> Probably just like vertical farming, it uses vastly more energy than traditional farming.
That's an unfounded assumption - vertical vegetable farming uses more energy than traditional vegetable farming (with a trade-off of less land).
However, farming animals also uses more energy than farmi9 vegetables. So it's possible that lab grown meat won't use more energy than farm grown meat, and will come with enough other benefits - less water and land use, less cruelty, less antibiotics, less risk of cross transmission of disease - that even if there is an increase in energy use, the trade-off will be worth it.
Farming animals doesn't use more energy than farming vegetables. You use a truly staggering amount of petrochemicals making fertiliser, spreading fertiliser, cultivating fields, planting seeds, harvesting crops, and all the rest of it.
Even if you grow silage crops specifically for feeding livestock it's not nearly so much faff and you use a relatively small amount of fertiliser and fuel.
It definitely uses more energy per calorie produced by a factor of 3 to 10. (Otherwise meat and cheese would cost roughly as much as rice or maize or bread or pasta.)
That's an unfounded assumption - vertical vegetable farming uses more energy than traditional vegetable farming (with a trade-off of less land).
However, farming animals also uses more energy than farmi9 vegetables. So it's possible that lab grown meat won't use more energy than farm grown meat, and will come with enough other benefits - less water and land use, less cruelty, less antibiotics, less risk of cross transmission of disease - that even if there is an increase in energy use, the trade-off will be worth it.