Astronauts on the International Space Station generate their share of garbage, filling up cargo ships that then deorbit and burn up in the atmosphere. Now Sierra Space has won a contract to build a trash compactor for the space station. The device will compact space trash by 75% in volume and allow water and other gases to be extracted for reclamation. The resulting garbage blocks are easily stored and could even be used as radiation shielding on long missions.
Called the Trash Compaction and Processing System (TCPS), plans are to test it aboard the International Space Station in late 2026.
Sierra Space said this technology could be critical for the success of future space exploration — such as long-duration crewed missions to the Moon and Mars — to handle waste management, stowage, and water reclamation.
“Long-term space travel requires the efficient use of every ounce of material and every piece of equipment. Every decision made on a spacecraft can have far-reaching consequences, and waste management becomes a matter of survival and mission integrity in the vacuum of space,” said Sierra Space CEO, Tom Vice, in a press release. “We’re addressing this challenge through technological innovation and commitment to sustainability in every facet of space operations. Efficient, sustainable, and innovative waste disposal is essential for the success of crewed space exploration.”
A sample trash tile, compressed to less than one-eighth of the original trash volume, was produced by the Heat Melt Compactor. Credit: NASA.NASA said that currently aboard the International Space Station (ISS), common trash such as food packaging, clothing, and wipes are separated into wet and dry trash bags; these bags are stored temporarily before being packed into a spent resupply vehicle, such as the Russian Progress ship or Northrup Grumman’s Cygnus vehicle. When full, these ships undock and burn up during atmospheric re-entry, taking all the trash with it.
However, for missions further out into space trash will have to be managed and disposed of by other methods, such as jettisoning the trash into space – which doesn’t sound like a very eco-friendly idea. Additionally, wet trash contains components that may not be storable for long periods between jettisoning events without endangering the crew.
Plus, there’s currently no way for any water to be reclaimed from the “wet” waste. The TCPS should be able to recover nearly all the water from the trash for future use.
TCPS is a stand-alone system and only requires access to power, data, and air-cooling interfaces. It is being designed as simple to use.
Sierra Space said the device includes an innovative Catalytic Oxidizer (CatOx) “that processes volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other gaseous byproducts to maintain a safe and sterile environment in space habitats.” Heat and pressure compacts astronaut trash into solid square tiles that compress to less than one-eighth of the original trash volume. The tiles are easy to store, safe to handle, and have the added — and potentially very important — benefit of providing additional radiation protection.
Sierra Space was originally awarded a contract in 2023, and in January 2024 they completed the initial design and review phase, which was presented to NASA for review. Sierra Space is now finalizing the fabrication, integration, and checkout of the TCPS Ground Unit, which will be used for ground testing in ongoing system evaluations. Based on the success of their design, Sierra Space was now awarded a new contract to build a Flight Unit that will be launched and tested in orbit aboard the space station.
NASA said that once tested on the ISS, the TCPS can be used for exploration missions wherever common spacecraft trash is generated and needs to be managed.
The post A Trash Compactor is Going to the Space Station appeared first on Universe Today.
The most amazing thing about light is that it takes time to travel through space. Because of that one simple fact, when we look up at the Universe we see not a snapshot but a history. The photons we capture with our telescopes tell us about their journey. This is particularly true when gravity comes into play, since gravity bends and distorts the path of light. In a recent study, a team shows us how we might use this fact to better study black holes.
Near a black hole, our intuition about the behavior of light breaks down. For example, if we imagine a flash of light in empty space, we understand that the light from that flash expands outward in all directions, like the ripples on a pond. If we observe that flash from far away, we know the light has traveled in a straight line to reach us. This is not true near a black hole.
The gravity of a black hole is so intense that light never travels in a straight line. If there is a flash near a black hole, some of the light will travel directly to us, but some of the light will travel away from us, only to be gravitationally swept around the backside of the black hole to head in our direction. Some light will make a full loop around the black hole before reaching is. Or two loops, or three. With each path, the light travels a different distance to reach us, and therefore reaches us at a different time. Rather than observing a single flash, we wound see echoes of the flash for each journey.
