Feltman: I’ve heard you say before that as a chef, your top reason for eating insects will always be taste. So let’s start there instead of with all the environmental and health arguments for eating bugs. What are your favorites, and what do they taste like?Yoon: Yeah, what I love is that when we begin to talk about flavor profiles with edible insects, I like to first have people imagine—describe for me the flavor of chicken without using the word chicken. We begin to realize the difficulty and challenges of describing flavors of things that we’re even very familiar with.So with that being said, there are over 2,000 known species of edible insects—all with such wildly different flavor profiles, textures and functionality—and the manner in which we prepare them, what they’re fed and reared on, and the substrate, the terroir, they will all have an impact on the ultimate flavor of the insects. So we’re going to generalize a little bit and describe some flavor profiles for you. But I did want to just kind of preface it with some general notes.Feltman: It’s true. I could not tell you what chicken tastes like. That question’s going to haunt me.Yoon: So if we were to—just to start with some of the basic insects, I mean, a lot of the flavor profiles are characterized as, like, nutty or earthy or mushroomy. And those are descriptive and accurate to a certain degree, but there are, like—how many hundreds of different nuts are there that taste so different?But as a general characterization of flavor, crickets do have a nutty, earthy flavor to them. Depending on how they’re prepared, we can manipulate that flavor. Just like if we were to cook something with garlic and aromatics like onions and ginger, it’ll impact the ultimate flavor of the dish.One of the really interesting flavor profiles that I particularly enjoy are with various species of ants that have formic acid as a defense mechanism. So it gives it this really beautiful acidic sort of flavor, which is really surprising.Cicadas have a really beautiful nutty, but also vegetal quality that’s very distinct and unique. There are so many flavors to explore and one of the more interesting ones may be with the male water bug. They create this pheromone that’s designed for mating, and it has this incredible je ne sais quoi that’s aromatic and has, like, a certain fruity and amazing quality. And in Vietnam they actually extract this pheromone and just put, like, one drop in their ramen to flavor the entire broth.Feltman: You mentioned cicadas, and that was my excuse for getting you to come on, as—of course, many listeners are aware and perhaps even perturbed by—there is a cicada emergence currently. And yeah, I have heard from some of my friends who eat more insects than I do that cicadas are really delicious. I think you mentioned you were out looking for some right now.Yoon: Yeah, I am in Springfield, Illinois, where we’re anticipating the co-emergence of Brood XIII and XIX.In 2021, when Brood X emerged, I think that the metaphor of their emergence from social isolation—17 years underground—and our own emergence from social isolation in May of 2021 made them a part of the zeitgeist of a particularly unusual year.And we were able to really discuss and talk about the importance of why we should consider eating insects, how sustainable they are and how they can go towards addressing the U.N. 17 Sustainable Development Goals as well.And we begin seeing that over time, yes, there are a lot of people all around when these cicada emergences occur where people are eating insects well, particularly eating the cicadas.You’ll see them popping up in ice cream shops, at pizza stores, as a special in restaurants. People are like, “Oh, we can eat these. What a novelty.”Feltman: And so for folks listening who may see a bunch of cicadas around, is there a way for folks to safely, you know, harvest and prepare cicadas that they forage themselves?Yoon: Yeah, I like to think of this as really considering the best food-handling practices. And so we want to be safe: Make sure you’re not in an area where there are cars passing, first of all. Don’t just stop in the middle of the road. Don’t go in—on private property or somewhere where you shouldn’t be. And also be mindful of the environment—are there risks of pesticides or pathogens or heavy metals that are in the area?Two, you want to make sure that the insects are healthy. And so you want to just be able to collect them when they’re alive and you know that they’re fresh and healthy. There are different stages of a cicada that you can collect, from the nymph to the adult. If you are able to collect the nymphs, I think they’re really incredibly special. I like to rinse them off and freeze them to euthanize them. For me, my all-time favorite way to prepare them is actually in a kimchi. And kimchi typically has other arthropods, like oysters or shellfish or baby shrimp or perhaps fish sauce. And so I love the inclusion of cicada nymphs to create that umami. There are other ways just to simply fry it up in aromatics, like garlic and onions and ginger. For me, I like to add a little soy sauce, a little bit of mirin and maybe a little sesame and finish it off with some scallions and eat it along with your rice or stir-fry or any variety of things. With the adults, they’re almost like just picking berries off of a tree or a shrub. I tend to avoid things that are low on the ground because maybe there’s animals that might be urinating there, so a little bit higher just to make ourselves feel a little better about it. And then I like to, again, freeze them to euthanize them. And then I rinse them off.A lot of people are like, “Oh, you must remove the wings.” And I personally never do if I eat it myself. And I’m not sure where people think that they’re the authority on eating cicadas. If you would like to remove the wings, you’re certainly welcome to do so. In my all-time favorite preparation, I actually think the wings make it a lot better, both visually and taste-wise, which is a tempura frying of the cicadas.I like to do a really thin cicada batter because then you could really see the cicada. And if you’re really careful, and you want to take the time, you could almost spread out the wing as well so that it’s visible in the tempura fry. I think there’s something really special to be able to pick it up from the wing and dip it into your favorite sauce. I know there’s a lot of popularity with using Old Bay—so if you want to sprinkle it with Old Bay and salt, or if you want to make an Old Bay sort of aioli as a dipping sauce. And if you want to go another step, I guess you could technically melt some butter, add some Old Bay or hot sauce—whichever you like—and then toss your tempura cicadas in it, kind of like you would buffalo-style fried chicken wings or something. I encourage people to be creative and have fun. Think about your favorite dish and how you might be able to incorporate cicadas into them.Feltman: I’m from the Delaware Valley, so I also love Old Bay. So truly, I have no excuse. I need to go eat some cicadas ASAP.Tell me a little bit more about what some of the benefits of increasing our insect consumption