Tim Weaver: 0:00

It's having its moneyball moment. We haven't talked much about finance here today, but how big finance is leaning into this space tells me exactly where this is going. You are starting to see institutional capital look at soil as infrastructure, and as that happens so many things open up.

Tom Raftery: 0:29

And that matters because the value of healthier soil may show up in places businesses already understand input costs, water resilience, and supply chain risk. Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you are in the world. This is Climate Confident Stories and Strategies that Cut Emissions episode 289, and I'm your host, Tom Raftery. My guest today is Tim Weaver of Holganix. We look at what healthier soil can mean for fertiliser use, water, farm economics and resilience, and why better measurement is changing what companies and investors can actually act on. Let's dive in. Tim welcome to the podcast. Would you like to introduce yourself?

Tim Weaver: 1:18

Yeah, Tim Weaver from Holganix. Super excited to be here and see where the conversation takes us.

Tom Raftery: 1:24

Fantastic. Who or what are Holganix first of all, Tim?

Tim Weaver: 1:28

Yeah, so Holganix is an interesting company. In the nucleus of it all, there is Bio 800, which is a biological, think of it as like a probiotic for soil. And it brings soil health really quickly back to a grower's dirt. That allows a lot of interesting things, though, to orbit around it. And so because of healthy soil, increased organic matter, you can get a lot of extra sequestered carbon, extra water holding capacity, increased yields, decreased inputs, and there's this real virtuous cycle, a virtuous flywheel that takes place. So in the middle of it is this pretty amazing biological product, but it really has a lot of reach, and that's where growers have loved it for years and years. And for those very same reasons, corporate partners have taken a keen interest.

Tom Raftery: 2:18

Okay, great. We'll get into that. But first, tell me a little bit about who you are and what convinced you that soil health was, something you were interested in and that it's a climate story.

Tim Weaver: 2:28

Yeah, so it's interesting a couple of my partners in this business, and I actually come from the commercial EV industry. So we spent about 15 years being really early into that looking for solutions in transportation because transportation is everywhere, but the infrastructure around those commercial EVs is a real challenge because of the scale. So as we were looking for our next adventure, we looked for something where scaling was obvious and had an easier path of entry. And soil and agriculture really provided that medium. And if we can go and just make moderate improvements in the quality of that soil, it's amazing the outcomes that are available. And so, yeah, from roads to dirt, it just seemed like a really natural progression when you look at it in the rear view mirror.

Tom Raftery: 3:18

Okay. And where does the name Holganix from?

Tim Weaver: 3:20

So Holganix is something that the founder, a gentleman named Barrett Ersek came up with. He wanted something to create that idea that it's holistic. The product is almost entirely organic and that I think the X at the end was at a time when that just sounded very tech and cool. So you put the X at the end of things. So, I can't say there's a tonne of meaning on the end, but yeah, the whole idea that something could have a holistic approach was really attractive to Barrett. And I think that that really rings true today too in these systems. The days of just looking at carbon or just looking at water or just looking at resilience, I don't think those days have much left. You hear this, we hear it over and over again. We kinda make a drinking game out of it of like, all right, well you need a whole system solution. Whole system solution, whole system solution. But that's becoming a hackneyed phrase for a reason because that is what's, whether it's governments or corporations or growers are trying to get, it's not a solution. It's a series of solutions, a stacked set of solutions. And that's where I think that a holistic approach that does have a history in that name has served us well.

Tom Raftery: 4:34

And why has soil suddenly become a much bigger conversation in climate and sustainability circles? What changed? Was it economics? Climate shocks? Measurement tools? Strait of Hormuz? Something else?.

Tim Weaver: 4:49

I think all of the above.'cause as we look at food, beverage, hyperscalers, they do come each with their own perspectives and their own priorities. I think at the centre of that though is the ability to measure. If soil in, in general is this nebulous concept with nebulous outcomes. It's really hard to build a system or a market on top of that. But with the vast innovations in digital and remote monitoring, and then with the AI layers that can be taken across that, our programme specifically for our carbon credits is measure-remeasure. Things that weren't possible five years ago are absolutely doable now, doable at scale, possible at a reasonable price. And that's what's led to soils having a Moneyball moment. And the data is in the middle of that Moneyball moment.