In principle, since each echo is from a different path, the timing of these echoes would allow us to map the region around a black hole more clearly. The echoes would tell us not just the black hole’s mass and rotation; they would also allow us to test the limits of general relativity. The only problem is that with current observations, the echoes wash together in the data. We can’t distinguish different echoes.
This is where this new study comes in. The team propose observing a black hole with two telescopes, one on Earth and one in space. Each telescope would have a slightly different view of the black hole. Through long baseline interferometry the two sets of data could be correlated to distinguish the echoes. In their work the team ran tens of thousands of simulations of light echoes from a supermassive black hole similar to the one in the M87 galaxy. They demonstrated that interferometry could be used to find correlated light echoes.
It would be a challenge to build such an interferometer, but it would be well within our engineering capabilities. Perhaps in the future, we will be able to observe echoes of light to explore black holes and some of the deepest mysteries of gravity.
Reference: Wong, George N., et al. “Measuring Black Hole Light Echoes with Very Long Baseline Interferometry.” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 975.2 (2024): L40.
The post Using Light Echoes to Find Black Holes appeared first on Universe Today.
Placing a mass driver on the Moon has long been a dream of space exploration enthusiasts. It would open up so many possibilities for the exploration of our solar system and the possibility of actually living in space. Gerard O’Neill, in his work on the gigantic cylinders that now bear his name, mentioned using a lunar mass driver as the source of the material to build them. So far, we have yet to see such an engineering wonder in the real world, but as more research is done on the topic, more and more feasible paths seem to be opening up to its potential implementation.
One recent contribution to that effort is a study by Pekka Janhunen of the Finnish Meteorological Institute and Aurora Propulsion Technologies, a maker of space-based propulsion systems. He details how we can use quirks of lunar gravity to use a mass driver to send passive loads to lunar orbit, where they can then be picked up with active, high-efficiency systems and sent elsewhere in the solar system for processing.
Anomalies in the Moon’s gravitational field have been known for some time. Typically, mission planners view them as a nuisance to be avoided, as they can cause satellite orbits to degrade more quickly than expected by nice, simple models. However, according to Dr. Janhunen, they could also be a help rather than a hindrance.
Mass drivers have been popular in science fiction for some time.Typical models of using lunar mass drivers focus on active or passive payloads sent into lunar orbit. Active payloads require some onboard propulsion system to get them to where they are going. Therefore, these payloads require more active technology and some form of propellant, which diminishes the total amount available for use elsewhere in the solar system.
On the other hand, passive payloads will typically end up in one of two scenarios. Either they make one lunar orbit in about one day and then deorbit back to the lunar surface, or they end up in a highly randomized orbit and essentially end up as lunar space junk. Neither of those solutions would be sustainable for significant mass movement off the lunar surface.
Dr. Janhunen may have found a solution, though. He studied the known lunar gravitational anomalies found by GRAIL. This satellite mapped the Moon’s gravity in great detail and found several places on the lunar surface where a mass driver could potentially launch a passive payload into an orbit that would last up to nine days. These places are along the sides of mountains, and three of them are on the side of the lunar surface facing Earth. Importantly, all of them have their gravitational quirks.
The Artemis missions might be our best chance in the coming decades to build a mass driver on the Moon – Fraser discusses their details here.More time in orbit would mean more time for an active tug to grab hold of the passive lunar payload and take it to a processing station, such as a space station at the L5 point between Earth and the Moon. This active tug could be reusable, have a highly efficient electrical propulsion system developed and built on Earth, and only need to be launched once.
All that would be required for the system to work would be a mass driver that could accelerate a payload up to a lunar orbital velocity of about 1.7 km/s. That is well within our capabilities to build with existing technologies, but it would require a massive engineering effort far beyond anything we have built-in space so far. However, every study that shows a potential increased benefit or lowered cost to eventually exploiting the resources of our nearest neighbor to expand our reach into the solar system takes us one step closer to making that a reality.