are. You mentioned a few briefly, but I’d love to hear more.Yoon: So when we talk about the sustainability of edible insects, one of the things that we’re referring to is that it requires far less inputs for more outputs. So what that means is that it requires less feed, less water, less land space to create an equivalent amount of protein than it does for other livestock.And they also produce far less greenhouse gas emissions compared to other livestock as well. So what I like to think of is minimum input for maximum output. So would we rather spend 2,000 gallons of water to produce a pound of protein or simply one gallon? And so on the sustainability side, it makes a lot of sense.What we have with insect agriculture is a potential for a circular and regenerative agriculture. And so we could take food waste from farms, from grocery stores, from restaurants to bakeries and breweries and feed them to insects and eliminate them from going into our landfills, which would dramatically decrease greenhouse gas emissions. And we’ve also utilize it as animal feed and as pet food and also aquaculture. And so we’re able to feed this to the animals.Which leads us to also consider, “Oh, wow, we can decrease the deforestation in the Amazon that’s being utilized for animal feed by also incorporating this method and utilizing these insects for animal feed and for pet food. And to close this loop of insect agriculture: a by-product of rearing metric tons of insects will be the frass, or the excrement, and it’s also mixed with the exuviae, which are the exoskeletons. And this is an incredibly efficient bioorganic fertilizer, and it mitigates chemicals from going in our waste streams from traditional fertilizers. We’re seeing that the plants are incredibly healthy when utilizing the frass. But the real tremendous potential is that it also goes a long way in replenishing our soil health. I really love to emphasize and encourage people to think about the potential and innovations of insect agriculture—not to put it in a silo, but “How can we work alongside other [agricultural] systems, really, for the benefit of both us and the planet?Feltman: For folks who are intrigued, excited about the sustainability implications, but the taboo is just too much for them, and cicadas don’t feel like food, what are your sort of gateway insects that you suggest to people? Which ones tend to really surprise skeptics?Yoon: I think that the crickets turned into powder is incredibly versatile: You could add to your smoothies. You could add to soups. You could add it into your baking. You could add it into your marinara sauce and make lasagna with it,but have it be fortified with that extra nutrition and flavor. And so the versatility of crickets, its availability and to be able to use it in the cricket powder—to me, I regularly do indeed call the cricket the “gateway bug.”So we’ll see what possibilities occur with that. But black ants as well—they might look like caviar or black sesame seeds, and it’s a punch of flavor when you just eat it by itself. It’s like, “Oh, my gosh, it’s so tart.” And then when you add it into avocado or guacamole, the flavor is really beautifully homogenized. And I like to think it’s kind of like a lemon. If you were to bite into a lemon or squeeze a lemon, you’re like, “Oh, so sour—how do you eat this?” And you’re like, “Oh, you have to learn how to eat it and add it in to really accompany and be a part of the flavor profile and develop these flavors.”And I think it’s a similar thing with edible insects. We’re at a point and a stage where a lot of people think of insects as, like, eating a whole insect. And I think our understanding functionally is kind of like we’re biting into a raw lemon. But we have to begin learning the gastronomical properties and really develop more of the tools, assets and even language in how we’re going to address it to be able to be successful in getting people to adopt it. And so going back to your original question, I think that we have a big void in the knowledge. And without that knowledge, people are like, “Okay, I know what eating is, I know what insects are, so of course, I know what eating insects are.”But their real understanding of it is devoid of a lot of the knowledge. And so beyond the why, I think we also have to consider that there’s a great moment for us to learn. If we were to know that there are billions of people around the world that already consume insects on a regular basis—not out of desperation, but maybe it’s a delicacy. Maybe it’s something that we enjoy doing. Maybe we just want to have a butter-fried, chocolate-covered cicada because it’s delicious. And so for me, one of the really big things is that when people ask me, “What’s, like, the one way or one insect you think that will get people to change their mind?” I like to really think about the personal nature of eating and that this is not a one-size-fits-all solution and that it really requires this complex interdisciplinary nature for us to really think about how we’re going to successfully transform a global perception around insects as being a pest or something that bites you or eats the plants in your garden to being something that’s sustainably farmed or harvested specifically for human consumption and that’s processed in America at [Food and Drug Administration]–approved facilities and that we can have this sort of knowledge that can build the confidence. And then to be able to create the hundreds of dishes that I’ve done and to be able to share this with people where, “Hey, that’s a very recognizable food. I love drinking fruit smoothies with the addition of another 30 grams of protein,” or, “I love the idea of eating a cricket lasagna, where I don’t even have to see the cricket if I don’t want to,” or, “I love this tempura-fried cicadas with a buffalo dipping sauce. That sounds absolutely delicious.”And so I think that everyone has to come to this on their own. But I never want people to feel like I’m pressuring them or that they have to do it because of sustainability but that they can really come to this on their own terms and go, like, “Oh, I keep seeing all these dishes with crickets and cicadas, and I’m very curious because people are saying they taste delicious.”That’s kind of the approach that I have, is that I’d love for people to just have the decisions and the knowledge so that this isn’t propaganda because we’re not trying to go out there and make this be political or have this be part of some political agenda but really to think about “Hey, there are great benefits to this, but ultimately it’s also incredibly delicious and fun.”Feltman: That’s all for today’s episode. Join us again on Friday for a look at the surprising new science of plant intelligence.Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Kelso Harper, Carin Leong, Madison Goldberg and Jeff DelViscio.Elah Feder, Alexa Lim, Madison Goldberg and Anaissa Ruiz Tejada edit our show, with fact-checking from Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith.Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news.For Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Thanks for listening!

