David Friedberg — How Technology Solves Our Climate Crisis
Channel: Alex Kantrowitz
Published at: 2023-02-15
YouTube video id: HYD45v7vg9w
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYD45v7vg9w
hey Dave welcome to the show thanks for having me excited to be here thanks for being here we spend a lot of time paying attention to the big tech companies Facebook Google Amazon Apple Microsoft a lot of time talking about Twitter a lot of time talking about AI on this show we're probably going to get to that as we continue this discussion but I think rarely did a headline spend enough time focused on how our technology can help solve some of the problems that we're seeing with our climate crisis and I think having you on you're actively working on these type of uh problems is a great opportunity to dig into this in a way that doesn't get enough attention that's what this podcast is all about so uh why don't we start here what is the state of our of of the planet right now in terms of where where the climate is uh what what are the just give us like the high level view of of the problem and then we'll go into some of the technological solutions uh it's a controversial question because you know some people will make the case that we're uh you know not um seeing the effects as were predicted on the time scales that were predicted and some people will say that we're seeing worse effects um the key metric obviously that a lot of folks look to as being kind of um you know the physical driver of the predicted effects of climate change is the concentration of atmospheric carbon and you know the simple equation is carbon and carbon out how much carbon are we putting in the atmosphere how much are we pulling out or how much is the planet pulling out in the oceans and in plants and so on um and so that number you know continues to rise we also algor's Inconvenient Truth and so so much of the kind of investing and Technology Community that's oriented around solving problems associated with climate change really focus on that key metric which is uh carbon reduction or the replacement of traditional systems that are used to do things mechanical systems to do things that emit carbon into the atmosphere in the process so you know there's no really good line of sight to when we're gonna stop um increasing the uh the rate of carbon emissions into the atmosphere there's efforts on energy and transportation and food um you know uh there's there's a ton of capital uh being organized around that as the key objective is to reduce that carbon emitting um number um but uh yeah we don't have a like at this point a good predictor that says we're still everyone still feels rather anxious um you know my personal point of view is I am not that anxious um I'm not that anxious because I do see a portfolio of technologies that are developed or developing and um those Technologies are not just about doing good for the planet they're just better business sense and what I mean by that is um they make stuff that's cheaper and better than the traditional way of making stuff or doing stuff uh and if it's cheaper if it's a better economic alternative customers the market will adopt it and if the market adopts it then that technology and that system becomes standardized becomes proliferant and if it happens to put less carbon in the atmosphere then that is a fantastic side effect of the adoption of that technology so you know renewable energy production is one that everyone's touting because we're seeing industrial scale renewable energy like solar and wind cost less now than um traditional petrochemical driven electricity production uh you know as low as under three cents a kilowatt hour and you know um we're typically looking at about 10 to 15 cents a kilowatt hour uh for traditional coal and natural gas power so um so if that technology is cheaper then it is better and the economy will move forward and I think we see this just across uh the gamut whether it's in agriculture or you know animal agriculture is a huge emitter of carbon uh or in energy production or in transportation or in manufacturing there are technologies that in the absence of being carbon emitters or not carbon emitters they're just faster cheaper and better and those Technologies are moving us forward improving economic productivity and they happen to also have lower uh carbon emissions and so that's why I'm fairly optimistic because I just see all these new systems coming online and all these Investments to move the economy forward across all these industries that are is better and they also emit less carbon so that's a you know kind of a why I'm not too anxious and I'm fairly optimistic and then there's also these big like step change Technologies like nuclear fusion which are on the horizon that seem to finally be real and if those happen then you can not just see the cost of energy go super low and have no carbon emissions but you can actually see energy production go up by tenfold or 100 fold which is another game changer for Humanity so um that's why I'm pretty pretty optimistic I'm seizing on this faster cheaper better part of your answer and I want to put a pin in that to come back to it later because I want to ask this other foundational question as we get going which is during covid one of the things that I came to the realization of and I think a lot of people who were watching our reactions some of the preventative measures was that if we put this task of trying to save the environment or try to protect population at large to the to humanity as a whole we're just not going to get the responses like I thought that if we're not gonna for instance follow some of these uh rules and restrictions when or we're gonna fight these rules and restrictions when we know that they can directly save human lives in front of us then this idea of taking human behavior Human Action to help this far away problem of climate crisis seems unlikely so I'm kind of curious like what your perspective is can we leave it to people's behavior changes to help get us out of this crisis or is it more of a technological solution then maybe we come back to this faster better cheaper idea yeah so um we've never saved the World by assuming that everyone's going to do good together okay and Humanity has faced existential crises uh for 200 000 years right like um I say humans were roaming The Plains of the Savannah without any food uh and we were just eating scraps that were left for us on the ground and eventually we figured out how to engineer the Earth to make food for us and that was the dawn of agriculture um and it wasn't this like Collective let's all eat less effort folks ate what they wanted to eat and ate what they