Learn More:
P Janhunen – Launching mass from the Moon helped by lunar gravity anomalies
UT – Moonbase by 2022 For $10 Billion, Says NASA
UT – NASA Wants to Move Heavy Cargo on the Moon
NSS – L5 News: Mass Driver Update
Lead Image:
DALL-E illustration of a lunar electromagnetic launcher
The post Launching Mass From the Moon Helped by Lunar Gravity Anomalies appeared first on Universe Today.
Massive stars about eight times more massive than the Sun explode as supernovae at the end of their lives. The explosions, which leave behind a black hole or a neutron star, are so energetic they can outshine their host galaxies for months. However, astronomers appear to have spotted a massive star that skipped the explosion and turned directly into a black hole.
Stars are balancing acts between the outward force of fusion and the inward force of their own gravity. When a massive star enters its last evolutionary stages, it begins to run out of hydrogen, and its fusion weakens. The outward force from its fusion can no longer counteract the star’s powerful gravity, and the star collapses in on itself. The result is a supernova explosion, a calamitous event that destroys the star and leaves behind a black hole or a neutron star.
However, it appears that sometimes these stars fail to explode as supernovae and instead turn directly into black holes.
New research shows how one massive, hydrogen-depleted supergiant star in the Andromeda galaxy (M31) failed to detonate as a supernova. The research is “The disappearance of a massive star marking the birth of a black hole in M31.” The lead author is Kishalay De, a postdoctoral scholar at the Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research at MIT.
These types of supernovae are called core-collapse supernovae, also known as Type II. They’re relatively rare, with one occurring about every one hundred years in the Milky Way. Scientists are interested in supernovae because they are responsible for creating many of the heavy elements, and their shock waves can trigger star formation. They also create cosmic rays that can reach Earth.
This new research shows that we may not understand supernovae as well as we thought.
Artist’s impression of a Type II supernova explosion. These supernovae explode when a massive star nears the end of its life and leaves behind either a black hole or a neutron star. But sometimes, the supernova fails to explode and collapses directly into a black hole. Image Credit: ESOThe star in question is named M31-2014-DS1. Astronomers noticed it brightening in mid-infrared (MIR) in 2014. For one thousand days, its luminosity was constant. Then, for another thousand days between 2016 and 2019, it faded dramatically. It’s a variable star, but that can’t explain these fluctuations. In 2023, it was undetected in deep optical and near-IR (NIR) imaging observations.
The researchers say that the star was born with an initial mass of about 20 stellar masses and reached its terminal nuclear-burning phase with about 6.7 stellar masses. Their observations suggest that the star is surrounded by a recently ejected dust shell, in accordance with a supernova explosion, but there’s no evidence of an optical outburst.
“The dramatic and sustained fading of M31-2014-DS1 is exceptional in the landscape of variability in massive, evolved stars,” the authors write. “The sudden decline of luminosity in M31-2014-DS1 points to the cessation of nuclear burning together with a subsequent shock that fails to overcome the infalling material.” A supernova explosion is so powerful that it completely overcomes infalling material.
“Lacking any evidence for a luminous outburst at such proximity, the observations of M31-2014-DS1 bespeak signatures of a ‘failed’ SN that leads to the collapse of the stellar core,” the authors explain.
What could make a star fail to explode as a supernova, even if it’s the right mass to explode?
Supernovae are complex events. The density inside a collapsing core is so extreme that electrons are forced to combine with protons, creating both neutrons and neutrinos. This process is called neutronization, and it creates a powerful burst of neutrinos that carries about 10% of the star’s rest mass energy. The outburst is called a neutrino shock.
Neutrinos get their name from the fact that they’re electrically neutral and seldom interact with regular matter. Every second, about 400 billion neutrinos from our Sun pass right through every person on Earth. But in a dense stellar core, the neutrino density is so extreme that some of them deposit their energy into the surrounding stellar material. This heats the material, which generates a shock wave.