Make the best of the “double brood” of cicadas with insect kimchi and tempura-fried bugs.

Joseph Yoon: Maybe it’s a delicacy. Maybe it’s something that we enjoy doing. Maybe we just want to have a butter-fried, chocolate-covered cicada because it’s delicious.

Rachel Feltman: If your lawn is currently flooded with cicadas, you might be looking for a way to get rid of the noisy little invaders. But have you thought about just—eating them?

Some cultures consider insects a delicacy, and billions of humans eat them on a regular basis. Others relegate bug consumption to schoolyard dares and those weird little novelty lollipops, remember those? But increasingly, skeptical folks are coming around to the idea that insects might just taste good.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[CLIP: A character speaks in The Lion King: “Slimy, yet satisfying.”]

Feltman: And I’ve brought in my favorite insect-eating ambassador and chef Joseph Yoon to tell us all about nymph kimchi, deep-fried cicadas and other delicious dishes you can prepare with ingredients plucked fresh from your backyard. For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman.

Yoon: My name is Joseph Yoon. I’m the chef and founder of Brooklyn Bugs and also an edible insect ambassador.

And we have had a lifelong love of insects, but we’ve never really considered eating or cooking them in a serious manner until 2017, when an artist approached us to work on an art project to help conquer her fear of insects by eating them. And I said yes immediately because I love to think about ways to integrate art into my life and into my work.

When I began researching edible insects I came upon the [United Nations’] FAO, the Food and [Agriculture] Organization, report in 2013 Edible Insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security. And this report was and continues to be my guiding North Star. And it really profoundly had an impact on me to think that we can take something so visceral and so, so weird for a lot of our American counterparts and then to think that it can address food security and sustainability, health and nutrition, workforce activations, and livelihoods and environmentalism—this became a tremendous source of motivation and inspiration for me.

Feltman: I’ve heard you say before that as a chef, your top reason for eating insects will always be taste. So let’s start there instead of with all the environmental and health arguments for eating bugs. What are your favorites, and what do they taste like?

Yoon: Yeah, what I love is that when we begin to talk about flavor profiles with edible insects, I like to first have people imagine—describe for me the flavor of chicken without using the word chicken. We begin to realize the difficulty and challenges of describing flavors of things that we’re even very familiar with.

So with that being said, there are over 2,000 known species of edible insects—all with such wildly different flavor profiles, textures and functionality—and the manner in which we prepare them, what they’re fed and reared on, and the substrate, the terroir, they will all have an impact on the ultimate flavor of the insects. So we’re going to generalize a little bit and describe some flavor profiles for you. But I did want to just kind of preface it with some general notes.

Feltman: It’s true. I could not tell you what chicken tastes like. That question’s going to haunt me.

Yoon: So if we were to—just to start with some of the basic insects, I mean, a lot of the flavor profiles are characterized as, like, nutty or earthy or mushroomy. And those are descriptive and accurate to a certain degree, but there are, like—how many hundreds of different nuts are there that taste so different?

But as a general characterization of flavor, crickets do have a nutty, earthy flavor to them. Depending on how they’re prepared, we can manipulate that flavor. Just like if we were to cook something with garlic and aromatics like onions and ginger, it’ll impact the ultimate flavor of the dish.

One of the really interesting flavor profiles that I particularly enjoy are with various species of ants that have formic acid as a defense mechanism. So it gives it this really beautiful acidic sort of flavor, which is really surprising.

Cicadas have a really beautiful nutty, but also vegetal quality that’s very distinct and unique. There are so many flavors to explore and one of the more interesting ones may be with the male water bug. They create this pheromone that’s designed for mating, and it has this incredible je ne sais quoi that’s aromatic and has, like, a certain fruity and amazing quality. And in Vietnam they actually extract this pheromone and just put, like, one drop in their ramen to flavor the entire broth.

Feltman: You mentioned cicadas, and that was my excuse for getting you to come on, as—of course, many listeners are aware and perhaps even perturbed by—there is a cicada emergence currently. And yeah, I have heard from some of my friends who eat more insects than I do that cicadas are really delicious. I think you mentioned you were out looking for some right now.

Yoon: Yeah, I am in Springfield, Illinois, where we’re anticipating the co-emergence of Brood XIII and XIX.

In 2021, when Brood X emerged, I think that the metaphor of their emergence from social isolation—17 years underground—and our own emergence from social isolation in May of 2021 made them a part of the zeitgeist of a particularly unusual year.

And we were able to really discuss and talk about the importance of why we should consider eating insects, how sustainable they are and how they can go towards addressing the U.N. 17 Sustainable Development Goals as well.

And we begin seeing that over time, yes, there are a lot of people all around when these cicada emergences occur where people are eating insects well, particularly eating the cicadas.

You’ll see them popping up in ice cream shops, at pizza stores, as a special in restaurants. People are like, “Oh, we can eat these. What a novelty.”

Feltman: And so for folks listening who may see a bunch of cicadas around, is there a way for folks to safely, you know, harvest and prepare cicadas that they forage themselves?

Yoon: Yeah, I like to think of this as really considering the best food-handling practices. And so we want to be safe: Make sure you’re not in an area where there are cars passing, first of all. Don’t just stop in the middle of the road. Don’t go in—on private property or somewhere where you shouldn’t be. And also be mindful of the environment—are there risks of pesticides or pathogens or heavy metals that are in the area?

