I find 'cultured meat being environmentally friendly' a controversial statement. It makes the question unclear.

[foldfree]

The question: "Experimental environmentally-friendly food sources like cultured meat are worth investing in." is ambiguous since a lot of researchers seems to think the statement that it is environmentally friendly is debatable. The technology needed to make such meat needs a lot of energy and might never scale up to global demands.

see: https://caes.ucdavis.edu/news/lab-grown-meats-carbon-footprint-potentially-worse-retail-beef
https://theconversation.com/cultured-meat-could-create-more-problems-than-it-solves-127702
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8929989/

I suggest to either

1. use a different example of an experimental food source, such as "insect-based food," which offers clear environmental benefits over cattle meat.
   (I'll admit this example is not perfect since insects are a common food in some countries like Nigeria or Congo. So a person from theses countries doing this test might be confused and offended)

2. Or to rephrase the sentence as "Potentially environmentally-friendly" since it's not clear if cultured meat may ever be sustainable.