The neutrino shock always stalls, but sometimes it revives. When it revives, it drives an explosion and expels the outer layer of the supernova. If it’s not revived, the shock wave fails, and the star collapses and forms a black hole.
This image illustrates how the neutrino shock wave can stall, leading to a black hole without a supernova explosion. A shows the initial shock wave with cyan lines representing neutrinos being emitted and the red circle representing the shock wave propagating outward. B shows the neutrino shock stalling, with white arrows representing infalling matter. The outer layers fall inward, and the neutrino heating isn’t powerful enough to revive the shock. C shows the failed shock dissipating as a dotted red line and the stronger white arrows represent the collapse accelerating. The outer layers are falling in rapidly, and the core is becoming more compact. D shows the black hole forming, with the blue circle representing the event horizon and the remaining material forming an accretion disk. (Credit: Original illustration created for this article.)In M31-2014-DS1, the neutrino shock was not revived. The researchers were able to constrain the amount of material ejected by the star, and it was far below what a supernovae would eject. “These constraints imply that the majority of stellar material (?5 solar masses) collapsed into the core, exceeding the maximum mass of a neutron star (NS) and forming a BH,” they conclude. About 98% of the star’s mass collapsed and created a black hole with about 6.5 solar masses.
M31-2014-DS1 isn’t the only failed supernova, or candidate failed supernova, that astronomers have found. They’re difficult to spot because they’re characterized by what doesn’t happen rather than what does. A supernova is hard to miss because it’s so bright and appears in the sky suddenly. Ancient astronomers recorded several of them.
In 2009, astronomers discovered the only other confirmed failed supernova. It was a supergiant red star in NGC 6946, the “Fireworks Galaxy.” It’s named N6946-BH1 and has about 25 solar masses. After disappearing from view, it left only a faint infrared glow. In 2009, its luminosity increased to a million solar luminosities, but by 2015, it had disappeared in optical light.
A survey with the Large Binocular Telescope monitored 27 nearby galaxies, looking for disappearing massive stars. The results suggest that between 20% and 30% of massive stars can end their lives as failed supernovae. However, M31-2014-DS1 and N6946-BH1 are the only confirmed observations.
The post A Star Disappeared in Andromeda, Replaced by a Black Hole appeared first on Universe Today.
About half a century ago, astronomers theorized that the Solar System is situated in a low-density hot gas environment. This hot gas emits soft X-rays that displace the dust in the local interstellar medium (ISM), creating what is known as the Local Hot Bubble (LHB). This theory arose to explain the ubiquitous soft X-ray background (below 0.2 keV) and the lack of dust in our cosmic neighborhood. This theory has faced some challenges over the years, including the discovery that solar wind and neutral atoms interact with the heliosphere, leading to similar emissions of soft X-rays.
Thanks to new research by an international team of scientists led by the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics (MPE), we now have a 3D model of the hot gas in the Solar System’s neighborhood. Using data obtained by the eROSITA All-Sky Survey (eRASS1), they detected large-scale temperature differences in the LHBT that indicate that the LHB must exist, and both it and solar wind interaction contribute to the soft X-ray background. They also revealed an interstellar tunnel that could possibly link the LHB to a larger “superbubble.”
The research was led by Michael C. H. Yeung, a PhD student at the MPE who specializes in the study of high-energy astrophysics. He was joined by colleagues from the MPE, the INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, the University of Science and Technology of China, and the Dr. Karl Remeis Observatory. The paper that details their findings, “The SRG/eROSITA diffuse soft X-ray background,” was published on October 29th, 2024, by the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.
This image shows half of the X-ray sky projected onto a circle with the center of the Milky Way on the left and the galactic plane running horizontally. Credit ©: MPE/J. Sanders/eROSITA consortiumThe eROSITA telescope was launched in 2019 as part of the Russian–German Spektr-RG space observatory. It is the first X-ray observatory to observe the Universe beyond Earth’s geocorona, the outermost region of the Earth’s atmosphere (aka. the exosphere), to avoid contamination by the latter’s high-ultraviolet light. In addition, the eROSITA All-Sky Survey (eRASS1) was timed to coincide with the solar minimum, thus reducing contamination by solar wind charge exchanges.