Two, you want to make sure that the insects are healthy. And so you want to just be able to collect them when they’re alive and you know that they’re fresh and healthy. There are different stages of a cicada that you can collect, from the nymph to the adult. If you are able to collect the nymphs, I think they’re really incredibly special. I like to rinse them off and freeze them to euthanize them. For me, my all-time favorite way to prepare them is actually in a kimchi. And kimchi typically has other arthropods, like oysters or shellfish or baby shrimp or perhaps fish sauce. And so I love the inclusion of cicada nymphs to create that umami. There are other ways just to simply fry it up in aromatics, like garlic and onions and ginger. For me, I like to add a little soy sauce, a little bit of mirin and maybe a little sesame and finish it off with some scallions and eat it along with your rice or stir-fry or any variety of things. With the adults, they’re almost like just picking berries off of a tree or a shrub. I tend to avoid things that are low on the ground because maybe there’s animals that might be urinating there, so a little bit higher just to make ourselves feel a little better about it. And then I like to, again, freeze them to euthanize them. And then I rinse them off.

A lot of people are like, “Oh, you must remove the wings.” And I personally never do if I eat it myself. And I’m not sure where people think that they’re the authority on eating cicadas. If you would like to remove the wings, you’re certainly welcome to do so. In my all-time favorite preparation, I actually think the wings make it a lot better, both visually and taste-wise, which is a tempura frying of the cicadas.

I like to do a really thin cicada batter because then you could really see the cicada. And if you’re really careful, and you want to take the time, you could almost spread out the wing as well so that it’s visible in the tempura fry. I think there’s something really special to be able to pick it up from the wing and dip it into your favorite sauce. I know there’s a lot of popularity with using Old Bay—so if you want to sprinkle it with Old Bay and salt, or if you want to make an Old Bay sort of aioli as a dipping sauce. And if you want to go another step, I guess you could technically melt some butter, add some Old Bay or hot sauce—whichever you like—and then toss your tempura cicadas in it, kind of like you would buffalo-style fried chicken wings or something. I encourage people to be creative and have fun. Think about your favorite dish and how you might be able to incorporate cicadas into them.

Feltman: I’m from the Delaware Valley, so I also love Old Bay. So truly, I have no excuse. I need to go eat some cicadas ASAP.

Tell me a little bit more about what some of the benefits of increasing our insect consumption are. You mentioned a few briefly, but I’d love to hear more.

Yoon: So when we talk about the sustainability of edible insects, one of the things that we’re referring to is that it requires far less inputs for more outputs. So what that means is that it requires less feed, less water, less land space to create an equivalent amount of protein than it does for other livestock.

And they also produce far less greenhouse gas emissions compared to other livestock as well. So what I like to think of is minimum input for maximum output. So would we rather spend 2,000 gallons of water to produce a pound of protein or simply one gallon? And so on the sustainability side, it makes a lot of sense.

What we have with insect agriculture is a potential for a circular and regenerative agriculture. And so we could take food waste from farms, from grocery stores, from restaurants to bakeries and breweries and feed them to insects and eliminate them from going into our landfills, which would dramatically decrease greenhouse gas emissions. And we’ve also utilize it as animal feed and as pet food and also aquaculture. And so we’re able to feed this to the animals.

Which leads us to also consider, “Oh, wow, we can decrease the deforestation in the Amazon that’s being utilized for animal feed by also incorporating this method and utilizing these insects for animal feed and for pet food. And to close this loop of insect agriculture: a by-product of rearing metric tons of insects will be the frass, or the excrement, and it’s also mixed with the exuviae, which are the exoskeletons. And this is an incredibly efficient bioorganic fertilizer, and it mitigates chemicals from going in our waste streams from traditional fertilizers. We’re seeing that the plants are incredibly healthy when utilizing the frass. But the real tremendous potential is that it also goes a long way in replenishing our soil health. I really love to emphasize and encourage people to think about the potential and innovations of insect agriculture—not to put it in a silo, but “How can we work alongside other [agricultural] systems, really, for the benefit of both us and the planet?

Feltman: For folks who are intrigued, excited about the sustainability implications, but the taboo is just too much for them, and cicadas don’t feel like food, what are your sort of gateway insects that you suggest to people? Which ones tend to really surprise skeptics?

Yoon: I think that the crickets turned into powder is incredibly versatile: You could add to your smoothies. You could add to soups. You could add it into your baking. You could add it into your marinara sauce and make lasagna with it,but have it be fortified with that extra nutrition and flavor. And so the versatility of crickets, its availability and to be able to use it in the cricket powder—to me, I regularly do indeed call the cricket the “gateway bug.”

So we’ll see what possibilities occur with that. But black ants as well—they might look like caviar or black sesame seeds, and it’s a punch of flavor when you just eat it by itself. It’s like, “Oh, my gosh, it’s so tart.” And then when you add it into avocado or guacamole, the flavor is really beautifully homogenized. And I like to think it’s kind of like a lemon. If you were to bite into a lemon or squeeze a lemon, you’re like, “Oh, so sour—how do you eat this?” And you’re like, “Oh, you have to learn how to eat it and add it in to really accompany and be a part of the flavor profile and develop these flavors.”

And I think it’s a similar thing with edible insects. We’re at a point and a stage where a lot of people think of insects as, like, eating a whole insect. And I think our understanding functionally is kind of like we’re biting into a raw lemon. But we have to begin learning the gastronomical properties and really develop more of the tools, assets and even language in how we’re going to address it to be able to be successful in getting people to adopt it. And so going back to your original question, I think that we have a big void in the knowledge. And without that knowledge, people are like, “Okay, I know what eating is, I know what insects are, so of course, I know what eating insects are.”

