TEL AVIV, Israel, March 20, 2024 (Newswire.com)
– SuperMeat, a food-tech company dedicated to supplying the world with high-quality cultivated meat, today shared industry-first, forward-looking projections for cultivated chicken based on its landmark continuous production process, outperforming the ambitious benchmarks set for conventional chicken at the start of the next decade.
The Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA) was conducted by CE Delft, an independent sustainability research and consultancy firm, to evaluate the anticipated environmental impact of a large-scale production of SuperMeat’s cultivated chicken, offering a glimpse into the future of sustainable meat production.
The assessment provides a detailed comparative analysis between SuperMeat’s 100% cultivated chicken and the most sustainably produced traditional chicken aspired for the outset of the 2030s.
SuperMeat’s cultivated chicken is projected to achieve a carbon footprint approximately 50% lower than the ambitious benchmarks set for conventional chicken production, when integrating renewable energy sources and sustainable production practices in both conventional and cultivated production methods. Even under the reliance on standard grid electricity, a 27% reduction in the carbon footprint of SuperMeat’s chicken is achieved, in comparison to the ambitious conventional chicken benchmark.
This analysis not only showcases the advantages of cultivated meat compared to conventional methods, but shows, for the first time, that cultivated meat could drastically improve the most carbon-efficient form of animal protein available today — chicken — in carbon efficiency and across numerous other measures.
Key findings:
Reduced Environmental Impact: SuperMeat’s cultivated chicken marks a significant 47% reduction in carbon footprint, a 64% decrease in fine particulate matter formation, an 85% lessening in terrestrial acidification, and a 90% cutback in land use compared to traditional chicken farming.
Enhanced Feed-to-Meat Efficiency: SuperMeat’s chicken product exhibits a lower Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) than conventional meats, demonstrating superior efficiency in transforming feed into meat. Specifically, SuperMeat’s FCR is estimated at around 1 vs. 2.8 for chicken, almost three times more efficient.
A Highly Efficient Production Process Fuels SuperMeat’s Sustainability Milestones:
SuperMeat’s continuous production process will be instrumental in achieving the expected sustainability outcomes for its cultivated chicken. The foundation of this analysis is based on practices currently in place at SuperMeat’s pilot plant, underscoring the current effectiveness and feasibility of this approach. The continuous production process allows for significantly higher yields — up to nine times greater than a fed-batch process based on SuperMeat’s data — and is more energy-efficient than fed-batch processes. Moreover, the adoption of high cell densities and the use of spent media in SuperMeat’s process contribute to a favorable feed-to-kg conversion rate. These breakthroughs in cellular agriculture are expected to enable SuperMeat to set these sustainability standards when producing at a commercial scale.
“Efficiency in meat production is no longer a goal; it’s a necessity,” said SuperMeat’s CEO Ido Savir. “Our pilot plant is the proving ground for SuperMeat’s vision of efficiency and sustainability. Through continuous production, we’ve showcased the potential to dramatically increase yields while reducing our environmental footprint, a testament to our dedication to advancing meat production.”
Moving Forward:
SuperMeat remains dedicated to pioneering advancements in sustainable meat production, and will use this LCA as a strategic guide for planning its large-scale production facilities, with a focus on incorporating renewable energy, establishing a sustainable supply chain and enhancing production processes.
SuperMeat stands at the forefront of the cultivated meat sector, championing the move towards sustainable, nutritious, and animal-friendly meat production. The company has established a pivotal continuous process, setting a new standard in the production of cultivated meat. SuperMeat has formed strategic partnerships with leading food companies, underscoring its commitment to working together to create a better food system.
Methodology
The research methodology behind SuperMeat’s Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) employs a systematic approach to evaluate the environmental impact of its cultivated chicken product.
The LCA, anchored in the goal and scope definition per ISO 14044 standards, emphasizes an ex-ante approach, comparing SuperMeat’s future production to 2030 ambitious benchmarks for conventional chicken. SuperMeat provided estimates based on specific technological data and efficiency metrics for its large-scale production. The analysis adopts a cradle-to-gate perspective, accounting for all relevant environmental extractions and emissions up to the point of leaving the production facility, including packaging. The assessment critically examines global warming potential among other key environmental metrics, using established environmental databases, ensuring a comprehensive and forward-looking analysis of SuperMeat’s environmental practices.
