The “Micro-Reactor” Challenge
Professor, you have famously described the natural coffee bean as a “pressurized micro-reactor” essential for flavor development. Given that cell-cultured biomass lacks this physical structure, how close can we realistically get to that “god shot” of espresso? Are we chasing a chemical mirror image, or is the goal to create an entirely new sensory category?
Your 2024 study showed that lab-grown samples hit about 40 percent of the aromatic intensity of traditional beans. From a chemist’s perspective, is that “flavor gap” a temporary hurdle of scaling, or an inherent limitation of growing cells outside the cherry?
My interest in cell-grown coffee comes from multiple directions.
First, sustainability and supply. When I started in coffee science and research thirty years ago, sustainability in coffee plantations and cell-grown coffee were hardly subjects in science and economics. My growing interest began five years ago, from the realisation that traditional coffee cultivation had become so successful and was produced in such huge volumes that at some point in the future, (i) the demand for traditional farm-grown coffee would outstrip supply, (ii) coffee prices would rise with no return, and (iii) coffee consumption would become unsustainable in terms of climate change, water, life cycle assessment, and so on. Even if I was not and am not a proponent of substituting farm-grown coffee with cell-grown coffee, it seemed obvious to me that cell-grown coffee, as an option to close the gap between supply and demand of traditional mainstream coffee, was a very good solution.
“Cell-grown coffee is neither meant to replace traditional coffee, nor is it my ambition to replace high-quality specialty coffee. For the moment, it shall close the gap and aim at the quality of mainstream coffee.”
Cell-grown coffee is neither meant to replace traditional coffee, nor is it my ambition to replace high-quality specialty coffee. For the moment, cell-grown coffee shall close the gap and aim at the quality of mainstream coffee, not specialty coffee. But if the price of traditional coffee continues to climb and the quality of cell-grown coffee improves, which it will, it is possible and even probable that cell-grown coffee competes with, or partly displaces, farm-grown specialty coffee.
As of today, cell-grown coffee does not reach the intensity of a good espresso. But a project between Food Brewer AG and the Coffee Excellence Centre of the ZHAW, sponsored by the Swiss National Science Foundation, has precisely that objective: to find strategies and technologies to increase the flavour intensity and improve the profile, both the sensory experience and the chemical composition, of cell-grown coffee to mimic farm-grown coffee. While this will increase and evolve over the coming years, I expect the intensity and profile will reach the target of mimicking a good farm-grown coffee within twelve months, though not necessarily a “god shot” of espresso.
In conclusion, while the flavour profile of good espresso is a target of the ongoing project for the next twelve months, in the long term we want to create an entirely new sensory category with a possible signature flavour profile. We could try to create a flavour that people recognise as coffee from, say, Food Brewer, a common base and core with an individual, proprietary top note. I wrote a book chapter on the flavour pyramid, together with Imre Blank and Stefan Palzers, in 2007.
Second, energy consumption. The realisation that cell-grown coffee, first ground as green coffee and then roasted, versus traditional coffee, first roasted as whole beans and then ground, leads to an overall tenfold lower energy consumption during roasting. This is because of smaller particle size, shorter roasting time, slightly lower temperature, and drier coffee particles. Even if roasting accounts for only about five percent of the total carbon footprint along the whole value chain, it remains a factor in reducing energy consumption. With expected higher and more volatile energy costs in the future, the more stable and predictable costs of cell-grown coffee become an advantage.
Third, technology. Coffee is traditionally roasted as whole beans to make them brittle and easy to grind, after which the roasted beans are ground. But after reviewing the literature on roasting, I believe flavour formation during roasting is under-researched, and I expect science will strongly improve roasting technology. While the image of a “pressurized micro-reactor” remains correct, roasting technology can be modified and adapted for ground green coffee, for example, by adding fat during roasting or using a coarse grind. Research on defects by the ZHAW, sponsored by the SCA, also shows that broken beans have a smaller sensory impact than previously believed.
Fourth, mimicking the sensory profile of traditional coffee. For an expert, the intensity of a “god shot” espresso can only be reached by roasting intact beans. But here comes the but: the sensory profile of roasted ground coffee depends mainly on three parameters: grind size (the coarser the grind, the closer the sensory profile to whole-bean roasting; larger than 700 micrometres is ideal), freshness, and addition of fat during roasting to selectively capture fat-soluble coffee flavour compounds.
Fifth, creating novel sensory profiles. Cell-grown coffee is authentic coffee. This gives it the freedom to taste outside the traditional framework of an espresso. In recent years, we have come to accept and even love the flavour profiles of fermented coffee, fruity and sweet, notes that we would not have recognised as coffee fifteen years ago. Since cell-grown coffee is authentic, we could and should be free to create entirely new flavour profiles. Be creative. But cell-grown coffee will also be able to reproduce traditional espresso, and I hope soon at a stable and good price. One additional trend I see is the transition from espresso to other cup formats, such as filter coffee. Soon, the benchmark may shift from traditional espresso to filter coffee.