Tom Raftery: 5:42

Interesting. And I did mention the Strait of Hormuz on purpose because agriculture today, modern agriculture is extremely dependent on synthetic fertiliser, which right now very little of that is getting out from where a lot of it is manufactured. And it normally flows through that Strait of Hormuz, but this, that choke point has been cut off and we're seeing a huge reduction in the amount of fertiliser now that's available and an increase in the price of fertiliser. So is that helping Holganix with its marketing?

Tim Weaver: 6:13

I think it's helping the industry, it's helping growers open their eyes. And, and Tom, you're, you're hitting right on it. For us, sustainability has a dual meaning. There's sustainability in a sense of something being green and renewable. There's also sustainability in terms of financial sustainability. If a grower, if a company, if a farm is exceptionally green, that's amazing. It also needs to be here in two or three years, and that's where that financial sustainability comes in. So in our programme, if a grower wants to participate and let us take their acres and go mint carbon credits out of it, they have to cut their nitrogen by 30% to be part of our programme. And if fertiliser prices are at a certain level, that's one level of risk for a grower. That's one hurdle to get over. But if they have a payment for, their carbon assets, for their environmental assets, that helps de-risk that hurdle. But where prices are today, where availability is today, growers minds and hearts are much more open because they see that financial sustainability coming to the forefront. Also, from that, Tom, something we're hearing more and more with our corporate partners and with our growers is this movement towards, and Maha is the brand that it's known by, but we see it on both sides of the aisle. There's this, I'll say, universal sense of fewer inputs, fewer chemicals in our food, in the feed stock for protein that's universally beloved. And so if you can show better finances for the grower, sustainability outcomes for the corporation and something around nutrient density, taste, and fewer chemical inputs, it makes a pretty compelling case.

Tom Raftery: 8:39

That gets to the economic hinge in this conversation. Cutting fertiliser is attractive when prices are volatile, but only if farmers can do it without sacrificing productivity. So the question isn't simply whether we can use fewer inputs. It's whether the soil itself can carry more of the load, and that means understanding what actually changes when soil health deteriorates.

Tim Weaver: 9:06

Yeah, I mean, when it comes to soil health, there's great use out there for chemical inputs. The quantity, though, I think over time, can get out of balance. And so what we look for in healthy soil is a fair amount of organic matter. We want the tilt of that soil open. When one of our jokes that one of our growers tells when his neighbour asks, well, how much rain did you get last night? And he gets to smile and say all of it, the tilt of the soil makes, makes a big difference. What we've also found is a hungry root is a healthy root. So when we have good soil health and those roots have to work to actually get to those nutrients, it's not all just being chemically placed right there adjacent to it. We see an increase in root mass, in root quantity, also in root quality. And if you go to holganix.com, you will see endless pictures and videos from our growers showing root comparison. And with those healthier root systems, that's where the increases in both quantity and quality of yield show up for us over and over again across as wide a range of crops as you can imagine.

Tom Raftery: 10:19

And talk to me about the water resilience. Because we focus a lot when we talk about soil on carbon, but are we underestimating water?