could get their hands on they didn't take food and not eat because other people were hungrier or more starving than them social consciousness um makes everyone a socialist in a nuclear situation meaning you know you will give stuff up for your family that you live with you will maybe give some stuff up for your neighbors that you live on the road with and then as you start to get wider and wider you start to care less about those people being taken care of by you in fact those are the folks who are competing for resources against you so every human has this innate Drive um called desire and desire means I I want to have what I don't have and so you always observe that which is in the world outside of you and there are things that you see in the world that you don't have and you say I want to have those things and that's what drives Humanity that's what drives the individual human now you're willing to give those things up to take care of those around you that you care about but at some point you can't take care of everyone and so the people you can't take care of become your competitors for resources and that's how tribalism and you know nation states and all these things that create distinction between large groups of people arise and in fact when it comes down to it um even though it's nation state collectives may fall apart as we've seen in civil wars in the past when resources become scarce and folks want more than they have and then they start competing within their nation state and things get ugly so that's that's I think a really fundamental psychological premise and history has proven it time and time again the only way out of these problems is by inventing cheaper and better Alternatives like agriculture we realize we could put seed in the ground when we put a seed in the ground a plant crew and then we could eat the plant a few months later that was this kind of you know ingenious Discovery and this ingenious invention and then we started to develop irrigation and all these systems where we could um engineer the natural ecosystem around us to make stuff for us um and then everyone had more everyone had abundance and the the rate of desire and the rate of competitiveness went down and there was errors of peace and areas of abundance that arose and this has been the case with every step change of Technology since the dawn of humanity we identify some way to engineer something novel create an era of abundance and these social conflicts kind of die down um if you think about the planet today there's about 95 percent of the world's people at the end of the century based on recent population um forecasts we'll call it 90 of people that will live in Africa and South Asia okay 10 of the people will live elsewhere So within those two regions you have a group of people that are rising in income and you know when you go from making six thousand dollars a year to Thirty or sixty thousand dollars a year let's say six to Thirty like has happened in China in the last 30 years what happens with that population well suddenly they have more resources and they want more stuff and they can see more stuff they're not oriented around let's save the planet those individuals those families the people that live there say I can now feed myself twice as much I cannot buy twice as many pounds of meat each week because that's satisfying to me and that consumptive pattern is what really drives the core problem you can't assume that social Consciousness will arise and everyone will suddenly stop this natural Drive of desire and then they move up the economic ladder they have access and opportunity to buy new stuff and then assume that they won't most of the demand will come from that emerging developing class and as that happens they're looking for more resources so the only way we can solve the problem is if we give everyone an alternative for energy for food for materials that is cheaper and better versus trying to convince them to do good for the world because they have other priorities and I think that's like a really core thesis here which is the only path to sustainability is a sustainable business meaning it can make money by selling a better cheaper product okay so so I'm definitely hearing from you that it's a technological solution I would agree that it's a technological solution as well when we get towards figuring out how to answer this these questions on climate the thing that I'm not understanding maybe you can unpack for me is when you talk about production right we're producing I think you said better cheaper and faster faster better and cheaper we're still producing more and it does seem to me like you produce more you're using more resources so how does producing faster better and cheaper if we're going to be producing for a planet you know again that's not going to take these mitigation efforts on their own we know that how does that solve the problem yeah this um this gets to a first principles of physics question and also one um where we talk about uh leverage or productivity so the key term to think about is productivity productivity is this basic principle that defines how much unit of output you can get per unit of input okay so if you can change the productivity of doing something or making something by a significant fold you can make it cheaper and make a lot more of it I'll give you an example today it takes 30 units of energy to make a unit of beef okay so if you measure beef in terms of calories to make one calorie of beef takes about 30 calories of energy across the whole system and it also takes several years because you have to grow a corn and then you have to move it to feedlots and feed cows and then process the cows and ship them to the restaurants so you're moving molecules around you're using a lot of energy so it's about a 30 to 1 energy conversion ratio so what if and what is beef well beef is just four elements carbon hydrogen oxygen and nitrogen primarily so if you can take those four elements and reconstruct them in a smarter cheaper better way into the cells of beef into the protein of beef and it's chemically identical it's the exact same thing as beef you just didn't happen to use the whole cow to make it and you could only use say five calories of energy to make one calorie of beef well now you can make six times as as much beef with um Prosperity or you could make three times as much beef and CH and chop the price in half so that's how productivity works and technology is what allows humans to improve our productivity when humans first formed the earth when we first started with agriculture we did everything manually we used you know sticks and we moved them through the ground and we put seed in the