While the food tech investment sector figured itself out last year, Miruku, a New Zealand-based food tech company, was busy getting ahead of molecular farming technology. That proactive strategy put the company about “three to four years ahead of emerging competitors,” CEO Amos Palfreyman told TechCrunch.
“Miruku has not only aimed to navigate the challenges presented by the shifting climate impacting traditional dairy production, but has also broadened our focus to address critical issues of food security and nutrition,” Palfreyman said via an email interview.
TechCrunch profiled the company in 2022 when it raised $2.4 million in seed funding to develop molecular farming technology to program plant cells to be mini factories for producing proteins and other molecules, like fats and sugars, traditionally made by animals.
Miruku is not alone in using molecular farming technologies to create dairy products. Mozza Foods and Nobell Foods do as well, but Palfreyman says his company focuses on business-to-business and modifies both proteins and fats within the same plant. It also chose to use safflower as its primary crop due to its climate resilience.
Miruku’s management, from left, Thomas Buchanan, Ira Bing, Amos Palfreyman and Abby Thompson. Image Credits: Miruku
Since the seed round, the company made advancements in its proprietary dairy seed system. Initially, Miruku focused on programming plants to produce dairy proteins that could be extracted from seeds. That approach has since expanded to leverage interactions between recombinant dairy casein and native plant proteins, with or without improved fatty acid profiles.
“This breakthrough allows us to utilize a larger portion of the seed, transforming it into a range of versatile ingredients tailored for the food and beverage industry,” Palfreyman said. “We’ve now reached several key proof-of-concept milestones demonstrating the viability and potential of the dairy seed system.”
During that time, the company also tripled the size of its team and formed relationships with a number of food manufacturing partners for some co-development opportunities. In addition, Miruku broadened its footprint to Israel as well as Australia, which was selected as the launchpad for initial market entry.
Today, the company announced $5 million in what Palfreyman called a pre-Series A round. It was led by Motion Capital and included seed round investor Movac and new investor NZVC. He didn’t disclose the valuation, but did say it was an “up round.”
The new capital enables Miruku to expand its crop development efforts. This includes a partnership with CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization), the Australian government agency responsible for scientific research. As such, the company will take its modified safflower varieties into field trials in Australia, Palfreyman said.
“Above all, our priority is to advance our technology and progress towards market readiness,” Palfreyman said. “This includes expanding our footprint in Australia and looking at establishing a presence in the United States.”
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
The human race numbered 1 billion people in 1804, the U.N. estimates. It took only 218 years since then for our population to multiply eightfold. That exponential growth creates challenges in securing the necessary resources to feed this growing population.
In 2023, in much of the developed world, it may not feel like there is a lack of food or even shortages of certain products or items. Yes, food prices have been steadily rising, but when perusing the shelves of your local supermarket, it’s common to come across sea bass from Chile, avocados from Portugal, shrimp from Indonesia, olives from Greece and mangos from Thailand. This might create a false sense that food products from across the world are plentiful, but in reality, our current consumption rates will reach a tipping point.
With wars and famines triggered by climate-induced natural disasters compounding our exploding population, innovative approaches to mitigating ongoing food shortages and future possible food crisis scenarios are imperative. And entrepreneurs are leveraging tech to tackle that challenge.
Extreme-weather conditions disrupted recent harvests across Spain and North Africa, causing severe shortages of many common vegetables in the UK, including tomatoes and peppers. Developing countries like Somalia and North Korea, all too familiar with the horrors of starvation, find themselves amid devastating food shortages. In both countries, it is believed that around half the population suffers from a lack of nourishment.
Food shortages caused by severe weather or other climatic conditions constantly plague poorer countries far worse than richer ones. These nations must look to solutions that are affordable and maximize the preservation of food products. Fermentation, a common practice across nearly every society used for pickling vegetables, producing yogurt and brewing alcoholic beverages, can be used by innovative founders to offer practical and affordable solutions.
