Hey David! This is great, thanks for sharing, I’ll take a more detailed look. For now, some comments:
I agree that a more detailed Monte Carlo than the one I did is desirable.
I also think it is reasonable to present a trio of scenarios (neutral, optimistic, pessimistic), though science is somewhat tricky in that what matters is “what is reasonably achievable”, not the average of efforts. Eg, we do not measure AI progress by the average AI model, but the best. Thus, my bias towards optimistic figures and towards considering Pasitka’s numbers as more relevant than Humbird’s. Additionally, the scaling issues also seem more relevant for the bioreactor than for the media, so I don’t think a lack of large-scale commercial proof is strong evidence against Pasitka’s numbers being achievable. In general, my best guess is that $0.3/L to $0.2/L is likely to be achievable for the media, even if it is not easy. And I think that is ultimately the interesting question to answer.
Quick follow-up: I’ve worked with Claude Code (several iterations; wanted Fable, got blocked so pushed to Opus) to put up this page comparing and bridging Pablo’s model to ours...
where and how the two overlap and differ
a simplified calculator that feeds a cost/kg into a stripped-down version of the cost→share logic.
This is early—I continue vetting and working on it and would love your feedback
There’s a potential complementarity: we focus on is the cost distribution, Pablo on the demand response is Pablo’s
(If you add hypothes.is comments there I’ll respond and adapt.)
Hey David! This is great, thanks for sharing, I’ll take a more detailed look. For now, some comments:
I agree that a more detailed Monte Carlo than the one I did is desirable.
I also think it is reasonable to present a trio of scenarios (neutral, optimistic, pessimistic), though science is somewhat tricky in that what matters is “what is reasonably achievable”, not the average of efforts. Eg, we do not measure AI progress by the average AI model, but the best. Thus, my bias towards optimistic figures and towards considering Pasitka’s numbers as more relevant than Humbird’s. Additionally, the scaling issues also seem more relevant for the bioreactor than for the media, so I don’t think a lack of large-scale commercial proof is strong evidence against Pasitka’s numbers being achievable. In general, my best guess is that $0.3/L to $0.2/L is likely to be achievable for the media, even if it is not easy. And I think that is ultimately the interesting question to answer.
With regards to the bioreactor, it seems progress has been happening there too, (see eg https://parima.bio/blog/parima-demonstrates-ton-scale-cultivated-meat-production-at-viable-unit-economics). Interestingly, they claim to have used a 22k L bioreactor, which is roughly the large scale that Humbird and Pasitka had envisioned. Again, not an insider, but it seems we live in the “optimistic” world.
Last: my $15 to $30 estimate was an eyeball from the results I had, it was just meant to be an anchor for people’s minds.