Coffee That's Less Climate Vulnerable
Coffee That's Less Climate Vulnerable
The Alternative Coffee (45th) Edition of the Negative Foods Newsletter
Most often I write about foods that help reverse climate change. This week’s newsletter is instead about an alternative version of a food - coffee - that is particularly vulnerable to climate change.
To grow properly, coffee crops require specific temperature, light and humidity levels... Rising temperatures will reduce the area suitable for growing coffee by up to 50% by 2050.
Coffee is a fundamental input to the way we live in the modern western world, as I learned in Michael Pollan’s terrific audio book. It is hard to predict how coffee markets will evolve in a warming world, but it is clear that the current coffee supply chains are in trouble. This podcast reveals some of the rabbit holes of the (seemingly intractable) problems of the coffee supply chain.
I spoke last week with Maricel Saenz of Compound Foods, who explained that American coffee businesses are already suffering higher coffee bean prices because of climate change, particularly in the higher end beans that I suspect many readers of this newsletter enjoy.
Coffee is a massive market, and many businesses are already focused on resolving these problems.
I’m intrigued by several companies that are making coffee without using coffee beans, in some cases with upcycled food ingredients. These companies, which include Saenz’s Compound, Voyage Foods and Atomo Coffee, are claiming to not only create coffee less vulnerable to climate change, but to also create coffee that reduces carbon emissions.
Serious investors are betting on these startups. Compound has raised >$5 million from investors that include Lowercarbon Capital, Collaborative Fund and Petri Bio. Voyage raised nearly $6 million last year from investors including SOSV and Valor Equity Partners (which includes Starbucks in their investor base). Atomo has raised more than $10 million from investors that include heavyweights such as S2G Ventures, AgFunder (disclosure: I’m an investor in AgFunder), Bessemer Venture Partners and Horizons Ventures, and a rumor is afoot that they’re brewing an even bigger deal.
I’m not sure how to judge all of this. I generally prefer food grown as food and consumed as food, with minimal science between the farm and the table. But . . . I’m quite attached to my daily coffee habit. I’m concerned about the coffee supply chain. I’m concerned about carbon emissions. My friend Jeanne Sullivan suggests that everyone consider switching to Numi Tea. Maybe she’s right?
I’m no expert on the science of how these businesses intend to make coffee without coffee beans, but I can’t imagine a better market opportunity. In the meantime, I’m rooting for the entrepreneurs building food businesses that are less vulnerable to climate change and that reduce the carbon emissions of our lifestyles.
For Your Consideration:
Will Carbon-Labeled Products Sell More? Here’s What We Know
Sustainability label claims are influencing more consumers, Cargill survey finds
Food Giant Unilever Says Plant-Based Diet Is the Future of Sustainability
In Labels We Trust: How Food Certification Labels Can Help Consumers Make Better Choices
Meet the Activator: Snacktivist Foods
Tenacious Ventures invests in natural capital software Cecil
Corn for ethanol? Not a good idea.
Hone brings on impact investor following $4.7m Series A for realtime soil carbon testing
How to finance Scope 3 emissions reductions on farms
The views in this newsletter belong solely to Paul Lightfoot (and not to BrightFarms or other organizations). This newsletter accepts no advertising. Learn more about this newsletter at https://paullightfoot.substack.com/about.
Got a couple of thoughtful comments already about a regenerative coffee brand, Biota (https://www.biotacoffee.com/). I just placed my first order. Learn more:
https://biotacoffee.substack.com/p/what-does-worlds-most-sustainable?utm_source=url
https://weekly.regeneration.works/p/the-inevitability-of-regenerative?utm_source=url
Not impressed with the sustainability credentials of synthetic coffee.
The claims by synth coffee startups about deforestation, 90% less water or 90% less CO2 are sort of bullshit, and take a worst case scenario. Take water. Coffee is grown in a RAINFOREST. It rains a lot. Most coffee farmers don't use any irrigation at all. The water is there the whole time. It's not going to be used for anything else.
For CO2, sure, spray plantations with pesticide, herbicide and fossil-fuel derived fertiliser and you have a shocking C-footprint. But does that mean you should make coffee in a lab, using secret ingredients with an unknown (but certainly net C-emitting) footprint? Or should you use regenerative agroforestry cultivation and actively sequester C? And make incredibly tasty coffee, a negative food. This isn't hard!
Finally, on deforestation; there are 25m farmers with families around the world dependent on coffee prices. They (and most national governments) don't want to destroy virgin forest. But if they can't feed your kids or send them to school, like anyone, they'll do what they have to. If you want to preserve virgin forest *raise coffee prices*! Give farmers a decent income to invest in their businesses so they can preserve their environments, like we rich people do.
Industrial, synthetic coffee at scale is going to have the precisely opposite impact. It will lead to more deforestation, not less, reduce C-sequestration, have no impact on water use, and condemn the people who are currently growing our coffee to greater poverty. I don't think these companies have a place in a sustainable portfolio.