“Mother Nature is a very powerful educator” and her power has never been more apparent than during Covid-19.* But what have we learned from this unprecedented pandemic?
Firstly: That what was once impossible, is now possible. Who’d have predicted that governments facing a global crisis would put humanity ahead of the economy? Despite all odds, they did and for the most part, continue to do so.
Secondly: With many economies in the deep freeze, we have a rare opportunity to create a “new” new normal, one that’s less carbon intensive and more environmentally friendly.
This week’s podcast explores these important questions: Is the Earth sending us a message? And if so, can we rise to challenge, before it’s too late?
OK, here’s a sobering statistic: A recent IPSOS Mori poll revealed that over 70% of the global population consider that, in the long term, climate change is as important a crisis as the coronavirus. Think about that for a minute.
Climate activists –– like the team at Global Optimism –– have renewed confidence that this pandemic has produced the wakeup call we need to re-examine our priorities. Instead of returning to business-as-usual and locking in higher emissions, some leaders are using the slogan: “Build back better.” The BBC’s Roger Harrabin writes about the need for the UK to avoid “lurching from the coronavirus crisis into a deeper climate crisis.” Britain’s Climate Change Committee Chairman, John Gummer has called for rebuilding the economy with a focus on green jobs, and boosting low carbon industries like clean energy and electric cars.
The pandemic has taught us that, instead of denial and inaction, basic risk assessment and preparation could have avoided mass chaos and deaths around the world. I’m sure you’ll agree that witnessing over-stretched intensive care units and the Hunger-Games-like scramble for ventilators, face masks and personal protection equipment was excruciating. It didn’t have to happen. Over five years ago, Bill Gates warned us about the risk of pandemics. Why did no one listen?
Today, Bill McKibben, Greta Thunberg and others are warning us about the risks of climate change. Calling them all Cassandras -– prophets of doom and gloom -– is no longer an option. We’re all in this together and we are woke! Let’s harness this united mindset and act NOW to green our economy, before it’s too late.
Some people might scoff at my idea that the pandemic could mean the Earth is sending us a message: the FT’s Robin Harding couldn’t conceal his mirth, as you’ll hear soon! But Jamie Robertson supported my idea, recalling his high school “Fruit flies in a jam-jar” experiment. Thanks Jamie! So think about this: Is the jam-jar sending the flies a message? It’s clear that you don’t have to be a sentient-being to send a message.
Here are highlights of my conversation with the BBC’s Jamie Robinson and the FT’s Robin Harding, (edited for length and clarity). We start by hearing from Tom Rivett-Carnac about this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to change direction, as governments use unprecedented levers to jumpstart their economies.
Tom Rivett-Carnac: If we now just subsidize fossil fuels, previous ways of doing things, we’re just going to end up with another boom and bust and very quickly be back to where we were in terms of pollution. An interesting correlation between climate and the pandemic: In both cases, relatively small amounts spent yield massive returns to benefit society.
Recent analysis suggests that if world leaders had spent $3.4 Billion annually preparing for Covid 19, it could have prevented at least $4 Trillion in costs, not to mention the human costs of the pandemic. That’s also true of climate. Taking action to prevent further impact is the cheapest thing to do and we should learn from the experience of the virus and invest now to prevent the impacts of climate change, and reap the benefits of the transition to a green economy.
Jamie Robertson: Robin, how does that argument fit in Japan?
Robin Harding: I don’t think that argument plays very strongly in Japan. I disagree with it strongly. The virus has revealed how miserable we are if we can’t go on holiday, see people, go out to work. I think people will be keen to get back to normal. What it reveals about the climate and the environment is that shutting everything down, avoid traveling to improve the environment isn’t going to wash with people. Instead we need to think about ways to decarbonize… Japan tends to prioritize the economy over the environment and always has.
Jamie Robertson: Now I want to go to California and see if the feeling is any different there, Alison?
Alison van Diggelen: There is a change in mindset, the pandemic and climate change are connected: we’re united against a common enemy. And we are learning to work from home more and that’s having a positive impact on climate change and it’s going be a lasting legacy.