For their study, the team combined data from the eRASS1 with data from eROSITA’s predecessor, the X-ray telescope ROSAT (short for Röntgensatellit). Also built by the MPE, this telescope complements the eROSITA spectra by detecting X-rays with energies lower than 0.2 keV. The team focused on the LHB located in the western Galactic hemisphere, dividing it into about 2000 regions and analyzing the spectra from each. Their analysis showed a clear temperature difference between the parts of the LHB oriented towards Galactic South (0.12 keV; 1.4 MK) and Galactic North (0.10 keV; 1.2 MK).
According to the authors, this difference could have been caused by supernova explosions that expanded and reheated the Galactic South portion of the LHB in the past few million years. Yeung explained in an MPE press release: “In other words, the eRASS1 data released to the public this year provides the cleanest view of the X-ray sky to date, making it the perfect instrument for studying the LHB.”
In addition to obtaining temperature data from the diffuse X-ray background spectra information, the combined data also provided a 3D structure of the hot gas. In a previous study, Yeung and his colleagues examined eRASS1 spectra data from almost all directions in the western Galactic hemisphere. They concluded that the density of the hot gas in the LHB is relatively uniform. Relying on this previous work, the team generated a new 3D model of the LHB from the measured intensity of X-ray emissions.
A 3D interactive view of the LHB and the solar neighborhood, Credit: MPEThis model shows that the LHB extends farther toward the Galactic poles than expected since the hot gas tends to follow the path of least resistance (away from the Galactic disc). Michael Freyberg, a core author of this work, was a part of the pioneering work in the ROSAT era three decades ago. As he explained:
“This is not surprising, as was already found by the ROSAT survey. What we didn’t know was the existence of an interstellar tunnel towards Centaurus, which carves a gap in the cooler interstellar medium (ISM). This region stands out in stark relief thanks to the much-improved sensitivity of eROSITA and a vastly different surveying strategy compared to ROSAT.”
These latest results suggest the Centaurus tunnel may be a local example of a wider hot ISM network sustained by supernovae and solar wind-ISM interaction across the Galaxy. While astronomers have theorized the existence of the Centaurus tunnel since the 1970s, it has remained difficult to prove until now. The team also compiled a list of known supernova remnants, superbubbles, and dust and used these to create a 3D model of the Solar System’s surroundings. The new model allows astronomers to better understand the key features in the representation.
These include the Canis Major tunnel, which may connect the LHB to the Gum Nebula (the red globe) or the long grey superbubble (GSH238+00+09). Dense molecular clouds, represented in orange, are shown near the surface of the LHB in the direction of the Galactic Center (GC). Recent work suggests these clouds are moving away from the Solar System and likely formed from the condensation of materials swept up during the early formation of the LHB. Said Gabriele Ponti, a co-author of this work:
“Another interesting fact is that the Sun must have entered the LHB a few million years ago, a short time compared to the age of the Sun. It is purely coincidental that the Sun seems to occupy a relatively central position in the LHB as we continuously move through the Milky Way.”
Further Reading: MPE, Astronomy & Astrophysics
The post eROSITA All-Sky Survey Takes the Local Hot Bubble’s Temperature appeared first on Universe Today.
In his new book Abortion in the Age of Unreason: A Doctor’s Account of Caring for Women Before and After Roe v. Wade, a nationally prominent doctor reports the daily challenges of offering and receiving abortion services in a volatile political and social atmosphere. In stories from the front lines–from protecting patients and staff from protesters’ attacks to the dangers to women of restricted access to abortion services, and the pertinent findings of his remote research in Latin America, Hern’s book is strikingly detailed just as it exposes the needs of women and the U.S. national interest. Dr. Hern–an abortion specialist, researcher, scholar, and highly visible public advocate – shows how abortion saves women’s lives given the many risks that arise during pregnancy, more than most people realize. He points to political and national solutions to reverse a reawakened crisis that now threatens democracy. Throughout the book, Dr. Hern shows how the current emergency was largely created by political actors who have exploited and distorted the abortion issue to increase and consolidate their power.