ground we harvested them and then the tractor came along and now instead of farming one acre per person per year one person could Farm 40 acres per year and eventually 400 acres per year and if you go to Australia today you'll see Farmers farming wheat across 10 000 acres per farmer per year The Leverage we get on a unit of time the leverage we get on a unit of energy has gone way way up and so we can now make more food and make it cheaper and that's because of the unlock enabled by all the technology youth in agriculture to make that possible like the tractor Precision agriculture software to drive those tractors Etc so that's what's really I think key for folks to understand is how critical um productivity unlocks can give us more and give us at a lower price um and that's where I think we start to beat the climate change problem and so how do you outpace then what we have what you're talking about in the in the earlier part of this conversation where we have not only more people who are starting to consume more but also population growth so I just looked it up we hit a billion people on the planet in 1804 2 billion in 1927 now we're in 7 billion range I mean this thing is growing you're you know your entrepreneur you do you know you know how software works and when it comes to exponential growth this is your territory so do do our productivity gains then offset the the you know coming the additional Supply and I mean sorry the initial demand yeah the incremental demand yes they do um now there's also another important factor which we didn't realize until we got rich as a species as um as we have more we actually reproduce less and this is a really weird socioeconomic statistic that seems to be emerging now um reproduction seems to be this um output of scarcity um that in fact the less income and the more challenged uh people are the more the higher their population right that's a very big generalization but there's a lot of these charts that and data that can kind of demonstrate that as more of the world has become industrialized and developed and more people have a grocery store they can walk to to pick up food more people have a clothing store they can get clothing from more people have comfortable uh warmth and heat and shelter um they tend to reproduce less they have fewer children there's a lot of theories about why this is um but regardless you know it could be related to comfort and feeling less distressed and so you don't need to kind of get more uh um uh it may be a function of just my time I'm satisfied with how I'm spending my time uh whereas uh humans in the absence of satisfaction with their condition in the world they seek satisfaction through having children um there's a lot of theories for this I'm not going to kind of uh try and be too predicted or too um theoretical here but um this is an important statistic because what we're seeing now is actually a plateauing in global population and some countries like China are now predicted to see their population shrink um so number one we've got this massive kind of Technology Improvement that's being realized across every industrial sector um and these new technologies that can be game changers meaning you know 10x or more Improvement and cost or output um and we have perhaps a shrinking population base across the developed world so you know keep that in mind that the challenge of climate change being driven by people um is uh um is less about population growth at this point uh and it's it's just much more about um you know what technologies are being adopted and utilized okay and so we've talked theoretically a little bit about how we end up being more efficient and cheaper and better in terms of the things that we produce and obviously this is going to come down to Agriculture and other forms of farming that the actual production and then of course industrial the industrial side of things and you're particularly focused on the agricultural side how do we bring technology to bear in order to make us more efficient when it comes to farming and I'd love to hear a little bit from your perspective of what's going on with one of the companies that you're involved with lavoro and how that actually helps solve some of these issues that we're we're talking about so um when you look at where Global calories are produced and consumed by country um you kind of see countries that are importers and countries that are exporters um you know countries that don't make a lot of calories because they don't have the land uh to do so to make their agricultural system can't support it um they have to import they have to buy uh by food so countries like Tunisia Egypt Somalia Ethiopia much of the Horn of Africa a huge population-based net importers of food then there's places um and then the biggest exporting Market is Brazil and Latin America so the US is the largest agricultural products exporter but we're not really growing that amount very much um where it's growing the most is in Latin America so Latin America is Big fertile ground unfortunately so much of it is or was rainforest land which is there's now a lot of restrictions that are prohibiting the um continued kind of growth into the rainforest uh but with just the land that's not rainforest today there's a tremendous amount of calories being produced in Latin America as a region exports twice as many calories as the U.S so the Latin American Market is growing and the farmers down there are becoming very sophisticated you know they make uh nearly uh 10 times as much profit in terms of their margin their operating margin as a U.S farmer um and they're typically 40 years old a U.S farmer 60. so you know what lavoro is is these guys are the retailers to Farmers meaning they meet with Farmers every week help them make decisions on what to do with their Farm what technology to use how to use the technology they sell them their seed and their crop protection and fertilizer products and they make a margin doing that so we did this investment and this this merger with lavoro that we're hopefully going to close here in the next uh two weeks or so um where as the largest agricultural retailer in the region uh in Brazil um they have this access to these farmers and where we're particularly interested is how do you bring new technology to the farm that helps Farmers improve their productivity like I mentioned earlier software being used in tractors allows Farmers to massively increase their yield per acre which means getting more per acre of land every year and it's not about putting more stuff in the ground it's about putting the right stuff in the right part of the ground so you can actually use less inputs and get more output and so um you