Tim Weaver: 10:31

Absolutely. Whether it's hyperscalers in the data centres that are requiring quite a bit of water and where these data centres are going up are often typically in these ag heavy communities where water's already at a premium. So the hyperscalers in their data centres are concerned with water, whether it's food, beverage even at the government levels, they're looking at ground swells of water that are certainly not increasing irregular rainfall patterns and what that can be done to hold. It's established science. For every point of organic matter increased, you'll see 20 to 25,000 gallons of additional water holding capacity per acre. So there's a virtuous aspect of great. When that rain comes, we can hold it. That's the obvious one. But really detrimental to that ground though, is if you get a lot of that rain at once and the soil's not opened up, spongy to absorb it, now you get the pooling on top. That takes away your oxygen detrimental to soil health. Then you can start to think about things like erosion and drought resistance. And something that's really important to our growers and governments and corporate partners is also runoff. So as we're placing, chemical inputs on these farms, if we can reduce the amount of runoff into our water flows, that's better for everyone. And again, universally popular. So carbon is the obvious one, Tom, because there are some established markets, there have been big purchases, it shows up in the headlines on the horizon. Everything can get about mitigating risk. For a lot of companies, water's at the forefront, and that can turn to the obvious headline that can get measured in gallons. But at the same time, you're starting to see cost of capital and cost of insurance affected by water availability, by resilience in general. When things go from the chief sustainability officer in a meeting and they bring in the chief marketing officer, things have gotten more interesting. If you have the chief sustainability officer, the chief marketing officer, and the chief financial officer,'cause now the basis points have shifted on their cost of capital. It's an entirely different conversation.

Tom Raftery: 12:53

So what I take from that is that water changes the category of the conversation. If soil condition affects water retention, runoff, and resilience, and as Tim argues, potentially insurance and financing as well, then this is no longer just a carbon story, but carbon introduces a harder problem. Trust. So how do you separate a credible soil carbon claim from a persuasive piece of marketing?

Tim Weaver: 13:21

Yeah, I think that goes back to your original differentiator and what has shifted into market to bring soil nature-based solutions and soil back to the forefront. And I really do think it comes back to measurement. There are things now with digital probes with information that's coming off of the farm equipments and a lot more with high res, low res, fixed wing imagery where a corporate partner can get all the data they can handle that verifies that. Nobody wants to be accused of, green washing. Nobody wants to end up with those kind of headlines in the paper. I think because soil now is able to document it so much more cleanly, that's where at least that kind of carbon offset is gaining popularity and it can scale. There's a great narrative around it and it also brings in some of those issues of water and food security where it's not just carbon in a box. There's something that extends beyond that and that's just on the offset side. When you flip to insetting as well, now you're getting back to it's the risk committee as much as it is a sustainability office that's looking at what are we doing to shore up those supply chains over the years. But what's being solved now comes in that measurement bucket. The work to be done really comes around standardisation. That's what's missing to create a market is when someone shows up and says, I want to buy a credit. What can be uniform in that box to where they know maybe even this can sit on the balance sheet, that will be the next level of game changer.

Tom Raftery: 15:05

And I gotta think as well, I mean, I've written a couple of posts around this, around the importance for primary data as opposed to industry averages. And you're talking about MRV there. So what kind of MRV are you doing? What kind of separates rigorous soil measurement then from the likes of greenwashing or industry averages? You know what, talk to me a little bit about the, the data you're getting out and how you're getting it out.

Tim Weaver: 15:32

Yeah, so there's certainly been a long history of practice-based methodologies and those certainly use a lot of models to determine carbon sequestered, the permanence of it and everything else. We have chosen to go with the measurement-based methodology, so we are pulling 18 inch soil cores, sending them off for testing. We are putting probes in next to those so that we can align the results of those things because we want things to be quicker and more cost efficient. Probes are probably a longer term solution to doing everything as a core test. Then to pull the information, to pull the, as applieds out of their John Deere ops outta their Climate View gives us now an above the ground measurement of what's taking place on the farm. And then with the ever increasing improvements to what's available with satellite imagery, we're able to take all three of those levels so below ground, at ground and way above ground, and combine all that so we can take what's happening underneath the soil and show, October 30th to October 30th, what has happened vis-a-vis carbon or organic matter, and therefore water. We can also show the practises to which that farmer has adhered that can be from their farm equipment and then backed up by what the satellite sees. So then you can go into a hyperscaler, go into a global food and beverage and say there's no wiggle room here. We have a waterproof credit. And there's three or four different kinds of validation that can show that. And that de-risks it because these aren't casual amounts of money being spent by these corporations. They wanna make sure it's doing good and it's also advancing the goals of the company. It's super detrimental when they, pay those dollars and then there could be a negative hit because there wasn't a robust methodology that gave them the ability to say, Hey, we've sequestered this many tonnes of carbon.

