Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
RWT2: The system deleted my link. To refer to the article, Google for 'Bloomberg World’s Top Beef Supplier Approves Methane-Busting Cow Feed' and see the top result.
RWT2,
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-09/world-s-top-beef-supplier-approves-methane-busting-cow-feed
The article say only 1/3 of the total emissions for livestock is from their direct emissions (see pie chart). The other third is from things like producing and transporting their food.
That same article also said UP TO 55% emissions reduction.
Cows also burp NO2 which is another potent GHG. Does this additive reduce that?
Then there was the other 5 or so deleterious effects of cows which I listed below.
So all in all I'd say my view was not pessimistic but rather realistically descriptive of how bad the industry is.
I was fascinated to be reminded that the iPhone was only launched in 2007, and that prior to this Nokia had a very strong market position. It just shows how quickly disruptive technologies can make significant global changes......
wgg58 - you have chosen to be take a pessimistic view on the alternatives to suit a biased view of this share. The DSM product I referenced reduces methane emissions from beef cattle by up to 90% - not 55%. This is on the DSM website. I don't know where you get your figure of 55% or where you get your figure that cow burps make up 1/3 of livestock emissions or exactly what you mean by this (e.g. Bovaer can be used for any ruminant). In any case, even if correct, emissions from beef cattle be reduced by 30%. Overnight. Now. What's not to like? This and similar products will be a serious challenge.
idg69 - you've been selective in your reference to the IPhone and how this can be interpreted to the benefit of ANIC. Firstly, an equally valid interpretation is that it simply demonstrates that todays frontrunners (i.e. the Nokia's of Cell-Ag) may very quickly fall by the wayside. This may include BlueNalu, VitroLabs and Formo. Secondly, your comment about underestimating the speed of technological change misrepresents observations made by Roy Amara. What he actually noted was that we have a tendency to overestimate the short term benefits of technological change but underestimate the long term benefits. I think that is what you are doing here.
RWT2 - I agree animal welfare concerns won't be the driving force for change. In my opinion they should be but most people don't really care about where their meat and fish comes from.
Hopefully, climate change concerns will be one of the trump cards for cell-ag. Another one could be cost. If cultured meat becomes cheaper to produce than animal meat I think a lot of the current meat industry will get wiped out.
wgg58 - totally agree with your points. I would also like to see a lot of the UK rewilded. I live on the edge of the South Downs National Park. Like a lot of national parks in England, most of it is taken up by farming (in this case sheep farming). Get rid of the sheep farms, plant trees, rewild it and reintroduce wild animals and you would have a much more attractive countryside with opportunities for ecotourism.
wgg58 - You've nailed it my friend. Very succinct and eloquently put.
RWT2 - 5-10 years is only my opinion for change, though listening to the Tony Seba RethinkX lecture at the weekend regarding disruptive technologies in recent history, the powers that be have most often seriously underestimated how fast the changes have taken place. Remember the iPhone was only launched in 07 - where where Nokia soon after? Popping a little seaweed in the cattle mix will be like sticking your finger in a burst dike. A do agree that there will be smaller family artisanal farms in the dales and sheep on the fells for many years to come but the big dairy and agro businesses will all but go.
There is also the emerging middle class in the developing world. These people want to eat more meat but the volume of land for farming is limited. Clean meat, cell-ag or whatever you want to call it, is a route to meeting that market need.
RWT2: the seaweed additives for cows only reduce UP TO 55% of methane emissions from cows. Those methane emissions are only about a third of the total emissions from livestock, so it's actually UP TO 1/6 of the total emissions, which is nowhere near enough.
But most importantly, GHG emissions are only just one of the impacts from livestock. Equally important are the massive amount of space needed for them and their food, their water consumption, the pollution they create and the problem with antibiotic resistance. And THEN there is JUST the matter of animal welfare (which in many people's eyes is the most important one).
All in all this means that some seaweed additive is almost negligable when you consider the total absolutely disastrous effect of this industry.
The space they need means that my country (the UK) is basically one giant meat and dairy farm with almost no space for nature left). I wnat to see this country rewilded on a massive scale and that is not going to happen while everybody is still consuming so much meat and dairy - lab grown can massively impove this situation.
More and more young people are aware of all these impacts, not just GHG emissions.
idg69 - we've had this back and forth a few times but I think your 5 - 10 year assessment is way out. Clearly you highly value animal welfare which is all very laudable and I don't disagree with it, but the animal welfare issue has been around for decades and from what I see has gained limited traction. It seems far more likely the change to agriculture being banded about now has far more to do with the climate change agenda and there are lots of other developments in the pipeline which may make conventional meat hang on for a lot longer than you think. So DSM are currently developing (in fact I think they have already developed) a product called Bovaer which is an additive for cow feed which reduces methane emissions by up to 30% for dairy cows and 90% for beef cows (i.e. immediate CH4 reduction) - don't ask me why the difference as I'm neither a chemist or a farmer. This looks like an oven ready immediate means of reducing emissions. There will be other similarish threats. If cell-ag doesn't hold the climate change trump card then development may slow down. This is not to dismiss the animal welfare etc. concerns, but this aspect clearly doesn't have the same impact on the public mood as climate change does.
A large chunk of the placing shares seemingly churned, brakes are slowly coming off here. Could be the most prolific growth sector of a generation - let’s hope Mellon has backed the right horses with the war chest and ANIC could be early retirement material. If this was listed in the US it would already be worth billions in my opinion.
I think removing meat and dairy from your cell-ag company name may prove a good long term decision. The meat and dairy industry as we know it now will not exist in 5-10 years and the associated (and rightly so) bad press around these industries will only grow as the masses wake up to the global damage these industries do the environment, human health and the appalling animal welfare practices. You certainly don't want your fresh, environmentally/animal friendly cell-ag business being associated with conventional animal husbandry that's for sure.
Just had a little re-shuffle of my portfolio to accommodate another 10,000 Anic shares - now just 15,000 short of my target holding.
Do you not think that given a couple of prominent frontrunners have chosen to rebrand (Memphis Meats change to Upside Foods and Legendairy to Formo) and remove the words "meat" and "dairy" from their name may actually be a deliberate move to distance themselves from what could become unpopular products? So even if they were barred from using meaty terminology, then possibly big whoop, if this distances themselves from the building negativity surrounding meat?
Terminology is an issue with food production. I agree Lab grown has connotations of Frankenstein, but actually also of health and hygiene. A point I raised with Mr Mellon about shelf life he was very quick to latch on to as a positive in terms of less chance of contamination or food poisoning with lab grown meat compared to farm meat particularly in intensive farming with pesticides, growth hormones, over fertilisation, disease etc. Indeed Lab meat sounds safe to me, but the proof will be in the pudding. If it costs pretty much the same to produce any species of lab grown meat, it could take offal off the table. I remember a butcher trying to convince me ox heart was as good as fillet steak. I stopped going there!
Well they are being rather noncommittal I’d say but did chuckle at the fact they used the terms meat and poultry in their noncommittal response!
One thing that is clear though is the cultured meat industry has an up hill battle to get rid of the term ‘lab grown’. Even to me that sounds a bit Frankenstein and invokes images of men in white coats and weird and wonderful Petrie dishes. The existing industry has done a great job in making the public forget about the bolt guns to the head so I’m sure over time the term cultured meat will take hold.
But to the point of the article…I’m minded to think the cattlemen are going to lose this battle.