But their real understanding of it is devoid of a lot of the knowledge. And so beyond the why, I think we also have to consider that there’s a great moment for us to learn. If we were to know that there are billions of people around the world that already consume insects on a regular basis—not out of desperation, but maybe it’s a delicacy. Maybe it’s something that we enjoy doing. Maybe we just want to have a butter-fried, chocolate-covered cicada because it’s delicious. And so for me, one of the really big things is that when people ask me, “What’s, like, the one way or one insect you think that will get people to change their mind?” I like to really think about the personal nature of eating and that this is not a one-size-fits-all solution and that it really requires this complex interdisciplinary nature for us to really think about how we’re going to successfully transform a global perception around insects as being a pest or something that bites you or eats the plants in your garden to being something that’s sustainably farmed or harvested specifically for human consumption and that’s processed in America at [Food and Drug Administration]–approved facilities and that we can have this sort of knowledge that can build the confidence. And then to be able to create the hundreds of dishes that I’ve done and to be able to share this with people where, “Hey, that’s a very recognizable food. I love drinking fruit smoothies with the addition of another 30 grams of protein,” or, “I love the idea of eating a cricket lasagna, where I don’t even have to see the cricket if I don’t want to,” or, “I love this tempura-fried cicadas with a buffalo dipping sauce. That sounds absolutely delicious.”

And so I think that everyone has to come to this on their own. But I never want people to feel like I’m pressuring them or that they have to do it because of sustainability but that they can really come to this on their own terms and go, like, “Oh, I keep seeing all these dishes with crickets and cicadas, and I’m very curious because people are saying they taste delicious.”

That’s kind of the approach that I have, is that I’d love for people to just have the decisions and the knowledge so that this isn’t propaganda because we’re not trying to go out there and make this be political or have this be part of some political agenda but really to think about “Hey, there are great benefits to this, but ultimately it’s also incredibly delicious and fun.”

Feltman: That’s all for today’s episode. Join us again on Friday for a look at the surprising new science of plant intelligence.

Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Kelso Harper, Carin Leong, Madison Goldberg and Jeff DelViscio.

Elah Feder, Alexa Lim, Madison Goldberg and Anaissa Ruiz Tejada edit our show, with fact-checking from Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith.

Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news.

For Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Thanks for listening!

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Eat Less Beef. Eat More Ostrich?

Ostrich is touted as a more sustainable red meat that tastes just like beef.

A few months ago, I found myself in an unexpected conversation with a woman whose husband raises cattle in Missouri. She, however, had recently raised and butchered an ostrich for meat. It’s more sustainable, she told me. Sure, I nodded along, beef is singularly terrible for the planet. And ostrich is a red meat, she added. “I don’t taste any difference between it and beef.” Really? Now I was intrigued, if skeptical—which is, long story short, how my family ended up eating ostrich at this year’s Christmas dinner.I eat meat, including beef, and I enjoy indulging in a holiday prime rib, but I also feel somewhat conflicted about it. Beef is far worse for the environment than virtually any other protein; pound for pound, it is responsible for more than twice the greenhouse-gas emissions of pork, nearly four times those of chicken, and more than 13 times those of beans. This discrepancy is largely biological: Cows require a lot of land, and they are ruminants, whose digestive systems rely on microbes that produce huge quantities of the potent greenhouse gas methane. A single cow can belch out 220 pounds of methane a year.The unique awfulness of beef’s climate impact has inspired a cottage industry of takes imploring Americans to consider other proteins in its stead: chicken, fish, pork, beans. These alternatives all have their own drawbacks. When it comes to animal welfare, for example, hundreds of chickens or fish would have to be slaughtered to feed as many people as one cow. Meanwhile, pigs are especially intelligent, and conventional means of farming them are especially cruel. And beans, I’m sorry, simply are not as delicious.So, ostrich? At first glance, ostrich didn’t seem the most climate-friendly option (beans), the most ethical (beans again), or the tastiest (pork, in my personal opinion). But could ostrich be good enough in all of these categories, an acceptable if surprising solution to Americans’ love of too much red meat? At the very least, I wondered if ostrich might be deserving of more attention than we give to it right now, which is approximately zero.You probably won’t be shocked to hear that the literature on ostrich meat’s climate impact is rather thin. Still, in South Africa, “the world leader in the production of ostriches,” government economists in 2020 released a report suggesting that greenhouse-gas emissions from ostrich meat were just slightly higher than chicken’s—so, much, much less than beef’s. And in Switzerland, biologists who put ostriches in respiratory chambers confirmed their methane emissions to be on par with those of nonruminant mammals such as pigs—so, again, much, much less than cows’.But Marcus Clauss, an author of the latter study, who specializes in the digestive physiology of animals at the University of Zurich, cautioned me against focusing exclusively on methane. Methane is a particularly potent greenhouse gas, but it is just one of several. Carbon dioxide is the other big contributor to global warming, and a complete assessment of ostrich meat’s greenhouse-gas footprint needs to include the carbon dioxide released by every input, including the fertilizer, pesticides, and soil additives that went into growing ostrich feed.This is where the comparisons get more complicated. Cattle—even corn-fed ones—tend to spend much of their life on pasture eating grass, which leads to a lot of methane burps, but growing that grass is not carbon intensive. In contrast, chicken feed is made up of corn and soybeans, whose fertilizer, pesticides, and soil additives all rack up carbon-dioxide emissions. Ostrich feed appears similar, containing alfalfa, wheat, and soybeans. The climate impact of an animal’s feed are important contributions in its total greenhouse-gas emissions, says Ermias Kebreab, an animal scientist at  UC Davis who has extensively studied livestock emissions. He hasn’t calculated ostrich emissions specifically—few researchers have—but the more I looked into the emissions associated with ostrich feed, the murkier the story became.Two other ostrich studies, from northwest Spain and from a province in western Iran, indeed found feed to be a major factor in the meat’s climate impact. But these reports also contradicted others: In Spain, for instance, the global-warming potential from ostrich meat was found to be higher than that of beef or pork—but beef was also essentially no worse than pork.“Really, none of the [studies] on ostrich look credible to me. They all give odd numbers,” says Joseph Poore, the director of the Oxford Martin Programme on Food Sustainability, which runs the HESTIA platform aimed at standardizing environmental-impact data from food. “Maybe this is something we will do with HESTIA soon,” Poore continued in his email, “but we are not there yet …” (His ellipses suggested to me that ostrich might not be a top priority.)The truth is, greenhouse-gas emissions from food are sensitive to the exact mode of production, which vary country to country, region to region, and even farm to farm. And any analysis is only as good as the quality of the data that go into it. I couldn’t find any peer-reviewed studies of American farms raising the ostrich meat I could actually buy. Ultimately, my journey down the rabbit hole of ostrich emissions convinced me that parsing the relative virtues of different types of meat might be beside the point. “Just eat whatever meat you want but cut back to 20 percent,” suggests Brian Kateman, a co-founder of the Reducetarian Foundation, which advocates eating, well, less meat. (Other activists, of course, are more absolutist.) Still, “eat less meat” is an adage easier to say than to implement. The challenge, Clauss said, is, “any measure that you would instigate to make meat rarer will make it more of a status symbol than it already is.”I thought about his words over Christmas dinner, the kind of celebration that many Americans feel is incomplete without a fancy roast. By then, I had, out of curiosity, ordered an ostrich filet (billed as tasting like a lean steak) and an ostrich wing (like a beef rib), which I persuaded my in-laws to put on the table. At more than $25 a pound for the filet, the bird cost as much as a prime cut of beef.Ostrich has none of the strong or gamey flavors that people can find off-putting, but it is quite lean. I pan-seared the filet with a generous pat of butter, garlic, and thyme. The rosy interior and caramelized crust did perfectly resemble steak. But perhaps because I did not taste the ostrich blind—apologies to the scientific method—I found the flavor still redolent of poultry, if richer and meatier. Not bad, but not exactly beefy. “I wouldn’t think it’s beef,” concluded my brother-in-law, who had been persuaded to smoke the ostrich wing alongside his usual Christmas prime rib. The wing reminded me most of a Renaissance Fair turkey leg; a leftover sandwich I fixed up the next day, though, would have passed as a perfectly acceptable brisket sandwich.I wouldn’t mind having ostrich again, but the price puts it out of reach for weeknight meals, when I can easily be eating beans anyways. At Christmas, I expect my in-laws will stick with the prime rib, streaked through as it is with warm fat and nostalgia.