Tom Raftery: 17:34

Okay, and those 18 inch cores and probes and et cetera, how well does that scale, because that sounds quite manual.

Tim Weaver: 17:43

It is. And that's where our operations, as we've come out to do the first million acres in our programme, and then now we're in the vintage, it has 3 million acres. And I can't exactly tell you what our vintage 27's gonna look like, but it'll be meaningfully more, than 3 million acres. We are learning that the hard way. I do think this is where, let me answer the question backwards. AI is amazing and is phenomenal and will open up so many different avenues to solve some of the challenges that you just addressed. However, semicolon, without a data lake for it to play in, AI doesn't have much grit, much traction. And so what we're doing is by manually going and bringing these cores in, getting 'em to a lab, doing the lab tests, and then assimilating those results to the probes that are next to'em, we'll be able to go to far fewer manual aspects of digging this out. I think you're also seeing probe technology as it gets more financially viable, where you'll have a lot more remote leave behind kind of probes. And then once we, and the industry in general, and there's another challenge is, we have our data lake, so do other groups, so do other governments, how and when do those come together? Because we're not always motivated to put that out there as open source, but as that data becomes bountiful and then we can turn AI loose on it, that's when modelling can replace some measurements. Some of that can make the cost more appropriate. But timing is a big key piece of this too, because we have project developer terms where if it's a DAC facility or something else, you may be looking at, hey, we're gonna start this. And then years and years and years from now, we'll have outcomes and products that we can, sell. The agrarian calendar doesn't, run that way. So these growers are used to plant in the spring, get paid in the fall with obviously some deviations around that. To go to scale in ag, to go to scale with soil-based carbon, we have to speed up that timeline because growers are looking for something not 10 years out, not five years out, but they're looking at things within months of that harvest, within months of satisfying their no-till commitment their reduction of nitrogen commitment. Ag has a different pace and it should, and I think technology helps us start to meet that pace.

Tom Raftery: 20:24

There's a useful tension here. Better measurement can make soil outcomes more credible, and AI may eventually make that measurement cheaper. But agriculture runs on a very different clock. Farmers make decisions around seasons harvests and cash flow, not 10 year technology roadmaps. So even if the measurement problem gets easier, the scaling problem remains. So what stops regenerative agriculture from spreading faster?

Tim Weaver: 20:54

Awareness, which I know sounds like a cop out answer. We joke Brian Hansel, who has been out on the forefront with our growers. Somebody asked one time, so what's your sales cycle with a grower? And Brian Hansel jokes at about two bush lights. If we can actually just sit and talk with a grower going to a biological, restoring life to their soil, treating their soil like infrastructure, not as this annual asset to be sweat over and over again by the end of that second beer, they get it. So I'm not sure what the exact analogy is, but now that same Brian is out there and we're talking with these global food, these global tech companies, it's not too much longer than two beers. Once we're able to sit and explain how things have changed, what we're able to do, the impact across the board, they get invested really quickly. I don't know how a Super Bowl ad can do that yet. I don't know how, honestly, a panel can do that at scale yet. Once we're able to get in a real conversation that identifies the opportunities and the challenges that these corporations are, are facing, that they can understand not every soil solution works for them, but there are a growing number that do. So if we could just have a couple thousand one-on-one conversations over pick whatever beverage you want, I think by that third beverage, you start to see that mass adoption. And so I think podcasts like this, I think doing things atypically to grow that awareness is part of what Holganix is trying to be part of. Along with a whole host of other groups. We took one of our growers to New York City for Climate Week two years ago. Another gentleman named Brian because everyone in my life is now named Brian. And we took this Brian, Brian Morfeld there, never been to New York City before. We popped out of the subway. He looked up and he said, there's more people that live in that building than live in my entire county. And like just, it blew his mind to go into some of these meetings and see, well, there's these university professors who care about farmland and care about my soil as much as I do in a really different way. But he had certain views of the sustainability crowd and exposure to that, again, over just a couple drinks, changed his whole perspective on thing. Then we flipped it the other way around. We'll get a chief sustainability officer, we will get them to one of our farms. One of our corporate partners came in and we went to one of our, our growers, I think of eight to 10,000 acre farm. And met the parents, met the kids, met the family, walked the farm, pulled us aside, said, Hey, like I thought like. Is this a corporate farm or a family farm? And we had to explain like, what you think size-wise on a spreadsheet is a corporate farm. This is the family. This is the group that's doing it. These are the three boys that are taking this over. And it was the same thing, but in reverse. He saw now this world of wait a minute, that these farmers aren't what I thought they were. They care about the environment as much as I do, just in a really different way. So by closing some of those gaps, that's where we've had the real success. It's connecting some of these companies and some of these farm groups as humans has led to a lot of a success and adoption that we've had. So how we scale that kind of intimacy is something that we're working on. But by being intentional about it we've seen some, some pretty magical moments and, and numbers that come out of those moments.