In conclusion, cultured coffee has the structure of ground green coffee and indeed lacks the structure of a tree-grown whole bean as a “pressurized micro-reactor” for roasting and flavour formation. The whole-bean structure is important but probably not absolutely necessary for coffee flavour development. There are potential structural workarounds, such as pressing the cell-grown powder into a bean-like structure to use existing roasting equipment, a “plug-and-play” solution; grinding or growing coarse; or adding some fat during roasting to catch and encapsulate fat-soluble flavour compounds. There are also potentially new roasting technologies that can add intensity.
“Cell-grown coffee is authentic coffee. This gives it the freedom to taste outside the traditional framework of an espresso… we should be free to create entirely new flavour profiles.”
For the moment, the intensity of coffee prepared with cell-grown coffee is less than fifty percent of good traditional coffee. Still, we first want to mimic traditional coffee, which I assume will be successful within twelve months. Once achieved, cell-cultured coffee has the freedom to chase an entirely new sensory category, composed of base, core, and top note. We are already accepting and partly loving coffee with novel flavour notes that did not previously belong to the flavour world of coffee, such as strongly fermented coffee or very lightly roasted coffee, as long as it is coffee. So I assume the current “flavour gap” is a temporary hurdle.
There is an ongoing larger science project, one million Swiss francs, between Food Brewer AG and the Coffee Excellence Centre of the ZHAW, largely financed by InnoSuisse, on flavour enhancement, matching the profile to traditional coffee, scaling to larger production volumes, and a comparative life cycle assessment of cell-grown versus traditional coffee. The research in this collaboration aims to mimic the pressurised micro-reactor and close the existing gap, and multiple strategies are being explored. Furthermore, cell-cultured coffee contains most of the coffee-specific precursors and volatiles, which can be tasted in the cup. Missing or low levels of precursors, such as chlorogenic acids due to structural differences, can be boosted by modifications during roasting: addition of fat, coarser grind, post-processing, and new roasting technologies.
Disruption and the Global Value Chain
The industry is watching Food Brewer AG and its recent funding rounds very closely. As this technology moves from the lab to the shelf, how do you see the pricing architecture evolving? Will lab-grown coffee debut as a premium sustainability play, or is it positioned as a high-volume solution to stabilize a volatile commodities market?
There is a brewing concern about the “de-skilling” of the coffee origin. If we shift production to bioreactors in Zurich or Singapore, what happens to the socio-economic fabric of the Coffee Belt? Can this technology coexist with smallholder farmers, or are we looking at a future where the Global North produces its own supply?
Concerning Food Brewer AG, this company has in opinion the most advanced in cell-cultured products. They already produce very good cell-cultured chocolate in large volumes and will soon also produce good cell-cultured coffee in larger quantities. Food Brewer’s ambition is to offer a price-competitive cell-cultured coffee. Their foremost aim is to be a reliable addition to conventionally farmed coffee, both in terms of pricing and volume. At the same time, Food Brewer wants to reduce the dependence of companies on farm-grown coffee.
Initially, Food Brewer will likely price cell-cultured cocoa above commodity prices while scaling up. The same will be true for coffee. But I expect the bulk of cell-cultured coffee production will soon be for mainstream quality products, priced equally to or even lower than traditional mainstream coffee. In the future, Food Brewer does not exclude positioning selected varieties as premium specialty coffee.
In conclusion, Food Brewer’s target is to close the gap between demand and supply, and to stabilise the price of coffee in the commodities market. After an initial premium positioning, and as volume increases, the price will decrease and become equal to or lower than farm-grown commodity coffee. But if the price of traditional coffee continues to rise, cell-grown coffee could take a larger share of the coffee market than simply closing the gap.
“The low-skilled and price-sensitive commodity coffee market will probably shift partly to cell-grown coffee. Food Brewer will then complement traditional coffee farming.”
Now, to the question of de-skilling and the socio-economic fabric of the Coffee Belt. In my opinion, these are not the same thing. I expect farm-grown coffee production will shift in the future towards higher-priced and highly skilled high-quality coffee. Traditional high-quality coffee farming and the skills related to it are essential for the world’s coffee supply. These traditions and the know-how, especially in post-harvest treatment and fermentation for flavour development, are also guiding how cell-cultured coffee is being developed. In contrast, the low-skilled and price-sensitive commodity coffee market will probably shift partly to cell-grown coffee. Food Brewer will then complement traditional coffee farming.
The Transparency and Health Factor
One of the most striking findings in your research was the sharp decline in caffeine and chlorogenic acids in cultured cells. Beyond the buzz, these compounds are tied to the health benefits consumers associate with coffee. In your view, will “cellular coffee” ever be able to claim the same nutraceutical profile as a farm-grown bean?