Today on Earth Day, it’s worth framing it like this: When Europeans came to The Americas, they brought smallpox and other diseases that decimated the Native American population because they didn’t have immunity. Now, the tables have turned: we humans are the invaders of the natural world. We’re now being exposed to wild animals’ pathogens; (from bats etc.) and we don’t have natural resistance. So it LOOKS like Mother Earth is fighting back. So I’m hoping, and I think many people are hoping, that this pandemic could stimulate a shift in mindset: we might become more inclined to protect rainforests, rethink farming and rethink our use of oil. If not, if we keep encroachment on wild areas, we could face more pandemics like this one.
Jamie Robertson: Robin, I imagine you’re not going along with that?
Robin Harding: I don’t feel this is the earth is sending us a message, that we’re doing something wrong (laughter)…
Jamie Robertson: There is the argument that if you put a large number of people in a small space: we have 8 billion people living on earth, you’re going to get more diseases. If you put fruit flies in a jam jar, they expend in number and then they die off…
Robin Harding: That’s belied by our actual experience. As we’ve become richer and more developed, we’ve succeeded in taming diseases. This disease came from a wild animal market that wasn’t properly regulated. So to me, the lesson is you need to regulate wild animal markets, not that you need to need to revert to nature.
Jamie Robertson: Alison, final word from you on this argument?
Alison van Diggelen: I appreciate your support here, Jamie. Arguably we’ve crossed a line here … and I don’t think regulation itself is going to help us.
*In 2019, during a must-read interview with the Washington Post, environmentalist and author, Bill McKibbon, famously said “Mother Nature is a very powerful educator.” Here at Fresh Dialogues, we couldn’t agree more.
The Paradise Camp Fire is the deadliest wildfire in California history. Why is that?
To date 79 people have died and almost 700 are still missing as the fire still rages on. Here in Silicon Valley, we’re processing the tragic devastation and choking in a blanket of smoke and misleading statements from our president, who blames forest mismanagement for the tragedy. Head of the California Professional Firefighters organization called the president’s claim “inane, ill-informed, ill-timed and demeaning to victims and to our firefighters on the front lines.”
I was invited to share my perspective on the BBC World Service and it felt good to call a lie a lie. NPR has explained its policy of not calling out Trump’s lies. I think it’s a complete cop out and agree with the listener who wrote: “To fail to identify a lie as a lie is a gross failure of journalism.”
“Donald Trump’s tweet at the weekend said, “There’s no reason for these massive fires…except forest management.” It’s over-simplification and it’s a downright lie. His aim is to distract and undermine the widely accepted role of climate change in these mega fires…the big picture is: climate change is causing longer droughts, hotter air, drier soil, faster winds and is creating these mega fires. So, thinning the forest is one thing, but the longer term thing is: we need to do more for climate change. We need to reduce our carbon footprint, and we need to encourage more clean energy.” Alison van Diggelen
Photo credit: Cpl. Dylan Chagnon, U.S. Marine Corps.
The BBC’s Fergus Nicoll is co-host of the program, Business Matters.
Here’s a transcript of our conversation (edited for length and clarity):
Fergus Nicoll: You’d think you were at a safe distance, Alison, but I guess there’s got to be knock-on effects weather-wise, smoke-wise, almost across the whole state?
Alison van Diggelen: It feels like California is on fire. Paradise (the town at the epicenter of the fire) is an ironic metaphor for California. The state is paradise for many but is rapidly becoming a hellish inferno. I’m 200 miles south-west of the Camp Fire and the air quality is terrible. We’re being advised to stay indoors and not exercise outside. It’s affecting almost every person in the Golden State.
Fergus Nicoll: Governor Jerry Brown said over the weekend, “Managing all the forests everywhere doesn’t stop climate change. Those that deny climate change are contributing to the tragedy.” He said, “The chickens are coming home to roost.” Is that what everybody’s talking about behind these headlines?