Tom Raftery: 24:50

Okay, and what would be harder than most outsiders realise then about changing farming systems at scale?

Tim Weaver: 24:57

I think the biggest misconception, Tom, is that, okay, if I'm going to go to region, it's going to take me five to seven years to see results, and I'm gonna have to manage this dip over time. I'm going to lose profitability in the process. And what we are now proving over just under 5 million acres is that is not true. You can see financial benefit immediately and that obviously, comes in the obvious things of yield improvement, quantity, and quality. Also a different grower not too far from where I'm sitting right now at breakfast a couple months ago said, Hey, like we bought six fewer tankers of diesel this year because we, moved to limited till, no-till. The planter goes so much easier through, the soil now there's those upfront savings. I mean, think about taking 30% off of the nitrogen bill. Those things have a meaningful financial impact early on. So the farmer has that misconception that there's gonna be a financial cost and then maybe I start to see my return five years out. Corporations have that same misconception that they're going to have to pay more for something that is, grown sustainably or has a regen aspect. And if the farmer does better, that allows the, the corporation to have a better quality product at their same price and has the reliability with that farm is going to be there in five or six years. We talk to some of our, corporate partners, one of the key questions that comes up far more often than I wish it would because I enjoy sweets, is like, where is chocolate going to come from in 10 years? They're really worried about that supply chain and some of that is environmental. Some of that's financial. Can these kinds of farms be sustainable? Will my supply chain be where I needed to be in 10 years? So again, it comes back to that dual definition of sustainability that, we're hearing on, both sides of our customer base, the corporates, and with our growers.

Tom Raftery: 27:07

Mm, Makes sense. And over the next decade then what becomes the dominant driver here? Is it carbon, water, food security, economics, something else? All of the above?