know software adoption by farmers in Brazil and in the region is negligible compared to the US these tools are available they're here so we're investing in this company and then we're going to help them bring software tools to the market and other emerging Technologies like Biologicals to help farmers kind of improve their productivity and the sustainability of farming and that's why we're so excited about it they have the largest footprint they reach more Farmers than anyone else and so we're going to have a really key role we're taking I think three out of seven board seats to help make this happen the other area that's that's super interesting um I'll just talk about Biologicals for a second so in agriculture farmers put three things on the ground they put seed they put fertilizer and then they put what's called crop protection these are things that keep insects and bugs and fungus and weed uh weeds and all this stuff away from the farm uh because as soon as that stuff gets into your farm into your crop your yields go down you get less per acre so um it turns out that there are little microbes in the soil you know if you take a teaspoon of soil there's about 10 billion unique microbes in that soil and those microbes these little bacteria and yeast and fungi are doing all sorts of interesting things they're making chemicals they're eating chemicals sometimes they can actually make fertilizer from the atmosphere sometimes they can keep insects away so there's this emerging category of technology and agriculture that's really just nasic it's about 10 to 20 years old now where we've identified how we can take bugs little microbes from the soil and use them to replace traditional agricultural inputs like fertilizer and crop protection products fertilizer and crop protection products are usually very carbon and energy intensive to make and they can also be persistent in the environment and not very healthy so by pulling those out of the equation and putting natural microbes into the equation you can start to kind of re-engineer how we're doing agriculture in a more sustainable way and it's more productive for the farmer and it costs less so um you know we're really excited about the opportunity for biologics these guys have a huge biologics business as well and we have a couple uh companies in the space that were that we've partnered them up with one's called pattern AG uh to do soil testing for farmers and then figure out what microbes are in the soil and then make recommendations on products to use and then bringing new microbes to the market so I think that's a big um exciting effort that that we're thrilled to be a part of because it means you know again going back to the sustainability point it's better for the planet and it makes the farmers more money and it gets more yield per acre and this is some something that levoro is doing yeah they have a business unit called crop care and they have um all these products in there and then we have other businesses that we're going to partner with them to try and accelerate and expand that work I want to get a little bit nerdy for a second and talk about how lavoro is at the moment looking at which parts of the field are producing what type of product and then deciding how to treat them differently and how to get more out of them can you can you talk a little bit about you said that you want to introduce technology there can you talk a little bit more about the technology that's involved yeah so so my last Company the company I started in 2006 I left Google in o6 I started a company called The Climate Corporation and we sold it in 2013 it's become you know very much the the largest software platform used in agriculture today through Monsanto through Monsanto which is now part of Bayer so it's called Bayer field of view I think or Bayer climate field you know um and so there's about 180 million Acres globally that use that software um you know just to give you a sense of scale the U.S Corn Belt is about 160 million Acres so pretty good footprint on that product now this is a whole um area of Agriculture called Precision agriculture or predictive agriculture or digital agriculture you can use these different you know names and the idea is historically a farmer would look at his field and he'll say I have a good gut I have a good sense I have a good intuition about what to do with my field and so I'm going to go use this seed and this amount of fertilizer and then he'll plant it and what's possible now that wasn't possible 30 years ago is the ability to get data from that field that can help that farmer make a more informed choice about what to do in different parts of the field is only a field because we call it a field within the field there's many different types of soil there's many different types of terrain some parts of the field water pool some parts of the field are at the top of the hill some parts have different bacteria in the soil some parts have different amounts of nitrogen or phosphorus or other chemistry in the soil so if you can understand and get data about what's in different parts of the field you can make different decisions about what to do and then all farm equipment today that's made by all the big farm equipment companies has what's called variable rate control systems and what that means is you can put different amounts of seed different amounts of fertilizer different types of seed different types of fertilizer in different parts of the field and it's all run by software so you have an iPad in the tractor and you write a prescription which says here's what I want to print in my field and it's a little colorful map and you click go and the tractor or the sprayer or the applicator go through the field and it literally just prints your field it puts different seed in different parts of the field different amounts of chemistry different amounts of fertilizer and then boom you've now optimized your field that was unfathomable 30 or 40 years ago so digital Technologies like satellite imagery radar imagery soil testing data the variable rate control that's been put on all the farm equipment it's all working together now to give Farmers these novel insights into what's really going on in their field so instead of using gut or Instinct they can now use this data system to make a decision about what seed to use and how much seed and how much fertilizer and then actually go out and print it in the field and so that's transforming agriculture it doesn't mean we're using more stuff in fact more often than not you use less stuff and you get more out and so this is a really kind of important advance for Humanity that's part of a long trajectory of improving productivity and AG