A vital component of women’s health care, the crisis over abortion is not new. Yet the reversal of Roe v. Wade and the steady accumulation of power by America’s right wing has put the issue at a level of urgency and national prominence not seen since the days before legalization. Women’s need for safe abortion services will continue as the struggle to secure their rights intensifies.
Warren M. Hern, M.D., is known to the public through his many appearances on CNN, Rachel Maddow/MSNBC, Sixty Minutes, and in the pages of The Atlantic magazine, The New York Times, Washington Post, and dozens more media. A scientist, Hern wrote about the need for safe abortion services before the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and was present at the first Supreme Court arguments. In his research and medical work, he pioneered since 1973 the modern safe practice of early and late abortion in his highly influential books and scholarship. A tireless national activist for women’s reproductive rights, he is an adjunct professor of anthropology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and holds a clinical appointment in obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Colorado medical center. He holds doctorates in medicine and epidemiology. His book is Abortion in the Age of Unreason: A Doctor’s Account of Caring for Women Before and After Roe v. Wade.
Shermer and Hern discuss:
Why women get abortions—2013 study “Understanding Why Women Seek Abortions in the US” (BMC Women’s Health Antonia Biggs, Heather Gould, Diana Greene Foster):
The top three reason categories cited in both studies were: 1) “Having a baby would dramatically change my life” (i.e., interfere with education, employment and ability to take care of existing children and other dependents) (74% in 2004 and 78% in 1987), 2) “I can’t afford a baby now” (e.g., unmarried, student, can’t afford childcare or basic needs) (73% in 2004 and 69% in 1987), and 3) “I don’t want to be a single mother or am having relationship problems” (48% in 2004 and 52% in 1987). A sizeable proportion of women in 2004 and 1987 also reported having completed their childbearing (38% and 28%), not being ready for a/another child (32% and 36%), and not wanting people to know they had sex or became pregnant (25% and 33%)
What about medical problems with the woman or the fetus? Lozier Institute 2024 study:
Worldwide (Guttmacher Institute):
Americans’ Self-ID on Abortion, 2024 (Gallup):
If you enjoy the podcast, please show your support by making a $5 or $10 monthly donation.
The dividing line between stars and planets is that stars have enough mass to fuse hydrogen into helium to produce their own light, while planets aren’t massive enough to produce core fusion. It’s generally a good way to divide them, except for brown dwarfs. These are bodies with a mass of about 15–80 Jupiters, so they are large enough to fuse deuterium but can’t generate helium. Another way to distinguish planets and stars is how they form. Stars form by the gravitational collapse of gas and dust within a molecular cloud, which allows them to gather mass on a short cosmic timescale. Planets, on the other hand, form by the gradual accumulation of gas and dust within the accretion disk of a young star. But again, that line becomes fuzzy for brown dwarfs.
The problem arises in that, if brown dwarfs form within a molecular cloud like stars, they aren’t massive enough to form quickly. If a cloud of gas and dust has enough mass to collapse under its own weight, it has enough mass to form a full star. But if brown dwarfs form like planets, they would have to accumulate mass incredibly quickly. Simulations of planet formation show it is difficult for a planet to form with a mass of more than a few Jupiters. So what gives? The answer may lie in what are known as Jupiter-mass binary objects, or JuMBOs.
The Orion nebula is a stellar nursery. Credit: NASA, ESA, M. RobbertoJuMBOs are binary objects where each component has a mass between 0.7 and 13 Jupiter masses. If they form like planets, they should be extremely rare, and if they form like binary stars, they should have more mass. Recent observations by the JWST of the Orion nebula cluster discovered 540 free-floating Jupiter mass objects, so-called rogue planets. This was surprising in and of itself, but more surprising was the fact that 42 of them were JuMBOs. Far from being rare, they make up nearly 8% of these rogue objects. So how do they form?