Tim Weaver: 27:20

Yeah, I mean, I, I think I really do think it's all above. I think it's that stacked aspect of it. We don't have the conversations here in the US that we're hearing in other parts of the world around food security. It's food security in some parts of the world. It's fuel, fuel security. When things like Corsea and think of things like, ethanol for aeroplanes , as those are getting pushed globally, that will have great opportunities here in the US I think that's a big piece of it. Global policy, the winds are right now globally more, more towards sustainable and regen. That will continue. It'll change outfits every now and again. It, it may be called by different names, but if you're a global food and beverage company, you're not just thinking about the US. You've got that entire regulatory market globally to consider. And you're not just thinking about US between now and the midterms or US between now and 2028. You're not just thinking about the European Commission's going to do between now and 32. These are big, big battleship companies that, it takes a decade to turn and shift. So I think regulation will continue to drive things, food security not just in quantity, but also in quality. I think we're already seeing a demand for better quality products. The word taste is coming up from some really interesting companies that are global quick service food who are seeing taste as a key differentiator. I think that's going to push a lot of us as well. And I think decarboni mostly tied to policy is not going anywhere and the winds will shift and change the appearance of it from time to time. And I think underpinning all of that is water. And I can look here in the United States and whether it is aquifers or Arizona or California these are key issues. Fertiliser runoff on the Chesapeake, a key issue. And then as a lot of our global partners are talking about South America, Africa, even parts of Europe water security and water quality, it's more tangible. It's something that, voters understand. It's something that finance groups understand. Carbon, maybe you can't see it, feel it, taste it. And sometimes it's harder to grasp. Everybody gets water. So yeah, I wish I had one clean answer, but I think, I think it's those things all orbiting around each other that continue to drive this, this forward. Yeah, I mean, food travels.

Tom Raftery: 30:10

By this point, carbon has almost become the supporting character. The bigger proposition is a stack of risks, water, fertiliser exposure, food security, regulation, and farm economics, all meeting in the same acre. But macro logic only gets you so far. The revealing test is behaviour. Once growers try these approaches in the real world, do they keep going?

Tim Weaver: 30:38

We like almost literally don't lose growers. It was like 98 point high something percent, and a lot of the fields we lost were either because the, the landlord leased to somebody else. A farmer passed away maybe a farmer gave up farming. The speed of adoption is probably the, the thing that surprised me the most. And, and most pleasantly, once these growers see results, they will go all in on their entire farm. And although growers are particularly and, and usually fairly private, we have also found in these communities, in these counties, once word gets to the coffee shop, I shouldn't be specific, there's always that one grower in the coffee shop that everyone kind of looks to like, well, if they're doing it, then it gives me permission to do it. Once that grower in the coffee shop comes and starts to use Holganix, starts to go to reduced till or no-till, takes that big risk of cutting back on some of their chemical inputs. Our adoption rate in that community in that county almost in the next season just completely tilts over. So I think to more directly answer your question, growers know that they've treated their soil like dirt for any number of decades now, and they'll talk generations back of what that farm used to be able to do on far less input expense. And once they see a glimpse of how to get that back again their enthusiasm continues to amaze us.

Tom Raftery: 32:22

Okay, time now, Tim, for the lightning round. Are you ready for that? We've got, I'm going to throw some questions at you and you've got one sentence answers, ok?

Tim Weaver: 32:31

Let's do it.

Tom Raftery: 32:32

Okay. So, water or carbon, which is the bigger long-term risk?

Tim Weaver: 32:39

Water. Water everywhere.

Tom Raftery: 32:41

Okay, the most overrated climate solution?

Tim Weaver: 32:46

Hope.

Tom Raftery: 32:49

Hope? Okay. The biggest misconception about regenerative agriculture?

Tim Weaver: 32:54

It necessitates a financial loss.

Tom Raftery: 32:57

Hmm. Okay. Better genetics or better soil?

Tim Weaver: 33:01

Better soil all day, all day, every time nature knows.

Tom Raftery: 33:07

Most dangerous agricultural dependency?

Tim Weaver: 33:12

I wish I hadn't already said hope. Inertia that, that what, that what worked 10 years ago will work again next season.

Tom Raftery: 33:21

Okay, and one climate metric leaders misunderstand most?

Tim Weaver: 33:28

That's a great one. measuring dollars instead of outcomes.

Tom Raftery: 33:34

Okay. Now, if listeners want to understand soil as a climate strategy, where should they go next?

Tim Weaver: 33:44

We've endeavoured to try to spread that message. So Holganix.com is a great place to start. The other thing, and this, this is gonna sound trite, but get out on a farm. And for some people that's a five minute journey, and for some people that can be five hours. But to get out and talk to a grower, and if you go to our socials at Holganix, if you go to our webpage, you'll see almost none of me and almost none of my colleagues. We just keep putting our growers forward. Go talk to a grower and understand what they're seeing, what their challenges are, what has never worked, what's working now. Those conversations with a grower will enlighten you in a way that that a, and we go to a lot of conferences and we love the conferences. An hour with a farmer will enlighten you in a way that a conference just can't.

