Agronomics Share Discussion Threads

[quepassa] 13/4/2023 11:26

Very important development with Liberation Labs where ANIC has a significant stake.

Read yesterday's RNS and also go to the Media tab of LibLab's website for further reports:-

hXXps://liberationlabs.com/media/


That is a major event for the biomanufacturing sector.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

[davebowler] 12/4/2023 07:02

htTPs://www.theproteinbrewery.nl/. New fast growing business, but still a small market.

[quepassa] 12/3/2023 12:17

Edison - good piece worth reading.

[blusteradjuster] 25/1/2023 08:34

Experience/Manufacturing scale is a proven way of reducing the cost of nascent technologies - more recent examples being photovoltaic solar panels and lithium ion batteries.

Liberation Labs would appear, from the announcement this morning, to be blazing a trail wrt precision fermentation.

What the % cost reduction will be for each doubling of capacity remains to be seen - but if the estimates are proven true (capacity increases from 61m to 10bn by 2030), then there would be more than 7 doublings in approx 7 years.

[livewireplus] 25/1/2023 08:16

NAV calculation as at closing on 31 December 2022 was 16.37 pence per share

[mjneish] 25/1/2023 07:46

Alas, not one in Agronomics' portfolio.

[nickgrant2] 14/1/2023 08:36

I still think this a long term one, and a bit of a moonshot. They can just sit there in a drawer for a couple of years.

[chozza] 08/1/2023 17:36

Interesting article in today's Sunday Times mag re cultivated meat. ANIC got a couple of mentions.
Good to see some coverage in the mainstream press.
GLA,
Chozza

[mjneish] 23/12/2022 21:01

This webinar from March last year deals precisely with what we are discussing.

[livewireplus] 23/12/2022 20:40

Well around this time of year in UK then it's called Turkey ....... Merry Xmas to all.

[septblues] 23/12/2022 17:05

Spoke to a man in the UK who has eaten the artificial chicken in Singapore many times and was looking for it here.

[ronniejamesdio] 23/12/2022 12:04

This might be the original article, although 67 litres/kg is mentioned.

hxxps://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1826/5425/rd_cc_g_f_fr_waterfootprintingenglishbeefandlambreport_14sept2010.pdf?sequence=1

[ronniejamesdio] 23/12/2022 11:58

Apologies mjneish, I don't have the link to hand, I'd copied the text from a respected and reliable journal 3 or 4 years ago, and saved the quote to my phone. I'm sure you'll be able to turn it up. A quick google and I've found 68 litres/kg from another source to sit alongside the 64 litres, so same ballpark.

Actually, double apologies, the figure I lifted from the report of 92,000 was a misread. Their figure was 1930 litres per patty, or 13,785 litres per kg. But in light of that the point still stands: 1930 quoted by them or 9 by Cranfield (or 9.5 from my second source). There are plenty of sources available that drill down into this though so dig away.

Whether or not it's a good idea to try to grow a lot of stuff in a place like California for instance, where most of these comparisons come from, is a point up for debate. You end up with silly comparisons which then get passed round the internet as gospel truth for the whole world. Grow cattle or almonds if you've got no water to start with? Probably better to grow both elsewhere frankly.

[ronniejamesdio] 23/12/2022 11:32

I have lots of holdings, none fascinate me like ANIC does. I have posted on others in the past but admittedly quite a long time ago. Looking for info on ANIC led me to this forum. Is that ok?

[mjneish] 23/12/2022 09:48

RJD, link please.

EDIT: all I have been able to find so far is this research project which is currently in progress.

[blusteradjuster] 23/12/2022 09:16

Is ANIC your only holding?

It’s just that this thread is the only one RonnieJamesDio posts on.

[ronniejamesdio] 23/12/2022 09:10

You asked, I merely threw some water on the question. Let's have a look at some actual figures shall we? Cranfield University in the UK has some actual real life figures for you. Water from the public supply that is drunk by beef cattle on average in the UK is put at 64 litres/kg of beef (many farms have a borehole anyway but that's just FYI). A 5 ounce beef patty is 140g. So one 140g patty "uses" 9 litres of tap water per patty in the UK. Their own LCA puts the "blended" (ie not even 100% fake meat) at 60kg per patty. Look again at their own LCA and they put the 140g beef patty at 92,000 litres of water. Do you see how you are being utterly played for fools? They tell you it's 92,000 litres, do you know what that LOOKS like? That's 92 IBCs all sat there supposedly making ONE tiny burger patty. 92,000 or 9? Quite the difference. 9 is still less than 64 btw.

They can't even claim lower GHG using their own discredited metrics or lower energy use for the 100% fake meat patty.

And again, the water "used" by the animal isn't actually used in the normal sense of the the word. The pee that comes out of the back of it now has nutrients that feed the plants in a cycle rather than it just being water. The plants and animals feed off each other.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger, I'm merely providing some actual facts rather than a paid-for best-case-scenario tissue of lies. I actually have money in these shares so I have a right to inform. Optimism is needed in investing, I get it.

[mjneish] 21/12/2022 17:57

So rainwater is free and copious everywhere, and cattle farming has absolutely no impact at all on the general water supply? The water that cattle drink is simply urinated out and returns to the environment for immediate use?

There are absolutely no water shortages anywhere, no pollution from the discharge of wastewater, no impact whatsoever on the landscape or on soil quality?

[ronniejamesdio] 20/12/2022 20:48

Elaborate on the water in what way? They’ve done the usual nonsense of quoting figures that are laughable for beef, in order to provide a "comparison" that makes the blended burger look as good as possible. And that’s the blended burger, not even a full cultivated burger. When you consider that 97% of the water "used" by cattle is simply rainfall it makes a mockery of these claims for sustainability. That water isn’t "used" in any sense at all, it simply falls on ground. Even the water that cattle drink isn’t actually "used", it simply comes straight out the back end of the animal onto the ground. I just find it sad that people actually believe this guff at face value and don’t engage their brains in any way. It all just gets repeated round and around and the lies continue. You should be aware when you are investing money though. They even admit that the energy used (by whatever best case scenario calculation they’ve chosen) is higher for the 100% cultivated burger, but conveniently don’t put a figure on it.