like I mentioned earlier we went from humans farming by hand to you know using tractors and then we had plant breeding where we could develop bigger and taller plants and all these different Technologies over the years have compounded to give us this incredible output and just to give you a sense of how quickly this has moved in the U.S the average corn farmer had about 90 bushels an acre 30 years ago or 100 bushels an acre 30 years ago and now they're you know at over 170 bushels an acre today so you know these Technologies are all dramatically improving these outcomes in Brazil the farmers are still getting about 110 bushels an acre so there's a lot in in China they're about 100 bushels an acre in Nigeria there's 70 bushels an acre um or Kenya sorry um and so in all these different countries around the world with similar soil and similar climate farmers are getting different amounts of calories produced per acre so Technologies allow them to kind of Advance this so Precision or digital agriculture is really giving everyone this toolkit to make better smarter decisions and to control those decisions in the field that's cool and so kind of coming back to your theme of better faster cheaper now I'm starting to understand it a little bit because if you're able to get more yield out of one field then a you don't have to use more land exact same amount of crops and B you don't need to cut down any more rainforest exactly exactly the goal will still probably happen but go ahead and and put language um uh back into conservation I mean that's a big push here uh particularly you know a lot of people think big AG is bad but everyone that works in agriculture has the same orientation around solving climate change and everyone says if we can put more land back into conservation we win as a species right now around the world we're generating roughly 3 000 calories per person per year so we are making enough food around the world we have all these supply chain problems that are causing some people to go starving while other people are you know getting clinically obese but it's um you know it's really fundamental that we have the capability today to feed ourselves and overfeed ourselves and so we can put land back into conservation and allow rainforests and forests to grow back in the U.S we have a great conservation program that's funded by the federal government uh where Farmers if they you know put land back into conservation they'll actually get paid to do this um and now we're seeing in Brazil uh this new president Lula has this similar sort of push which is how do we save the rainforest and put that land back into conservation uh which is totally feasible under these conditions David Friedberg is here with us he's the founder and CEO of the production boat production board also a member of the all-in podcast you probably know him from there we'll be back right after this to talk a little bit more about how technology might be able to help the climate crisis but really talking about the business side of this is there is there money to be made in working on these businesses or is the market no longer going to support this there's there's definitely a question there we'll try to answer them on the other side of this break and we're back here on big technology podcast with Dave Friedberg he is the founder and CEO of the production board also former uh employee at Google maybe we get some Google questions in before we end this but let's just talk a little bit about the business of this so first of all you are trying to I think what is it take liberal public with a SPAC it's kind of interesting to hear the the four-letter acronym spec it's had a bit of a lot of work and oh okay four is a four-letter word also four-letter acronym but oh yeah it's uh and actually maybe one of your buddies has been uh has been part of uh the reason why people aren't so excited about it anymore so um maybe we can talk about that but but yeah I'm just kind of curious why is SPAC and and what kind of interest is there in in the business world for these type of companies yeah well look I mean facts have become a four-letter word that's why I say that it's kind of a joke in the markets um yeah when you meet within Public Market investors like no one wants to touch its back anymore because so many of these collapsed after people d-spack after these mergers these back and that's because so many of the companies that went public ended up being um you know zero revenue or low revenue or low margin businesses that had many years ahead of them still they you know some people will joke there's a reason you know the public markets have had their um you know they're kind of uh requirements for someone to go public historically because the public markets can't really stomach um what Venture capitalists typically fund uh which is long range uh sometimes Capital intensive business bets um that take a long time to prove out so that doesn't even sound like a joke to me that sounds like a legitimate criticism of what happened that's right and so you know a couple years ago and facts have been around for a long time a couple years ago obviously there was this um this kind of positioning that we could use facts as a way to get private companies public sooner and give public investors more access to private companies what would have otherwise been private companies and they would have access to um otherwise and the problem is the typical investor base you know as well what that's your capitalists do is spend a lot of time where they're supposed to if they do their job spend a lot of time doing diligence and understanding these companies very deeply to determine what are they really capable of what's the risks and what should they be worth based on the long-range outcome potential of the business and also the um the risks of executing on that that outcome um and so the idea of a spec making a a private company public sooner than they otherwise would have been able to go public um was kind of interesting because a lot of public investors don't have access to the Venture industry and Venture and private Investments and so getting access to these companies earlier was appealing so that's what really kicked this whole thing off I wasn't you know um really involved in all that stuff early on I think we're we're we set up our SPAC vehicle and so the production board uh you know we don't operate as kind of a traditional um um you know SPAC uh sponsor uh we saw the opportunity to have a vehicle whereby we could find a strategic partnership through that vehicle so our goal was to find a large profitable and growing business in one of the markets that we work in which is food agriculture human