Alison van Diggelen: Absolutely.Donald Trump’s tweet at the weekend said, “There’s no reason for these massive fires…except forest management.” It’s over-simplification and it’s a downright lie. His aim is to distract and undermine the widely accepted role of climate change in these mega fires. There is a short-term solution in mitigation: doing some controlled thinning of forests and relaxing the logging rules, which the state law makers have done this summer. But the big picture is: climate change is causing longer droughts, hotter air, drier soil, faster winds and is creating these mega fires. So, thinning the forest is one thing, but the longer term thing is: we need to do more for climate change. We need to reduce our carbon footprint, and we need to encourage more clean energy.
Fergus Nicoll: I know these are issues you talk about on Fresh Dialogues. What about water? What about the shortages that California has had? Is it a problem fighting fire because there’s insufficient water?
Alison van Diggelen: That again is Donald Trump’s oversimplifications and a distraction. Water shortages (for fire fighting) aren’t a problem. Oroville Dam is very close to where the Camp Fire is burning and in Malibu, you’re right next to the ocean. So there’s really no issue about water shortages for putting out the fires. That is not the issue. Again it’s distracting…it’s point over there when we should be addressing the real issue of climate change.
And one other issue that a lot of people don’t know about is that nights in California have warmed nearly three times as fast as days during the fire season, so lower night time humidity means that the fires are growing and blazing overnight. That didn’t used to happen. So again, the finger points to climate change.
Fergus Nicoll: Alison, thanks for that. This is Business Matters, we’re live on the BBC.
Plenty, a Silicon Valley company, plans to revolutionize farming by bringing it indoors and dramatically reducing water use. It has ambitious plans to replicate its warehouse farms in Japan, China and across Europe. BBC Click’s Alison van Diggelen explores: the veracity of its technology; its environmental claims; its use of AI and automation; and how it plans to disrupt the agricultural industry.
Here’s a transcript of the original (lengthier) report:
Plenty’s Patrick Mahoney (inside warehouse, sounds of farm fans, air-conditioning, beeps) : What you see is a cathedral like room – in which there are rows of towers on which our plants grow. This lush abundant overload of beautiful greens that we’re growing indoors here.
van Diggelen: Climate change is exacerbating food shortages by delivering more extreme temperatures, storms and severe droughts. Can technology help grow food more efficiently, using a fraction of the land and water of traditional agriculture? Matt Bernard, the CEO of Plenty, an indoor farming company in Silicon Valley believes it can. He grew up on a cherry farm in Wisconsin and says that fixing the water industry has been a driving force for him ever since. Barnard says that today’s agriculture industry uses about 80% of global water consumption and could use a “heck of a lot less.” His solution is “vertical farming” – massive indoor warehouses with powerful LEDs, and a super-efficient watering system. It uses just 1% of the water needed for a traditional field, he says.
Barnard: In the size of a couple of football fields we can grow 200 to 1000 acres. If you look at a football pitch – say FC Barcelona – we can grow what would grow on that field in the space of one net. That’s how land efficient it is. We get to grow all year long, without seasonality. [because we give the plants the perfect environment, they’re growing much faster than they do out in the field.
van Diggelen: Unlike rivals like, that grow produce on massive trays, Plenty’s plants grow out of 20-feet long poles and are fed with nutrient-rich water. Such soil-free systems, called hydroponics, have been around for decades, but recent tech advances have enabled a brave new world of indoor farming, on a scale that’s unprecedented. The temperature, humidity, and light is controlled by sensors and electronics, a system known as the Internet of Things or “IoT.” Here’s Bernard:
Bernard: We wouldn’t exist if it wouldn’t be for things like LED lights, if they hadn’t come down in cost by 98% over the last 7-8 yrs and the efficiency hadn’t improved.
van Diggelen: What other tech breakthroughs and cost curve reductions have been key?
Bernard: IoT sensors were too expensive 5 years ago, and weren’t practical enough – they were relatively dumb. Today the story is very different, camera tech and software technology make cameras as effective as possible. That tech and its cost effectiveness are critical to computer vision – a technology we need to run an effective farm.
van Diggelen: Can you break that down? What’s computer vision?