Tom Raftery: 34:37

And where does this space go over the next five to 10 years?

Tim Weaver: 34:43

It's having its moneyball moment. We haven't talked much about finance here today, but how big finance is leaning into this space tells me exactly where this is going. You are starting to see institutional capital look at soil as infrastructure, and as that happens so many things open up. And so, just like in the last 10 years, we've seen certain industries where there was standardisation that allowed the requisite thrust of capital to come in and those markets took off. You are going to see regen ag as a, an investible commodity. And once those institutional investors come in a lot of really, really good things can happen. So I don't think it's controversial for me at all to say, or I say with, with full confidence. This is the very, very beginning of soil, soil health, the carbon water and food security, the resilience that comes out of that. The money's just figuring it out. And once the money figures it out, you won't stop hearing about it.

Tom Raftery: 35:52

Okay, I've got a left field question for you Tim,

Tim Weaver: 35:55

Yes.

Tom Raftery: 35:56

If you could have any person or character, alive or dead,

Tim Weaver: 36:01

Oof.

Tom Raftery: 36:02

real or fictional a champion for soil health and regen ag, who would it be and why?

Tim Weaver: 36:10

Wow, excellent left field question. I am a former English professor, so I'm trying to think how Gutenberg democratised soil health. I'll go, I'll go a different route mostly'cause I would just like to meet him. The way that Bob Dylan's music ushered in and opened up a lot of minds particularly in the sixties, but in the decade since. Just an artist to crack, to crack open the door. So it's probably Taylor Swift now, not, not Bob Dylan, but yeah, if people just take a little bit of look into their soil, a little bit of look under the leaves, nature takes care of itself. Yeah, so you, you pick your favourite artist. That's the wild fire I'd like to see grow.

Tom Raftery: 37:02

Okay, great. Tim, we're coming to the end of the podcast now. Is there any question I didn't ask that you wish I did or any aspect of this we haven't touched on that you think it's important for people to be aware of?

Tim Weaver: 37:14

Yeah, we could, I feel like we could talk about this for hours, Tom. I think the thing I would double click, and we mentioned it briefly, is it's easy to see what's just right in front of us geographically. It's what's in our region. And right now, you and I are on different, parts of the globe, but governments and these global corporations are taking a, a, a universal view of this. And so as we're contemplating these issues, if you're thinking about chocolate, you have to think about West Africa as much as you think about Amsterdam or New York City. As you're thinking about water, it's universal. It's from, the middle of the United States where I'm sitting right now to Iowans that are, surrounded by it. And just understand that the big hands that are moving this do have a global point of view. And once you see it through that prism, it starts to make at least for us a little more sense. So, if I was leaving a sticky note for a next conversation, it's how does any one individual acre play out on a global stage?

Tom Raftery: 38:23

Super. Tim, if people would like to know more about yourself or any of the things we mentioned on the podcast today, I know you mentioned your website already, anywhere else that I should be directing them?

Tim Weaver: 38:34

If you go to our LinkedIn, you can learn more about our people 'cause we do have some, pretty phenomenal people. And again, to our social channels to Instagram and Facebook and YouTube. We really do put our growers out there first.'Cause they're amazing humans from amazing families.' Yeah, it's Holganix.com is a great place to start to learn more about the product, the services, the people inside the company, the growers that are part of the mission. Some of our corporate partners too, who are making investments to make all of this possible. So the story's just getting started. Tom, I, I can't wait to give you, updates in the future.

Tom Raftery: 39:08

Fantastic. Great. I look forward to it. Tim. Tim, that's been fascinating. Thanks a million for coming on the podcast today.

Tim Weaver: 39:13

Amazing. Thank you, Tom.