health biomanufacturing and broad-level Life Sciences so those are the markets that we know well and what we wanted to do was to bring one or more of our technology businesses to partner with a scaled business like this and use that to accelerate that business's outcome and that's what we found with lavoro you know it's a business that's doing um I don't want to mistake the numbers but you know it's projected this calendar year to do uh between two and 300 million of ebitda Top Line growing 40 uh you know north of two billion dollar Revenue Top Line and market leader um in their uh in their industry and in their their region so you know it's a it's a profitable growing scaled business um and it's a market leader and it's in a market we know well and you know so in our kind of approach we were setting up to bring one or more of our technology businesses to help them we announced a partnership between pattern Ag and lavoro um and so this is a very strategic deal for and we're also investing 100 million dollars you'll find very few sponsors that are actually investing in the spec that they're involved in yeah so we're putting our own Capital At Risk where you know we don't get these founder shares we only get one third of the founders we only get two-thirds of them if the stock goes up 25 or 50 so you know we're really aligned with with shareholders but to your question it's a total show out there um you know spax have gotten uh such a bad reputation because so many of them are trading below ten dollars and uh everyone thought that the company that they were investing in was a good company and then it turns out that they didn't hit goals or didn't hit milestones and the stock got beat up for it and so every one lost money over and over and over again so many of the portfolio managers I've talked with in the public markets have said um I am just restricted I can't invest in any previous companies anymore because we've had so many scenarios where we thought it was a good company it was going to do well and then our stock got cut in half and I lost X dollars and so my boss or my boss's boss said I'm fired if I put any more money into any pretty decals so it's um the vehicle itself is pretty distressed and I would say broadly speaking I don't think that there's going to be a quick return to spec land um anytime soon in fact I think it'll only filter out to businesses like what we're doing with levora profitable scaled growing you know kind of where you can measure it on its Financial returns and results not kind of some speculative you know out your outcome um yeah why not just go public through a traditional IPO yeah so I think I can say this um but they uh they had uh on file a plan to do that uh lavoro um and we through our because again we're strategic investors and partners so our partnership with them they've they've kind of understood the value we could bring to the table and that's why we ended up working together on this yeah I'm kind of curious if you're at all a little bit annoyed with uh chamoth who was sort of the number one cheerleader for the SPAC vehicle and now some of his specs are not doing so well talk about the ones under ten dollars in sofa which he was part of down 34 since this back and 43 in the past year Virgin Galactic down 30 percent 38 in the past year and 50 since the last spec yeah so I'll say a couple things um there is not a smart Silicon Valley I should say it another way there are many smart Silicon Valley VCS and investors who set up specs in the last couple years okay so um and all of them have stocks that are way down uh so that that you know I don't think that um singling out any individual uh you can certainly do the same about anyone that stood on a Podium and said buy the stock on the SPAC sponsor uh and a lot of smart reputable people in Silicon Valley and across Wall Street and celebrities I mean everyone did this over the last couple of years so it's been um I would say broadly uh a kind of a a collective um concern on you know should people should individuals be using their celebrity or their influence to be cheerleaders for stocks and whether or not that's a good idea and we see that over time the individual cheerleader for a stock uh is probably just as good as you know a monkey ringing a bell right I mean look at the joke about Jim Cramer on CNBC this guy has a TV show and there's the joke that the inverse Kramer index I think is up 20 on the Kramer index is down 17 meaning like if you bet on what he said to do uh versus the opposite um and he's you know up there on TV every day cheerleading people to buy one stock and sell another so generally I think that that's probably a bad idea is to be kind of a stock cheerleader uh or denouncer um and uh and I think like you know the way that this is all kind of playing out a lot of people are hitting themselves on their head I've spoken to a lot of my friends who became SPAC sponsors and got very vocal about some transaction they did and are just feeling like honestly a little dumb they're like how did I get caught up in all the hype in the hysteria um and uh and they regret it I will also say that as you know broadly speaking growth stocks and the tech Market um because it's so growthy have had massive Retreats right like like growth stocks in aggregate not just with specs are down 60 70 I mean Google was down 55 or 50 last year or something so it's not just spacks that got beat up spax were part of a broader kind of tidal wave of reset away from growth towards value that happened in capital markets over the past year um and spax certainly get a bad rep but um here's another statistic I'll tell you I think I've mentioned this on the podcast but 65 roughly of companies that went public so since 2020 whether that's through SPAC or IPO 65 are trading below um the uh the total cash they raised as a private company as a as a tech as a by VCS so they're so low in value in aggregate that they're actually worth less than the money that went into them so about two-thirds of them uh it's an incredible statistic so it's not just about the underperformance of businesses it's about a fundamental reset of value um that's broadly affecting growth and I think that its facts just became the sort of poster child for this I mean Google did drop in value but at least there's something there uh for a lot of SPAC companies people sort of looked up and said where's the cream feeling but I want to ask you about that the biggest problem with facts is that they were sold to retail investors and that's where people felt really shafted traditional IPOs get sold to these institutional investors and they're typically the main holders and you don't have someone going on a road