Bernard: The pairing of camera and vision tech with machine learning. Developing algorithms to allow machines to learn from the information they gather over time from what’s happening on the farm. Machine Learning was a couple of orders of magnitude more expensive only five years ago and also not effective enough to make use of in a farm.
van Diggelen: How does that make you better farmers?
Bernard: In the field, even in greenhouse, you don’t control all the inputs.
We end up with a giant optimization problem and we need to ask the machines to help if we want to learn and move as fast as possible.
van Diggelen: The sensors and software can spot plant problems before they’re obvious to a human he says. So, instead of using pesticides, this monitoring means ladybugs are its only pest control.
Many companies are vying for a slice of this fresh produce pie. And several have withered on the vine as they strive for economic viability. But with over 200 million dollars, Plenty is the best funded enterprise in the field. With funding and scaling expertise from Softbank’s Vision Fund, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and former Google Chairman, Eric Schmidt, Plenty has an aggressive plan to build its intensive farms close to major world cities. Providing local produce is key to its business model.
Barnard points out that the average lettuce travels about 2000 miles from field to grocery store in the U.S. The company aims to increase food nutrition and prolong shelf-life by what he describes as “collapsing the time from farms to tables, from weeks to minutes.”
In SF, the company’s focus is R&D, but it’ll start delivering produce this year from its first warehouse farm in Seattle. This 100,000 sf facility will powered entirely by renewable energy. But, like many tech dreams, marinated in Silicon Valley’s Kool Aid, is this all more hype than substance?
Jon Foley is the Executive Director of the California Academy of Sciences. I caught up with him on the phone….
Foley: They use an enormous amount of resources to build the infrastructure to make these indoor farms. They use an enormous amount of energy to power them…to replace the sun and use indoor LED lighting. But we didn’t run out of sun!
The only benefits is maybe for water but food miles and food transportation isn’t really a huge problem for the environment. The biggest emissions of GHG from agriculture are not due to food miles, it’s things like deforestation, and too many cattle burping methane.
van Diggelen: Foley points out that many crops like wheat and corn just won’t grow indoors. They need heat and wind to develop stalks.
Foley: You see lots of vegetable greens: lettuce, arugula…you’re basically growing garnish.
van Diggelen: Foley also questions scalability…
Foley: Are we going to truly make a dent in global land-use that cost vastly more than farmland in Kansas? They’re not a silver bullet. They’re not really addressing the biggest problems we face feeding the world sustainably, it’ll be expensive and I doubt it’ll be reaching the world’s poorest billion.
van Diggelen: Another existential challenge is a pests outbreak. Due to the intensive nature of the farm, just one infestation could be catastrophic. Right now, the Plenty team is paranoid about pests. Workers and visitors must wear overalls and rubber boots disinfected in special shoe baths. A powerful ceiling fan is set up to remove any unwanted pests like Spider Mites.
Although the company plans to focus first on the U.S. market, another agriculture expert, Professor Heiman Lieth of UC Davis suggests the biggest opportunity might be in China where there’s a shortage of safe fresh produce, and government incentives for “green jobs” and subsidized renewable energy sources. The United Arab Emirates also offers a fertile venue with cheap power and affluent consumer demand.
But will consumers love the product enough to pay a premium?
Atmos: lettuce breaking sniffing…
(Lettuce container opening)
Keller: This was harvested ten minutes ago….We measure the size (tape measure unrolling). It’s ~9 cm – within accepted range. It meets the arugula profile…We’re on track…
van Diggelen: At this futuristic farm, even the taste testing is tech centered. The distinct taste, smell, even the size of each sample crop is tested twice a day and inputed to a computer program that features colorful pie-charts. Human and machine analysis creates a quick reaction-loop inside the warehouse to ensure a consistent taste and quality.
My mouth was watering by the time I met the taste experts, in Plenty’s white-tiled kitchen. Chief taste testers, Christine Keller and Leta Soza offered me what looked like baby spinach, but was in fact the sweetest, spiciest arugula I’ve ever tasted.