One clue lies in their orbital separation. The components of JuMBOs are most commonly separated by a distance of 28–384 AU. This is similar to that of binary stars with components around the mass of the Sun, which typically are in a range of 50–300 AU. Binary stars are extremely common. More common than single stars like the Sun. The environment of stellar nurseries, such as the Orion nebula, is also extremely intense. Massive stars that form first can blast nearby regions with ionizing radiation. Given how common JuMBOs are, it is likely they began as binary stars, only to have much of their masses blasted away by photo-erosion. Rather than being binary planets, they are the failed remnants of binary stars.
This could also explain why so many rogue planets have super-Jupiter masses. The same intense light that would cause photo-erosion would also tend to push them out of star systems.
Reference: Diamond, Jessica L., and Richard J. Parker. “Formation of Jupiter-Mass Binary Objects through photoerosion of fragmenting cores.” The Astrophysical Journal 975.2 (2024): 204.
The post An Explanation for Rogue Planets. They Were Eroded Down by Hot Stars appeared first on Universe Today.
In 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations published a report titled Edible Insects: Future Prospects of Insects as Food and Feed.1 Despite being downloaded over seven million times and receiving widespread publicity, the report did not generate much controversy. This was likely because the consumption of insects was seen as an unfamiliar practice associated with developing countries in the tropics, and the idea of incorporating bugs into Western diets was just not taken seriously. However, that perception has been changing recently. Several edible insect products have been declared safe by international and national food safety organizations in Western countries. In response, critical coverage has emerged on social media, claiming that edible insects pose a threat to public health and even to national identities.
Here are a few examples of how some politicians and journalists reacted to the legalization of insects as food:
This aversion has been connected to conspiratorial claims about a shadowy global elite that aims to control the world’s population. The World Economic Forum (Davos) has been singled out, with claims that elites such as heads of state and business leaders want people to eat bugs instead of meat to combat food insecurity.7
The main narratives surrounding these claims include:
Is there any truth to such allegations? These claims are largely false. Since 2021, several insect products have been approved in the European Union as safe for human consumption,9 but there is no mandate forcing citizens to eat them. The safety of these products is ensured through rigorous testing by food safety organizations. Additionally, the move towards including insects in the food supply is motivated by concerns about sustainability and food security, rather than by sanctions against Russia. So, why is there such significant resistance to eating insects?
Why are we reluctant to accept insects as food?The numerous statements by politicians and journalists quoted above, and similar sentiments shared by the public, are primarily rooted10 in two underlying reasons:
Although these are closely related, disgust is the more significant barrier to acceptance of insect consumption. Food neophobia can be mitigated with information about the food item’s nutritional value, safety, and sustainability. Disgust is harder to overcome as it is based on emotion rather than rationality.11 A related reason why insects are not commonly eaten in the Western world is their association with dirt, death, disease, and contamination.