Show pitching a company like that to the public spax did and that's the circus problem when you have kind of a ringleader in a circus and they go and tell everyone buy the stock buy the stock they're putting themselves on a Podium lots of people buy the stock all these individuals that otherwise kind of aren't typically in these markets and so it's a blessing and a curse it's a blessing and that they are kind of being shown and given access to things they otherwise wouldn't have the problem is they kind of end up in things that lose money and then the person who stood on the podium is to blame and the whole vehicle is to blame um and so I think that that's certainly a big part of what's gone on with specs in addition to you know the fact that all so many of them were speculative out your businesses meaning they have to do something in your four or five to be worth what they're what you're paying for today right right and then just the timing was was tough with the FED yeah that's a good point let's just talk quickly about whether there's a market for some of this climate forward you know for lack of a better term type of technology or productivity enhancing type of Technology when it comes to meat and agriculture there's uh there's you know the there's obviously been some of those companies that are doing the better faster cheaper when it comes to meat that doesn't come from the cow I'm kind of I would love to hear you react to these statistics so beyond meat is is one of them and it's down more than 80 off its all-time high and impossible Burger has done layoffs and uh laid off more than 20 percent of its staff these were some of the poster children this is coming from Derek Thompson's plain English podcast what's your perspective on where this this sort of Cadre of companies sit right now and and do you think the market will have appetite to to fuel the type of stuff that you're you're betting on yes especially in these current conditions yeah so I'm not a so the problem with impossible foods and beyond meat and companies of that ilk is that they charge a higher price um than the alternative so ground beef you know three bucks a pound roughly um beyond meat impossible or like two to three to four times that price so I've always been negative on these businesses I've never invested in them and I've been um you know when people have approached me about investing I've said no and I uh you know people said I was an idiot when beyond meat stock went through the roof I'm like I don't know man I don't think this thing's gonna last long term um just a matter of time because there's just a fundamental consumer behavior that will emerge over time that'll win out which is if it's not cheaper and better they're not going to want it so you know five percent of people or ten percent of people call themselves vegetarian I'm vegetarian I've never eaten meat in my life so yeah I don't have a never know and so I don't have a desire to go eat like a Beyond Burger or impossible Burger um you know it's got a lot of coconut oil or other kind of deeply saturated fat so it's um it's also not healthier so the reason people buy it is to feel better for the planet and to make some kind of you know um conscious decision um and feel better about themselves so what I've told people is that these businesses are like luxury goods Brands uh you know you can buy a a purse that carries your stuff or you can buy Louis Vuitton or Gucci purse and then feel good about carrying a Louis Vuitton or Gucci purse and be like look what I got um there's nothing that's necessarily higher utility for that purse uh it just gives you a good feeling about the brand that you're associating with and I think the same is true of these you know fake meat companies where you feel good about buying them but you pay more and over a period of time people are going to stop doing that because at some point if you're a meat eater you're gonna say why would I pay eight bucks and I can pay three bucks for a burger and it tastes the same and it's better or or it's better and you know I kind of feel like I've done enough for the planet or I'm doing good enough for the plant if I eat it once in a while right so they don't replace the salute the way to replace the solution is to make ground beef that's chemically identical meaning it's the same product and it's made cheaper and you just don't happen to use animals so that's a tip that's a much more technologically challenged problem there's a lot of kind of work being done around this now to your point about Investors I think there is this um this tidal wave right now of capital going into green investing or eco-conscious investing um or whatever you want to call it um and often the capital isn't doing a good enough job of distinguishing between high value luxury branded Solutions which don't scale and actual technological solutions which are high risk but may but if they work they will become really big and the problem is so many of those Technologies are still very nascent they don't make a cheaper alternative today they're like the out your kind of solution like we talked about earlier and so um it's very hard for cap so then capital is kind of looking for a home and it finds its way into the luxury goods business and so you see this across cpg consumer package Goods you see this across um you know all these different categories where all this money's kind of pouring into these better for the planet Solutions but because they're more expensive they don't ultimately win the market if they don't win the market they actually don't help the planet that much so to help the planet we have to make the bets on the technology which is long range and risky and you'll lose a lot of money along the way and investors have to be ready for nine out of ten things failing but hopefully if the one out of ten thing does hit it becomes worth 100x um and that that's I think kind of the the real you know ratio of what's going on in the market today do you have time for one more question about Fusion so I think the big the big question underlying all of this is can we also become more efficient when we use energy and you're a big proponent on uh basically switching to Fusion so can you talk a little bit about or or enhancing our use of it can you talk a little bit about that solution and where it gets us yes so fusion um Fusion is what goes on in the Sun so uh protons uh fuse and form uh so you know hydrogen is one proton in the nucleus and when you know those two protons uh get enough energy and jam into each other they actually fuse and they get stuck together and they become a helium nucleus a helium has two protons um and so you have to have a lot of density and