Can investment into alternative protein innovation have unintended consequences for animals?

The case of algae-based omega-3s

Author: Sophie Williamson

At Rethink Priorities, we recently explored how improving the taste of fish-free omega-3s and reducing their costs could be potentially valuable interventions for the research and development of alternatives to salmon. Our analysis revealed a tradeoff. The improvements that could help fish-free omega-3s thrive might also benefit salmon aquaculture. This raises the questions: how should animal advocates approach dual-use innovations that could strengthen the very industries they are working to reform?

Omega-3s in farmed salmon production

Farmed salmon require EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) omega-3s – long-chain fatty acids – for their health. Their diet contains 25 to 30 percent lipid content, sometimes as high as 40 percent, which is made primarily of fish oil sourced from small pelagic fish. This demand is substantial, given that roughly 60% of global fish oil is used for feeding farmed salmonids.

However, due to rising costs, unstable supply, and sustainability concerns, the percentage of fish meal and fish oil in salmon diets has declined dramatically. In 1990, the global average for fish meal and fish oil in salmon’s diets was 59 percent and 24 percent, respectively. By 2024, these inclusion rates had fallen to 17 percent fish meal and 13 percent fish oil in Norway and to less than 5 percent fish meal and 10 percent fish oil in Chile.

In addition, the global production of fish meal and fish oil plummeted (dropping by 23% and 21%, respectively) in 2023, mostly due to El Niño disrupting fishing conditions in Peru. Since Peruvian exports make up over 20 percent of the world’s EPA/DHA supply, fish oil prices spiked five to seven times their original cost. With fish feed representing roughly 70 percent of salmon farmers’ operating costs, this event starkly exposed farmers’ vulnerability to supply shocks.

As warming waters and extreme weather events become more frequent due to climate change, the appeal of stable, contracted omega-3 sources that don’t fluctuate like commodities becomes clear. The growing need for stability presents a significant opportunity for alternative omega-3 sources.

Algae-based omega-3s: the future of farmed salmon feed or alt proteins?

This is where algae oil comes in as a potential commercially viable source of omega-3s for fish farmers. Corbion and Veramaris are two of the market leaders in producing omega-3 algae oils for aquafeed. Veramaris claims it can supply 15% of the salmon industry’s EPA/DHA demand, offering significant supply chain stability and reducing dependence on unpredictable fish oil supplies.

Unfortunately, algae-derived EPA/DHA may also be crucial to the development of taste-competitive, plant-based salmon alternatives. Experts in formulating fish flavor in plant-based alternatives say that EPA and DHA are essential in replicating salmon’s flavor profile, as they serve as the primary flavor precursors in alternative fish products.

Research and development of algae-based omega-3: a case of dual-use innovation

The crude oil extraction process of algae oil is, in general, identical for feed-grade and human-grade oils, meaning that the bulk of cost reductions would benefit both the aquaculture and human consumption markets. Aside from minimal refining and processing costs, the same oil commands a 4-6x premium when sold for human consumption compared to aquaculture feed. In essence, aquaculture brings the scale, and the human market brings the profit margins.

This creates our central dilemma: algae oil is essential for making alternative salmon taste authentic, and aquaculture’s scale might be the best path to affordability. But, relying on aquaculture also props up the industry we are trying to reform.

In other words, algae-based omega-3 R&D is dual-use. Its results have the potential to possibly reduce the suffering of farmed salmon (assuming farmed consumption is displaced by alternatives) and to increase it, by lowering production costs (assuming this yields a counterfactual increase in total production).

It is one example of a broader issue: there may be other dual-use innovations that animal advocates have not yet considered.

Solutions for the dual-use dilemma in alt protein R&D and welfare research

Based on this case study, we suggest two ways animal advocates and funders might navigate the dual-use dilemma:

1. Look for R&D opportunities that are less relevant to the animal industry

   • In our omega-3 project, we mapped R&D investment opportunities by their potential impact and dual-use risk. Predictably, the interventions with the greatest impact carried the highest dual-use risks. However, even among those high-risk options, we identified niches that would benefit the alternative protein industry more than aquaculture.

2. Develop a decision-making framework for dual-use research impacting animal welfare

   • The nuclear and biotech industries already have governance frameworks for mitigating and administering dual-use research. Could animal advocates create a similar framework to help them navigate dual-use dilemmas—determining which innovations to support when they might also benefit animal agriculture?

   • For example, in the case of algae-based omega-3 R&D, such a framework could consider:

     1. Whether alternative salmon is necessary to displace salmon consumption. If not, advocates could consider deprioritizing alternative salmon development, especially since other cultivated seafoods exist, and the human health benefits of omega-3s remain contentious.

     2. Whether certain dual-use innovations are necessary to make alternative salmon a good replacement for animal-based products.

Whether these innovations ultimately reform or reinforce the industry remains to be seen, but for now, they provide some food for thought.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to Sophie Williamson for writing this piece, to Elisa Autric and Urszula Zarosa for helpful feedback, and to Thais Jacomassi for copyediting.

Thank you

Thank you for taking the time to read our Substack. We will continue providing this content for free, but if you find our work valuable, consider donating to RP. Your support enables us to focus on identifying and addressing the most pressing challenges facing animals.

Your contribution helps us remain independent, responsive, and impact-focused.

As usual, we encourage you to share your feedback and ideas.

---

By default, we’re sharing this Substack via email with Rethink Priorities newsletter members who indicated interest in animal welfare. Please feel free to unsubscribe if this is no longer a topic that you care deeply about, or if you prefer to just stick with our general newsletter.