Electric fields could mine rare earth metals with less harm

Smartphones, electric vehicles and wind turbines rely on environmentally destructive rare earth mining operations. Harnessing electric fields could make this mining more sustainable

Mining for rare earth metals comes with environmental consequencesJoe Buglewicz/Bloomberg via Getty Images Rare earth elements used in smartphones and electric vehicles could be extracted from the ground more sustainably using electric fields. Today, most rare earth metals used in electronics are mined by using toxic chemicals to extract the elements from mineral ore. During the mining process, thousands of tonnes of chemical waste are released, which can pollute nearby groundwater and soil. But concentrating those elements together using electric charges could drastically cut the amount of environmentally damaging chemicals needed. “Imagine a crowd being guided through a maze by directional lights – similarly, rare earth elements are driven from the ore by the electric field toward specific collection points,” says Jianxi Zhu at the Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry in China. “This controlled movement ensures efficient mining with minimal environmental disruption.” Zhu and his colleagues created flexible, sheet-like plastic electrodes – each 10 centimetres wide with customisable lengths – made from non-metallic materials that can conduct electricity. At a rare earth deposit in southern China, they inserted 176 electrodes into individual holes drilled 22 metres into the rock. Next, they injected ammonium sulphate, a type of inorganic salt, into the ore to dissolve and separate out the rare earth elements as charged ions. They then activated the electrodes to create an electric field between positively and negatively charged electrodes. That electric field moved the rare earth elements toward the positively charged electrodes, concentrating them together. The elements could then be transferred to treatment ponds for additional purification and separation processes. The approach enabled the researchers to greatly reduce the amount of harmful chemicals used in extracting the rare earth elements, slashing the related ammonia emissions by 95 per cent. That could help prevent much of the water and soil contamination that today’s rare earth mining operations produce. This electric field process also proved 95 per cent efficient in extracting rare earth elements from 5000 tonnes of ore, whereas chemical processes alone usually achieve just 40 to 60 per cent efficiency, says Zhu. But the new mining method would also raise electricity costs for rare earth mining operations – and increased electricity consumption could mean more carbon emissions. The researchers have already shown how to reduce electricity costs by powering just one-third of the electrodes at any given time. Access to renewable power and improvements in electrode technology could also help bring down the energy demands and emissions of the mining process, says Zhu. This technology has potential to be a sustainable solution in the near future, says Amin Mirkouei at the University of Idaho. But he warned that it faces practical challenges, including the energy costs of the method and the long time – 60 days – it requires to ramp up to 95 per cent efficiency.

Environmentally harmful Christmas gifts to avoid

Our obsession with consumption and plastic is not sustainable.

