Hide table of contents

This is a summary of a research report that investigates costs of production at large Black Soldier Fly Larvae (BSFL) producers, and explores whether they can displace fishmeal as a feed ingredient at scale. You can request access to the full report here.

Key points

  • Over $1 billion has been invested into Black Soldier Fly Larvae (BSFL) farming since 2014.
  • BSFL producers have ambitions to displace fishmeal as a feed ingredient. If successful, this could unlock growth in aquaculture.
  • We investigated costs of production at four of the largest BSFL producers to better understand the prospects of them making major inroads into aquaculture feed.
  • We found production costs at these firms will most likely be too high to displace fishmeal.
  • We anticipate a smaller BSFL sector focused on high-value market segments rather than bulk feed commodities.
  • Our analysis has lots of caveats, including generalizability across different business models and geographies. Read the long summary or full report for more detail.

Executive summary

  • Significant investment has flowed into black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) farming, where producers have ambitions to create feed ingredients for aquaculture (aquafeed).
    • Since 2014, over $1 billion has been invested into black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) farming.
    • At present, BSFL producers mainly sell ingredients to the premium pet food market.
    • But they have ambitions to position BSFL ingredients as a more sustainable alternative to fishmeal, an important feed commodity for farmed fish and shrimp.
    • If these ambitions are realized, it could unlock growth in the aquaculture sector.
  • But the prospects of BSFL producers displacing fishmeal in aquafeed remain uncertain.
  • To shed light on this issue, we estimated production costs across four of the largest BSFL producers (by funds raised).
  • We estimate that production costs for these BSFL producers will be too high to meaningfully displace fishmeal.
    • Our research suggests BSFL producers would need to keep production costs below $1,600 per tonne of dried insects in order to displace fishmeal at a meaningful scale.
    • For a hypothetical ‘average producer’, we estimated median production costs to be double this: around $3.7K per metric tonne of dried insects (see Chart 1).
    • We also estimated production costs at six current and planned production facilities, where median costs ranged from $2.3K to $6.1K per tonne.
    • Notably, none of the evaluated facilities demonstrated a 90% subjective confidence interval for production costs that undercut the $1,600 per tonne threshold.
  • It’s also unclear whether BSFL producers will be able to get production costs as low as our estimates.
    • Our cost estimates above are conditional on facilities operating at full capacity.
    • But given deteriorating investor sentiment and a constrained funding outlook, it remains an open question whether existing facilities will ever reach full capacity.
    • It is also uncertain whether firms will be able to raise sufficient capital to complete construction at sites that have been announced but are not yet in operation.
  • We anticipate a smaller, less sustainable BSFL sector focused on high-value market segments.  The results of this analysis have led us to believe that the BSFL sector will:
    • end up much smaller by 2030 than many previous industry forecasts;
    • focus on high-value applications rather than compete with feed commodities on price;
    • struggle to live up to sustainability claims predicated on displacing fishmeal.
  • Our analysis has lots of caveats and uncertainties
    • Our cost estimates are based on centralized, mass-production business models in Europe and North America, which rely heavily on grain-based substrates.
    • Findings may not be universally generalizable across different business models or geographic contexts.
  • Further details are available in the full report.
    • The full report contains detailed information on the calculation methodology and facility-specific cost estimates.
    • To request access to the full report, please fill out this form.

Chart 1 – Estimated production cost ‘by type of cost’ at a hypothetical ‘average facility’

Acknowledgments

This post is a project of Rethink Priorities—a think tank dedicated to informing decisions made by high-impact organizations and funders across various cause areas. The lead author is Sagar Shah, and this summary reflects his views. This report draws heavily on research conducted by Michael St. Jules during his time at Rethink Priorities, though it doesn’t necessarily reflect his latest thinking. Thanks to Ben Stevenson for reviewing the report and checking calculations, and Ula Zarosa and Shaan Shaikh for assistance with copyediting.  Header image photo credit: Jaka Suryanta.

                                                Request access to the full report

2

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

There are no more recommendations left.

