![\"\"](\"http:\/\/craphound.com\/images\/li-scallop-shuttle-620-fabathome.jpg\" "\\"Printed")
<\/a>Image from Cornell University\/French Cullinary Institute<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
3-D printers<\/a>, which have been growing in popularity since 2003, are cropping up a lot in the news lately. 3-D printers work by depositing any extrudable substance (for example: plastics or ceramic) in successive layers until the printed object is the size and shape desired. Although we won\u2019t have replicators<\/a> in our homes anytime soon, these printers have already shown their practical applications in manufacturin<\/a>g, fashion<\/a>, and art.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n But what about food, the most popular purpose of the fictional replicator? It\u2019s been possible for years to print 2-D images in edible ink on edible paper for decoration, but recently Cornell University has been working with the French Culinary Institute to modify 3-D printers to work with food. The result produces edible sculptures from just about any food that can be pureed and pushed through the printer\u2019s extruder. \u00a0For example, the little Space Shuttle pictured above is made from a scallop and cheese mixture.<\/p>\n The practical applications of this technology are mostly unknown. So far, the only one noted by FCI is to re-create food in textures that are otherwise not found in that particular food<\/a>. For example, they are trying to make a meatloaf-like substance that \u201cabsorbs sauce like a sponge.\u201d<\/a> Cornell University also presents several highly-worded arguments<\/a> that mostly translate to, “we can make it look really cool.” \u00a0 I think that anyone with kids or any babysitting experience sees the immediate application of being able to play \u201chere comes the airplane\u201d with broccoli that actually looks like an airplane.<\/p>\n I wonder about whether this has any practical applications that don\u2019t boil down to \u201clet\u2019s make this interesting.\u201d The benefits of 3-D printers in manufacturing are due to economy of scale. Things no longer need to be mass-produced to be cost-effective. \u00a0Right now, for example, a company will produce thousands of pairs of sunglasses, and if only one person wants to buy them, the rest go in a landfill somewhere. \u00a0Someday, that company can sell the program to print the sunglasses instead of the glasses themselves, and only those who want a pair will produce one. Food, on the other hand, is already tastiest and healthiest if not mass-produced. And uneaten food does not have the same ecological impact as other unused products because it biodegrades. Printable food doesn\u2019t have the same ecological or financial benefits, it\u2019s just\u2026fun<\/p>\n If I\u2019m honest, I really want to try printed food for the novelty of it. \u00a0Our society has never gotten rid of something just because it wasn\u2019t practical or particularly useful. \u201cJust for fun\u201d is a perfectly good reason to do something. \u00a0And maybe, just maybe, kids will eat their vegetables.<\/p>\n\r\n\t\t