Keller (sniffing): We break it…We put our faces in the product and we take little sniffs so you detect every smell in there: Fresh cut grass, a very spicy wasabi…When we’re done, we roll it up into a little ball (Crunching, chewing…)
Keller: Our data teams and our plant science teams continue to improve the product because we know all the environmental controls going in and the sensory things coming out. It’s remarkable. It’s not been done.
Keller: We’re each filling out 3-digit codes for where the product came from, which room, (what farm, if you will) so we can track it back to all of the computer science that’s telling us the exact recipe that went in there.
Soza: (Typing andform filling): that’s slightly more than a four on the sweet actually – wasabi’s beautiful and so is bitter. Let’s send that off so farm ops can have the data and press on. (Laughter)
van Diggelen:It’s certainly a brave new vision for farming. But Plenty needs to scale up and surmount the cost challenges it faces, and keep growing tastier products than conventional farms, with a fraction of the water. It also needs to find markets where the demand and the price is “just right.” Only then will they flourish as well as their leafy green produce. Right now, it looks like a very tall order.
Listen to the BBC podcast or to the player above to hear a lively discussion of this report and some insights from Click’s Bill Thompson.
Our delivery date was scheduled two weeks ago, then cancelled abruptly without explanation. This week, delivery was again scheduled but we still held our breath…
On arrival at the new Tesla Delivery Center in Fremont, California this morning, the staff were all smiles. Savannah, the friendly barista was waiting to make us a complementary cappuccino or even a “Ludicrous Latte.” That’s 4 shots of espresso.
We didn’t need it!
We waited for over 20 minutes and received regular updates from Sean, our friendly Tesla guide (a former Verizon salesman) and Joe (a former barman). We wondered: is the car really here? What are they doing back there? There were no Model 3s in sight. Not even one to spare for the showroom floor.
There were about a half dozen others waiting, the majority for Model S delivery. One couple told us it’s the first non-Mercedes they’ve bought in over a dozen years.
Here’s the moment of truth. For my techie husband, it was the best Christmas present he could imagine. I was prepared to be underwhelmed but was genuinely impressed by the quality of this car. I was expecting a cheaper, tinny version of the Tesla Model S, but this car shows some real innovative flare (from its sleek lines, to the elegant door handles to the newly designed heating/cooling system and the new charging plug and cable). The new dash interface is intuitive and sleek.
Tesla Model 3 Naming
Below: I wonder how Tesla knows its customers preferences?
It’s show time
The question is: how long before Frank lets me get behind the wheel?
Elon Musk continues to make ambitious plans for Tesla Motors, some even call them “ludicrous.” Not content to make a niche product for electric vehicle enthusiasts, he now wants to conquerthe mass market, competing in the major leagues against GM, BMW, Ford et al. Musk is promising an annual production of 1 million cars by 2020, a staggering increase from last year’s paltry: 76,000. Is he insane?
On a conference call with Musk and media colleagues this week, Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogueslearned that Musk is still calm and laser-focused on executing his “Tesla Master plan.” This year is crunch time for Tesla. The future of the company rests on the timely and efficient production of the Model 3, Tesla’s smaller, mass market car. Will demand stay strong, despite intense competition and reservation holders threatening to cancel due to his position on Trump’s economic advisory team? Musk seemed to flounder a bit on this question and refused to disclose the latest reservation numbers, for fear of analysts “reading too much into them.”
During the discussion of Tesla’s 2016 financial results, some anomalies arose. Despite continuing to make massive losses (due to capital investment in the Tesla Factory and the Gigafactories), its share price is still in the stratosphere. Tesla might produce a small fraction of GM and Ford’s output, but the company is valued on par with them. What gives?
“The recent run-up in Tesla stock has less to do, in our view, with anything around the near-term financials, and more to do with the nearly superhero status of Elon Musk,”Barclays analyst, Brian Johnson.
Superhero status? More ludicrousness…The superheroes Tesla is focused on are the mighty robots on the factory floor. Musk has named them after X-men superheroes, like Cyclops and Thunderbird (see photo above); and they’re the ones that’ll have to earn their superhero status as manufacturing goes into top gear in the next few month.