While cell-cultured coffee is marketed as “deforestation-free,” has there been a rigorous Life Cycle Assessment comparing the energy footprint of massive bioreactors against traditional, carbon-sequestering agroforestry?
I think and hope that cell-cultured coffee will be able to claim a similar nutraceutical reputation and profile as a farm-grown bean. Perhaps even better. For the moment, caffeine and chlorogenic acids are indeed lower in cultured coffee. But in principle, secondary metabolites like caffeine and chlorogenic acids can be increased; this remains to be shown and done. Lower caffeine and chlorogenic acids could also be seen as a health advantage. Indeed, we see health trends moving towards caffeine-free or low-caffeine coffee consumption. So cell-grown coffee also has properties that could position it as “healthy coffee.”
Cell-cultured coffee from Food Brewer contains caffeine in the culture broth, which could, if needed, be purified and added post-cultivation.
As for life cycle assessments: LCAs on plant cell-based production have shown the potential to reduce water usage, footprint, and global warming by nearly ninety percent. Part of the InnoSuisse project is to challenge and specify this number.
Regulatory Hurdles and Market Adoption
We are seeing regulatory movement in Singapore and the European Union, but the “consumer ick factor” remains a hurdle for many biotech foods. How do you plan to bridge the narrative gap? Do you see hybrid blends, mixing traditional beans with lab-grown biomass, as the necessary “Trojan Horse” for mass-market acceptance?
As someone who has shaped coffee science for over three decades, how do you define “Coffee” today? Does the definition lie in the DNA of the plant, or in the traditional ritual of the harvest?
Transparency is key to winning consumer acceptance. It is essential to involve consumers and explain that the technology reproduces what nature does. Cell-cultured coffee does not use any gene manipulation. It simply takes cells from coffee plants and forms them directly into ground green coffee.
In fact, it is a form of “more efficient farming,” and that explains the lower life cycle assessment. In traditional farming, coffee cells are taken from a tree, go from fields to greenhouses to the tree itself. They are harvested, processed, and transported over large distances before roasting, grinding, and extraction. Traditional coffee also uses a great deal of water. In cell-cultured coffee, we go directly to the tree, take cells, culture them in reactors, and form ground green coffee directly. It then has to be dried, roasted, and extracted.
“Cell-cultured coffee does not use any gene manipulation. It simply takes cells from coffee plants and forms them directly into ground green coffee. It is a form of more efficient farming.”
Hybrid blended products are one possibility for familiarising consumers with cell-cultured coffee, again, provided the hybrid nature of the product is transparently communicated. For some companies, hybrid blends could be the ultimate solution, allowing them to sell more of their products without ever moving to pure cell-grown coffee. In that case, cell-grown is not just a “Trojan horse”; it is the ultimate goal.
As for how I define coffee today: for me, the smell and taste are crucial. But other factors are very important to people as well: the mental and physical energy it provides, the health it promotes, and its role as a social facilitator. I believe that for most consumers, the experience is the most important factor, once they begin to trust the new food. They already accept artificial vanilla.
The Road Ahead
With commercialization targets set for late 2027, what is the single biggest “make or break” factor for this project over the next 18 months? Is it the science of the roast, or the economics of the bioreactor?
Looking ahead to 2050, will the “Specialty Coffee” of the future be defined by a specific terroir in Ethiopia, or by a specific bio-recipe developed in a lab?
The legal hurdle. Cell-grown coffee must become legally accepted in large markets. From a toxicological point of view, cell-grown products have been tested in research for many years; they are becoming good and are non-toxic. But the legal hurdle remains. How long it will take is difficult to predict. I hope about one year.
The second factor is successful scaling to achieve attractive unit economics, price. That is the single biggest “make or break” factor.
The third factor is industry transparency together with consumer acceptance. Some foods have already shown the way: chocolate, vanilla, and others.
Looking ahead to 2050: in my view, both will coexist. Cell-based and farm-grown coffee will coexist, with cellular technology always trying to learn from and be inspired by nature. The beauty of cell-grown coffee technology is the possibility of making rare varieties more accessible, since these varieties have very little success in nature due to low yields or weak immune systems. The technology has shown that these varieties often thrive in bioreactors. Furthermore, this could help conserve rare species for future generations.
“My prediction for 2050: farm-grown coffee will continue to largely define the future… but cell-grown coffee will be accepted, particularly in the mainstream market.”
Cell-cultured coffee technology will also probably allow variation according to consumer needs: variable acidity, variable caffeine content, low bitterness, higher sweetness, higher cocoa notes, and so on.
My prediction for 2050: farm-grown coffee will continue to largely define the future. Cell-grown coffee will be accepted by the population, particularly in the mainstream market. But there will also be spots in the specialty coffee market carved out by cell-grown production, depending on the price of farm-grown coffee. The advanced skills needed to produce cell-grown coffee will be established. Cell-grown coffee will allow production where coffee is drunk, with short transportation, in the quality and quantity needed, without sensory variation and with far fewer by products.