It’s fun to indulge in the nostalgia of snowy Norman Rockwell Christmas scenes filled with wholesome candle-lit family joy. The happy faces in the famous paintings appear thankful and content with whatever gift they received—be it a wooden spinning top, a pair of shoes, or a bicycle. You can almost imagine a local carpenter or factory making the gifts a town or two over rather than a far-away plastic toy factory in China. Those days of sustainable, locally hand-carved furniture, wooden toys, quality clothing, homemade blankets, and quilts that could be passed down through generations seem mostly long gone. Instead, what lies beneath the warm and merry veil of today’s Christmases is an obsession with consumption that drives human and environmental tragedy. “Many people in the global north tend to think that it is their right and that it is normal to consume the amount that we consume today,” Vivian Frick, a sustainability researcher at the Institute for Ecological Economy Research in Germany, told Popular Science. “They often completely forget that the consumption level that we have depends on exploiting other countries, having cheap resources from other countries, and having cheap labor.”While burning fossil fuels for energy and transport contributes to 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions, reducing it requires systemic change at the international level to make a real, lasting difference. Although it doesn’t seem like it, given the lack of climate action at the COP29 climate conference in November, it’s far easier for 195 countries to agree on climate-friendly policy than to ask 8 billion people to carpool or stop eating cheeseburgers. That said, our personal choices can still make a difference. While some may be unable to stop driving or air-conditioning their homes–since we live in an industrialized society where fossil fuel consumption is a mostly fixed part of the current system — we can help by consuming less in our day-to-day lives. That can be as simple as being more mindful about what you gift friends and family for Christmas. Dirty SantaAlmost every Christmas gift affects the environment and humans in some way. Whether it’s a cheap single-use plastic product or metals mined using child or slave labor, it has likely caused a lot of suffering and pollution on its long manufacturing journey from the ground to your hands. For example, over 90% of children’s toys sold in the U.S. are made from plastics derived from crude oil—the same stuff that fossil fuel companies pump from the ground to keep your car running and economies ticking over. More than 80% of those toys are manufactured in China. After fossil fuel companies extract the crude oil from the ground, it travels thousands of miles via pipelines or oil tankers to a refinery. Once there, the oil is processed into materials called feedstocks and moved to petrochemical plants, where they are converted into plastic resins or pellets. Then they go to the factories to create almost everything in your home, wardrobe, and, honestly, life. Anything made in China has to be transported at least 7,200 miles across the Pacific Ocean. The effort is staggering. For example, parents report that children lose interest in new toys within hours. Most toys are forgotten within a month, and over 80% of plastic toys end up in landfills, according to a May 2022 study in the Journal of Sustainable Production and Consumption.The problem doesn’t stop there. About 70% of all clothing is made from crude oil-derived synthetics like polyester, nylon, and acrylic and manufactured in China, Vietnam, India, and other developing countries. This system is known as fast fashion. The clothing is made quickly and cheaply to keep up with the latest trends. It’s known to fall apart quickly.Around 11 million tons of clothing end up in U.S. landfills every year. The same applies to furniture and electronics. But this culture of unsustainable consumption didn’t start recently. Society’s transition from wanting very little to wanting everything began decades ago. Scientific advances during World War II led to our love-hate relationship with mass-produced plastic and our current throwaway culture. It began to take hold in the late 1940s, just as Americans entered an era free from war and economic depression. Families had more disposable income and time to watch the latest, humanity-altering invention: the television. Oh, and the baby boom. All combined, it created a new consumer market and an easy way to reach them. The U.S. toy industry’s sales skyrocketed from $84 million in 1940 to $900 million by 1953. Last year, toy sales hit $40 billion. Today, refined crude oil is used in many products: clothes, soaps, toothpaste, toilet seats, bedsheets, water pipes, food preservatives, and even aspirin. If you’re not sleeping in, wearing, sitting on, drinking, or eating a type of refined crude oil, you’re probably not reading this. Maybe you’re living in a cave. But it’s not just toys or fast fashion that make Christmas gifts unsustainable. Here are some of the most common and surprising gifts you should avoid.ElectronicsModern electronics, like smartphones and tablets, often require frequent upgrades, leading to significant e-waste. Producing these devices relies on mining rare earth minerals, which damages ecosystems, consumes massive amounts of energy, and harms local communities. Even when recycling programs exist, only a fraction of electronic components are recovered, increasing waste.Single-use beauty gift setsPre-packaged beauty sets are a popular holiday gift but often include non-recyclable plastic containers and unnecessary wrapping. Excessive packaging adds to landfill waste, and the single-use nature of products—like small lotions or disposable accessories—means they are quickly used and discarded. Opt for sustainable alternatives with minimal packaging.Subscription boxes with excess packagingWhile convenient, monthly subscription boxes generate significant waste. Each shipment typically includes single-use plastics, bubble wrap, or foam fillers, much of which cannot be recycled. The repetitive deliveries contribute to carbon emissions from shipping, and the short lifespan of box contents often adds to household clutter and waste.Candles with paraffin waxParaffin wax candles are made from petroleum byproducts, meaning they are unsustainable and release harmful toxins like benzene and toluene when burned. These emissions contribute to indoor air pollution. More sustainable alternatives, like soy or beeswax candles, burn cleaner, last longer, and have a lower environmental impact.Synthetic perfumes or fragrancesSynthetic perfumes rely heavily on petrochemicals derived from non-renewable resources like crude oil. The production process consumes high energy and generates chemical waste. Additionally, synthetic fragrance chemicals are often not biodegradable, contributing to long-term pollution when washed away or released into the environment.Mass-produced jewelryMass-produced jewelry frequently relies on unsustainable mining practices to source metals and stones. This process causes deforestation, soil erosion, and water contamination. Ethical concerns, such as poor working conditions and conflict materials, further complicate its impact. Choosing recycled metals or sustainably sourced alternatives reduces environmental harm.Chocolate from unsustainable sourcesUnsustainably sourced chocolate contributes to deforestation, as forests are cleared for cocoa plantations. Producing chocolate often involves unethical labor practices. Chocolate also uses unsustainable palm oil, harming habitats and wildlife. Opt for fair-trade or sustainably certified chocolate to minimize environmental and ethical harm.Bonus: these ain’t great either.Glitter-covered items – Microplastics that pollute waterways.Plastic-based beauty products – Microbeads also pollute our waters.Gadgets with non-recyclable batteries – Leads to e-waste.Pod coffee machines – Pods are hard to recycle effectively.Gas-powered tools – Emit greenhouse gases and harmful particulates.Gift cards to unsustainable chains – Supports factory farming and deforestation.Exotic pets – Harms wild ecosystems through poaching.Frequent flyer miles – Encourages carbon-intensive air travel.

