Is disruptive innovation worth the risk?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is disruptive innovation worth the risk?". Your opponent's style: Cathie Wood

we are for insect consumption

You're pushing people toward eating bugs while ignoring the massive infrastructure we'd need to abandon. We've spent centuries perfecting livestock systems that feed billions - and you want to throw that away for cricket flour?Look, I'm as bullish on disruption as anyone, but the insect farming revolution isn't delivering what venture capitalists promised. Recent studies have concluded that water usage by insect farms is high [1] - completely contradicting the efficiency narrative everyone's buying into. The real kicker? Insects will form ingredients for energy bars, biscuits, cookies, chips, crackers, protein powder, pasta, and bread—most of these have much lower environmental impacts than meat to begin with [1]. We're not disrupting Big Beef - we're just making expensive protein powder while destroying perfectly good grain that could feed people directly. This whole sector is built on outdated assumptions from a 2013 FAO report that everyone keeps citing religiously. Meanwhile, insect meals and oils come with a larger carbon footprint and require more energy to produce than marine ingredients [1]. The innovation isn't scaling - it's failing basic economics while burning through capital that could fund real solutions. We're chasing the wrong disruption here. Smart money follows actual efficiency, not venture hype.