Food Safety and Nutritional ValueThe assumption by Westerners that insects cannot be eaten and are merely survival food in tropical countries is more of a bias than a fact. In tropical regions, over 1,500 insect species are consumed because the local population considers them nutritious, tasty, and easy to procure, rather than solely due to low living standards. In North America and Europe, insects have not been a customary food item primarily because they are not available in sufficient quantities to be considered food. In contrast, in tropical regions, larger insects are available year-round and can be easily harvested due to their tendency to occur in clumped distributions. Insects do occasionally appear in large numbers in temperate zones—for example, in the U.S., the 2024 simultaneous emergence of 13- and 17-year cycle cicadas, which happens only once every 221 years, sparked interest in using them as food.12 Historically, until the mid-1900s insects such as cockchafers were both a common pest and a delicacy in France and Germany.13
To make edible insects available in Western markets, they need to be reared under controlled conditions on farms. For human consumption, species such as mealworms, crickets, and locusts are used, while fly species such as the black soldier fly are used for animal feed because they can be reared on various organic side streams. And there’s an additional benefit: with 30 percent of food and agricultural produce going to waste,14 using these fly species could contribute to a self-sustaining economy. The market for edible insects as animal feed is expected to grow from about $7 billion in 2023 to $116 billion by 2033.15 This growth is being driven by the increasing prices for conventional feed ingredients such as fishmeal and soybean meal, whose sustainability is in question.16 Most insect-based ingredients are used as feed for animals (pets, fish, chickens, and pigs), while insects for human consumption remain a niche market, expected to grow from $650 million in 2023 to over $1 billion by 2033.17
Conspiracy TheoriesConspiracy theories often highlight the perceived food safety risks associated with consuming insects. The European Union requires that any insect intended for food first must be screened by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). This rigorous process takes considerable time and thoroughly evaluates all aspects of food safety. While several insect products have been approved, they carry a warning regarding allergies. Individuals allergic to seafood or house dust mites should be cautious due to potential cross-reactivity, as these groups are taxonomically similar to insects. Consequently, this risk must be shown on the product label, along with a clear statement that the product contains insects.
Conspiracy theories also mention the alleged danger of consuming chitin, the material composing the exoskeleton of insects. Chitin can be present in food products containing whole insects, as the processing methods—decontamination, drying, and grinding—do not remove it. However, when insect protein (meal) is used, it is often separated from fats and chitin. Even when chitin is present, it is unlikely to be harmful and may even offer health benefits.18, 19 Insect products are rich in antioxidants and essential minerals such as zinc and iron, which are often deficient in large segments of the human population, and can cause conditions such as anemia.
It is challenging to provide general numbers regarding nutritional value of insects, because they depend on various factors such as the insects’ diet and other biotic and abiotic elements. However, insect products are generally as nutritious as, or even more nutritious than, meat products.20
Are insects the future of food?There are many misconceptions about the use of edible insects, often reinforced by negative associations. Insects provide crucial ecosystem services, such as pollination, valued at over 150 billion U.S. dollars—10 percent of the value of global agricultural production for human consumption.21 Additionally, insects play important roles as decomposers and in the biocontrol of agricultural pests. Many bird species, including chickens, as well as various fish species, naturally consume insects. Non-human primates also eat insects, as do hundreds of millions of people worldwide in tropical regions.22
The publication of the 2013 edition of the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Statistical Yearbook triggered enormous publicity by highlighting the environmental benefits, nutritional value, and safety of using insects as food and feed. This coincided with increasing awareness that changes in our food habits were necessary. Eighty percent of all agricultural land worldwide is used to produce dairy and meat products.23 It is estimated that this land area will not be enough to satisfy the increasing demand for these products due to the growing world population and improving living standards. Additionally, the environmental impact of meat and dairy production is substantial, accounting for about 15 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions and almost two-thirds of all ammonia emissions.24 Water and land use requirements are also very high. Farming edible insects is environmentally better on all fronts, while their nutritional values are similar to those of conventional meats.25
The idea of eating insects is gradually gaining traction in Western countries. Strategies such as targeting more adventurous eaters, incorporating insect ingredients into familiar products, and providing information about food safety, nutrition, and sustainability may help shift public perception and gradually convince more people that insects deserve a place on the menu.26
Resistance to this new food is not unexpected, given that insects have never been considered a regular food ingredient in the West. But if insect products are proven to be safe, nutritious, tasty, and more sustainable than meat, perhaps we should reconsider our food habits?
About the AuthorArnold van Huis is a Professor Emeritus of Tropical Entomology at Wageningen University & Research in the Netherlands. From 1974 to 1979, he worked for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Nicaragua. He is the author of over 300 scientific papers and co-author of The Insect Cookbook: Food for a Sustainable Planet (Columbia University Press). In 2014, together with FAO, he organized the first conference, Insects to Feed the World, attended by 450 participants from 45 countries. He is the chief editor of the Journal of Insects as Food and Feed.
References