a lot of energy to force those protons close enough and the reason is under um the laws of physics that the weight of two protons stuck together is less than the or the mass of two protons stuck together is less than the mass of those two protons floating around alone and the difference in that mass is the energy that is released when they're put together so that that is the physics E equals MC squared physics uh that actually drives the the core of Fusion Energy uh as a source of energy so how do you get two protons to smash into each other they need to be really close together firstly which means really dense and they need to be moving at a really high speed which means high energy so how do you get the kind of density and energy needed to make this happen well the only place we see it happening is in the center of the sun it's not even the outside of the sun it's all the way in the center of the sun where this is happening so Fusion aims to recreate the conditions at the center of the sun here on Earth in a controlled way and then to pull the energy of that fusion reaction out of a system and use that energy to make electricity and that's the principle that I think was first theorized in the 1950s and ever since then there's been this like endless effort to try and make it a reality now um the way we do it is we create a what's called a plasma which is where you take you know a hydrogen in the form of What's called the ethereum and tritium these are like heavy this is like instead of having just a proton you also have a proton and a neutron stuck to it um you spin it around in um you know some sort of system or you you energize it and it gets so energetic like a hundred million degrees Celsius that all the electrons fly off and you just get these protons moving super super fast and then you use magnets a magnetic field to squeeze this proton plasma together this plasmatic really close so that's how you get density now think about taking a balloon and trying to squeeze it squeeze it squeeze it if you try to squeeze a balloon to 1 100th of its size when it's filled with with air how hard would that be you have to get your hand around the whole balloon you have to squeeze it and if any tiny hole shows up in any part of your hand the balloon will pop and all the air will get out and that's the challenge with plasma Fusion is if you can't squeeze it and there's a tiny break in the magnetic field all the plasma gets out it doesn't cause a big explosion or anything because this is generally pretty low energy so um so the whole point of fusion is you kind of are trying to control a magnetic field and squish all these uh protons together and drive this energy out of it and that whole system um people have tried many different ways and many different architectural designs things called Toca Max and stelerators and all these fancy words lately they're these kind of pulsed plasma you know systems uh all sorts of different technology Concepts I think that what's going on right now um generally speaking and the reason that we're all getting very optimistic two years three years ago there was about seven Fusion startups today there should there's roughly 70. um so there's this massive proliferation and there have been a bunch of technical breakthroughs that have been demonstrated in the last two years what's really happening um is digital technology is allowing us to do things that we historically could not do um at a scale of physics that allows us to control these systems and make them work right so when I say digital technology I mean to control the magnetic field you have to make sensing and adjustments in 10 to the negative 15 seconds okay that's how like the speed at which you have to sense and and respond uh to perturbations in the plasma and change the magnetic field is so minuscule that you have to get Computing working right you have to get sensing working right you have to be able to get perfect measurements of the field all of these underlying digital Technologies and better sensors better semiconductors better superconducting materials better compute power better Computing better models AI driven models they're all coming together to finally give us this really difficult engineering capability of causing man-made Fusion and when you do this you get this energy out of the system you you know you generate electricity and hydrogen is you know deuterium is roughly you know completely abundant and infinite on Earth so theoretically humans could make infinite energy on Earth with all the stuff we have around us using Fusion if we can make it work it's not radioactive I mean generally there's some Isotopes in the thing that that generally let me just say that's not radioactive there's no heavy elements it's not like uranium or plutonium that you're breaking apart to release energy you're sticking hydrogen atoms together uh to create energy so it's super clean it's super abundant it's technically very difficult if we can do it and we can do it scalably then it's theoretically possible that Humanity can produce 10 or 100 times as much electricity per year as we do today at a cost that is 10 to 100 times cheaper than we do it today that's what is so exciting to everyone because that's sort of a breakthrough doesn't just solve all of our energy needs and replace all the carbon emitting stuff it creates entirely new industries that are not even possible or feasible today and if those Industries get created it will be another kind of sea change of abundance for Humanity that makes us say holy crap I cannot believe we ever lived in a world that was different than this we're going to feel completely awashed in anything and everything we ever wanted um and so that's what's kind of so compelling about it I think that the digital Technologies are causing this big shift on the win rate and we're starting to see some of these work now of those 70 companies which ones are going to win I have no freaking clue I don't know which of them are real I don't know which of them are fake which of them are schemes which of them are going to actually have the technical breakthroughs which of them are going to fly through the wall but I will tell you that I would bet on the portfolio and I would say there's probably a 90 plus percent chance or 95 chance that we will have scalable Fusion Energy in the next decade or two and it will become a big change for everyone that's why I'm also so optimistic uh because I think this portfolio of bats with all these different Technologies going at it from different angles someone will figure it out and and this thing will kind of get there Dave this was awesome thanks so much for coming on thank you for having me it's great