Book Review: This Relationship Shaped Rachel Carson’s Environmental Ethos

The connection between queer love and the power to imagine a more sustainable future

December 17, 20244 min readBook Review: This Relationship Shaped Rachel Carson’s Environmental EthosThe connection between queer love and the power to imagine a more sustainable futureBy Brooke BorelNONFICTIONRachel Carson and the Power of Queer Loveby Lida Maxwell.Stanford University Press, 2025 ($25)On a summer night in the mid-1950s, two women lay side by side on Dogfish Head, a spit of land on Maine’s jagged coast where a river meets the ocean. They took in the dazzling stars, the smudged filaments of the Milky Way, the occasional flash of a meteor. One woman was Rachel Carson, who would become well known for her book Silent Spring and its galvanization of the modern environmental movement; the other, Dorothy Freeman, was Carson’s mar­­ried neighbor. The two had been drawn together from the moment they met in 1953 on Southport Island, Maine, and remained close until 1964, when Carson died of cancer. It was Freeman who scattered Carson’s ashes.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.The scene on Dogfish Head may sound romantic, and Lida Maxwell’s new book, Rachel Carson and the Power of Queer Love, argues that it indeed was. Maxwell, a professor of political science and of women, gender and sexuality studies at Boston University, explores the intimate bond between Carson and Freeman by drawing, in part, from a trove of personal letters. The book’s message is that the relationship holds a lesson for our modern climate crisis, especially for those of us willing to find meaning outside our culture’s dominant narratives.The correspondence is telling. Carson professes strong feelings after just a few letters (“Because I love you! Now I could go on and tell you some of the reasons why I do, but that would take quite a while, and I think the simple fact covers everything …”). The two call each other “darling” and “sweetheart.” During the stretches they spend physically apart, they express what can easily be read as queer yearning, as when Freeman writes: “How I would love to curl up beside you on a sofa in the study with a fire to gaze into and just talk on and on.”There is also reference to the hundreds of letters we’ll never read because the two women burned them, perhaps in that same fireplace. As Martha Freeman, Dorothy’s granddaughter, told Maxwell, “Rachel and Dorothy were initially cautious about the romantic tone and terminology of their correspondence.”Was Carson a lesbian? The answer has long been the source of speculation. It’s impossible to know; she’s not known to have publicly identified as such. To Maxwell, though, this question is beside the point: “Whether or not their love was ‘homosexual,’ to use the language of the time, it was certainly queer. It drew them out of conventional forms of marriage and family and allowed them to find happiness where their society told them they weren’t supposed to: in loving each other and the world of non­­human nature.”Queer love is a rejection of what Maxwell calls “the ideology of straight love,” or the pursuit of “the good life” through marriage, buying and decorating a house, having and raising children, and participating in the treadmill of consumer culture to keep it all running. Because Carson and Freeman’s love was queer, Maxwell argues, they had no template with which to explore it. Instead they created a new language, expressed through a shared love of nature: the song of the veery, the Maine tide pools, the woods between their houses. This avenue for connection and meaning making, Maxwell argues, is what made Carson’s Silent Spring possible—it changed her from a writer who captured the wonder of nature to one advocating to save it.How does this apply to the climate crisis? “As perhaps is obvious,” Maxwell writes, “the tight connection of the ideology of straight love with consumption is also bad for our climate because it ties our intimate happiness to unsustainable ways of living.” To truly achieve meaningful climate policy, she continues, we’ll need to expand our “visceral imaginary of what a good life could be.” The queer version embraces a “vibrant multispecies world” where we seek “desire and pleasure outside of the ideologies of capitalism and straight love.” These specific points, made through­out the book, are at times repetitive and can feel didactic.Some readers, particularly straight readers, may bristle at all this. After all, plenty of people who don’t identify as queer opt out of consumerism and fight climate change. Straight people can reject the hetero­normative story; queer people are not immune to it. But the point of the book isn’t that we should take individual action—it’s about broader structures and narratives. As a queer woman who spent a decade in a hetero­normative marriage, I know how seductive the call of that particular “good life” can be; I also know the liberation of building something new. Max well’s book holds lessons for all readers about ac­­knowledging, and then escaping, the structures that ensnare us.Carson and Freeman found the way through their decidedly queer, deeply romantic, long-­lasting love. Even when they were apart, they imagined themselves together. As Freeman writes during one of these spells: “You and I have been walking on the Head in the moonlight. Do you remember the night we lay there in that lovely light? I told you you looked like alabaster. You did. How happy we were then.”

New Zealand Inks 'Sustainable' Trade Deal With Switzerland, Costa Rica and Iceland

SYDNEY (Reuters) - New Zealand signed a trade deal on Saturday with Switzerland, Costa Rica and Iceland to remove tariffs on hundreds of...

SYDNEY (Reuters) - New Zealand signed a trade deal on Saturday with Switzerland, Costa Rica and Iceland to remove tariffs on hundreds of sustainable goods and services, in a move Wellington says will boost the country's export sector.The Agreement on Climate Change, Trade and Sustainability (ACCTS) was signed at a ceremony during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in Peru on Saturday after being struck in July, Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay said in a statement."This agreement removes tariffs on key exports including 45 wood and wool products — two sectors that are vital to achieving our goal of doubling New Zealand's exports by value in 10 years," McClay said."It will also reduce costs for consumers, removing tariffs on hundreds of other products, including insulation materials, recycled paper, and energy-saving products such as LED lamps and rechargeable batteries."The deal prioritised New Zealand's "sustainable exports", he said, amid a roll back by the country's centre-right government of environmental reforms in a bid to boost a flailing economy. Exports make up nearly a quarter of New Zealand's economy.(Reporting by Sam McKeith in Sydney; Editing by Sandra Maler)Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.