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
Curated and popular this week
 · 12h ago · 1m read
 · 
At ACE, we are committed to ensuring that every donation is put to the best possible use. As part of this commitment, we are conducting an internal assessment of our programmatic work, and we would love to hear from you. We are seeking your input to better understand how familiar the farmed animal advocacy community is with our work, how people use our work, and the positive and negative effects our charity evaluations, recommendations, and grants have on organizations and individuals working in animal advocacy. Your feedback is incredibly important in helping us improve our work. The survey will take roughly 15 minutes, and your insights will directly shape our efforts moving forward. ACCESS THE SURVEY The survey will be open until June 15th, 2025. We appreciate your time and support! The ACE team.
Andie Hansen
 · 5d ago · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from the Effective Altruism Forum. Original link here. Co-written with a language model. TL;DR: Large language models like ChatGPT influence the choices of hundreds of millions of users — including when it comes to food. Yet in ambiguous cases (e.g. “Recommend me a quick dinner”), ChatGPT often defaults to factory-farmed meat dishes. This post argues that such defaults are not neutral and that OpenAI’s assistant could reduce enormous suffering by subtly favoring plant-based meals when no preference is stated. Drawing on behavioral science, AI alignment principles, and messaging research from Pax Fauna and the Sentience Institute, I suggest concrete steps OpenAI could take and invite readers to send feedback to OpenAI to shape the ethical defaults of future AI systems. ---------------------------------------- Factory farming likely causes more suffering than all human violence combined. This claim might seem extreme at first, but the numbers back it up. Over 80 billion land animals and up to 3 trillion aquatic animals are killed each year for food, most enduring severe suffering for weeks or months. Confinement, mutilation without pain relief, and deprivation of natural behaviors are common in standard industrial practices. For example: * Broiler chickens suffer from painful bone deformities and lameness due to unnatural growth rates. * Egg-laying hens are confined in cages so small they cannot spread their wings. * Fish are killed by asphyxiation, freezing, or live gutting — often without stunning. If we conservatively assume each of 50 billion land animals experiences just two months of intense suffering per year, that’s over 8 billion animal-years of suffering annually. This dwarfs even the cumulative human toll of organized violence throughout history (around 2 billion human-years of suffering in the 20th century, which is likely an overestimate). In terms of suffering intensity, duration, and sheer numbers, factory farming plausibly exceed
 · 2d ago · 1m read
 · 
Hi FAST! The ongoing egg crisis continues to challenge the foodservice industry with shortages and soaring prices—but smart, plant-based substitutions offer operators easy, sustainable solutions to supply chain volatility. Last month, Greener by Default hosted a webinar with three culinary leaders to share their tips, tricks, and practical takeaways for foodservice professionals looking to looking to make their menus more resilient and cost-effective through subtle, plant-based swaps, without compromising on taste or diner experience.  The insights and experiences shared by our three expert chefs were so incredibly helpful and action-oriented, we've distilled them down into three key strategies and published them on our blog, and created a highlight reel so as many foodservice professionals as possible can access the knowledge that was shared during the session.  Please feel free to read, watch, and share these links with anyone you think could benefit from this discussion around navigating the egg crisis: Blog post: https://www.greenerbydefault.com/blog/navigating-egg-crisis-recap  Highlight reel:
 · 4d ago · 1m read
 · 
Hello everyone! We’re pleased to announce our first cage-free commitment from a supermarket: Franco Supermercado, a retailer with four stores in Arequipa and one in Lima, has committed to selling only 100% cage-free eggs by the end of 2026. Commitment link: You can see the publication of the commitment in this LINK. Scale: National (Perú) Timeline:  Compromiso Verde first established contact during a visit to Arequipa in April 2023. We followed up during a second trip in September 2024, where we arranged an in-person meeting. After several months without a response, we successfully reengaged the company by sending a corporate gift for Friendship Day. This gesture led to two additional face-to-face meetings in February 2025, during which we also explored how Compromiso Verde could support them in developing a cage-free egg farm through our PROBA certification program for local producers. ARBA began conversations with Franco Supermercado in November 2024 through emails, WhatsApp messages, and phone calls. Who: Compromiso Verde and ARBA Unsuccessful Tactics: None. Successful Tactics: In-person meetings at the company’s offices in Lima and Arequipa, delivered a corporate gift, and offered support for cage-free egg production through the PROBA program. Scalability: This commitment is significant as it comes from a supermarket chain with locations in Peru's two largest cities. Follow Up: We will stay in touch to request reports and validate compliance with the commitment.  Thank you!