“Tesla is going to be hell-bent on becoming the best manufacturer on earth.” Elon Musk
The BBC’s Fergus Nicoll invited me on Business Matters to help explain more.
Here’s a transcript of our conversation (edited for length and clarity):
BBC Host, Fergus Nicoll: Tesla stock has hit record highs, soaring 50% since December. With investor confidence growing that Tesla will deliver its Model 3 on time. Let’s explore this with Alison in Silicon Valley. Before we get into the nitty gritty of Model 3, and the other numbers, I know you watched Elon Musk do the webcast that go with the Q4 figures. What kind of presentation did he come up with?
Alison van Diggelen: I listened to the (live conference call) podcast. Elon Musk was on the podcast with his (retiring) CFO, answering questions from the media. They were generally upbeat. Elon Musk always over-promises how soon his vehicles will be delivered, but he is confident that they’re going to start deliveries of their Model 3 in July of this year, for employees first…beta testing for employees. He’s hoping for the mass rollout starting in September of this year. They’re pretty bullish about that.
Fergus Nicoll: Here’s the thing: Tesla has a valuation pretty close to Ford. But compared to Ford it makes about five cars! So what are we seeing? A massive future priced into that?
Alison van Diggelen: That’s right. Last year, Tesla delivered 76,000 vehicles (compared to Ford’s 2.5 million), but Elon Musk is very bullish. He’s aiming for the factory to produce 500,000 cars by the end of 2018, and one million a year by 2020. He’s ludicrously ambitious. Brian Johnson, who’s an analyst with Barclays, called this run up in the Tesla stock more “Elon Musk superhero status” than short term financials. What Elon Musk says, he often delivers….eventually.
Tesla merged with SolarCity, the rooftop solar provider, so that is also giving an upside. They’ll be able to cut costs: Tesla showrooms will also become showrooms for the SolarCity solar panels. They’re also doing the other side of the equation: energy storage….
Fergus Nicoll: The household and business batteries.
Alison van Diggelen: Exactly.
Fergus Nicoll: The thing is, Americans drive insane distances. Electric cars have to go a long way….the infrastructure has to catch up with the company?
Since Tesla CEO Elon Musk joined the Trump business advisory team in December he’s been under intense pressure to step down. That pressure intensified this month after Donald Trump signed an executive order banning immigrants from seven countries with Muslim majorities. On February 2nd, Musk’s colleague, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick pulled out of the Trump team after a widespread #DeleteUber campaign went viral and his employees urged him to withdraw.
“Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the President or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that,” wrote Kalanick to his staff.
Musk faced a barrage of similar criticism, with some saying he’s a crony capitalist and others claiming to have cancelled their orders for Tesla Model 3.
Last week, I joined the BBC’s Fergus Nicholl on the BBC World Service program, Business Matters. We discussed Silicon Valley tech’s furious reaction to the Trump travel ban and Elon Musk’s high pressure predicament.
Listen to the podcast excerpt below (it includes commentary from the always provocative Lucy Kellaway):
Here’s a transcript of our conversation (edited for length and clarity):
Fergus Nicoll: Elon Musk has run into Twitter trouble…when he spoke to Mr. Trump in person and when he was seen having a drink with Steve Bannon in the White House, a lot of people said: “What on earth are you thinking?” And he came up with a fairly strong defense…
Alison van Diggelen: His key message is: “Activists should be pushing for more moderates like him, to advise the president not fewer.” And he asks, “How could having only extremists advise him possibly be good?”
.
Alison van Diggelen: He’s faced a lot of criticism, people even saying they’re cancelling their orders for the next generation of cars, the Tesla Model 3. He is under this pressure, but he is a powerful influencer, a poster child for Donald Trump’s manufacturing jobs being in the U.S. Musk is an idealist, he wants to save the planet. He’s bringing his message of climate change and green jobs, almost as a Trojan horse, into Trump’s meeting rooms. I think a lot of people who think about this deeply deeply, are not having this knee jerk reaction and saying don’t associate with Trump. Instead they’re saying this might be a good conduit for Trump hearing this green point of view.
Here is some of the pushback Elon Musk received on Twitter and his responses:
