Not right away, probably. For one thing, producing synthetic meat initially is going to be really expensive -- Post's fake hamburger, which he's hoping to get a celebrity chef to cook, will cost about £200,000 or U.S. $320,000 to produce. (You could buy 89,635 Big Macs -- which go for $3.57 apiece as of late 2012 -- for that much money.) Of course, as researchers refine the process, they're hoping to drive the cost down quite a bit [source: Ghosh].
Test-tube burgers would have a lot of advantages over the real stuff. For one thing, fake meat wouldn't eat up our resources the way that cows do. According to EarthSave, an environmental organization, growing a pound (about half a kilogram) of beef necessitates the use of 2,500 gallons (9,464 liters) of water, 12 pounds (5.4 kilograms) of grain, 35 pounds (15.8 kilograms) of topsoil and the energy equivalent of 1 gallon (4 liters) of gasoline. And with some experts estimating that food production will have to double within the next 40 years to keep up with expanding populations in developing countries, it's going to be tough to find enough pastureland, grain and water to feed the number of cows we would need for meat. "Anything that stops more wild land being converted to agricultural land is a good thing," University of British Columbia professor food ecologist Sean Smukler said in a 2012 BBC News interview. "We're already reaching a critical point in the availability of land" [source: Ghosh].
Jason Matheny, director of New Harvest, a nonprofit research organization that has been working since the mid-2000s to promote its development, said in a 2008 interview that synthetic meat would have health advantages as well. It would be easier to control and eliminate food-based pathogens in laboratory meat, and fat content could be systematically controlled, making it healthier to eat [source: Kiger].
That is, assuming that synthetic meat ranchers can get people to eat the stuff. Modern Meadow, the Missouri-based startup that hopes to become the first manufacturer of synthetic meat, concedes that convincing consumers that fake flesh is okay may be a bit of a challenge. "We expect it will first appeal to culinary early-adopted consumers, and the segment of the vegetarian community that rejects meat for ethical reasons," the company wrote in a 2012 proposal for a U.S. Department of Agriculture grant. "With reduction in price, it can reach the masses with religious restrictions on meat consumption (people restricted to Hindu, Kosher, Halal diets) and finally populations with limited access to safe meat production" [source: U.S. Department of Agriculture].