Industrial fermentation can expand the millennia-old practice by scaling up and adding new, healthier and tasty food options in an eco-friendly and affordable manner. As a metabolic process producing chemical changes in organic substrates, fermentation in food production refers to the use of microorganisms, including bacteria, yeasts and molds, to bring a desirable change to food or drink.
And with modern tech, fermentation can be used on a near-unlimited number of organic foods and beverages, enabling them to enjoy drastically longer shelf lives. Advanced technology is helping make fermentation even more relevant.
Precision fermentation technology has been leveraged to produce drugs and food additives, but now scientists are developing new alternatives to classic food products. Alternative types of proteins, milk, cheeses, fungi, wheat and dairy products can provide populations with healthier and cheaper versions of familiar foods. Precision fermentation requires 1,700 times less land than the most efficient agricultural means of producing protein, and local communities and entrepreneurs can quickly adopt this technology around the globe to stabilize food supplies.
Organic alternatives
While fermentation tech will take time to maximize and scale up, agriculture remains the primary outlet to feed humans. The brutal war in Ukraine has disrupted wheat supplies by reducing the country’s output and complicating export efforts. A lesser-known consequence of the war is the disruption of the chemical-based fertilizer market, particularly those that use nitrogen such as Urea, which also harms soil, air and waterways.
To mitigate the lack of nitrogen-based fertilizers caused by Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, biological alternatives can help farmers meet the growing demand. Grace Breeding, an agro-tech startup, has developed organic bio-based fertilizers that have demonstrated the ability to reduce environmental damage while boosting yields on key crops, such as wheat and tomatoes.
From biofertilizers to fermentation and plant-based meats, science and technology are increasingly colliding with food to help develop sustainable practices and products to counter food insecurity without harming the planet.
But finding innovative ways to combat hunger today doesn’t stop there. Mainstream tech, like AI, can also play a role. A new study published in Science Advances demonstrates how machine learning techniques can successfully predict where and when the next food crisis will likely occur. By using deep learning to extract relevant text from a database of over 11 million articles focused on food-insecure nations published between 1980 and 2020, the algorithm was able to improve the accuracy of predictions on food insecurity up to a year in advance.
By better anticipating where and when a food crisis outbreak will happen, humanitarian and relief organizations can efficiently plan, raise funds, delegate resources, and have boots—and food—on the ground earlier, thus drastically reducing the impact of famines.
Innovation alone isn’t enough. It must be supported by private and public sector initiatives along with popular support. But without entrepreneurs capable of leveraging innovative solutions, the challenge at hand would be impossible.
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
As I speak to various agriculture industry representatives wanting to supply their clients with sustainable solutions to address today’s food crisis, I often hear how they either hesitate about the newest satellite technologies or are not sure how to utilize them best.
In this article, I’d like to explain what satellite technologies are about in agriculture, how industry players can leverage them to help farmers address food security issues, and how to make sure your future partnership with a sattech company will be most fruitful.
In the agriculture industry, modern sattech solutions come as mobile and web apps accessible from any Internet-connected device. Once new images and insights are ready, a farmer opens the tool to get visually clear and up-to-date information on the state of their lands.
Yet the global goal behind this market is not just to make a handy tool to simplify crop management but to help humanity fight hunger and reach food sustainability. One of the United Nations’ sustainable development goals is to end hunger by 2030, and the commercial market of satellite technologies might make the most significant contribution to achieving this outcome.
How satellites and remote sensing help farmers
Simply put, remote sensing satellites take pictures of the Earth daily. After that, these images get processed and analyzed using modern machine learning and artificial intelligence algorithms to provide various industry players with actionable insights.
As technologies advance, the data satellites collect increasingly impacts our lives, whether we’re talking about weather forecasts, news broadcasting, or even personal security. That is why the overall sattech market is expected to grow by 6.5% every year up until at least 2028, when it’ll reach $4.7B.
The top three benefits provided by today’s satellite-based analytics platforms for agriculture businesses are:
Vegetation Indices. By looking at the fields over time through different sensors, the software can provide you with visual analytics on crop development dynamics, the photosynthetic activity of the canopy cover, water body turbidity and more.
Field Management. Farmers who maintain big crop areas find it difficult to look after them. By being able to watch fields from the sky and send scouts to problematic areas, farmers can react more quickly and keep their crops at top productivity.
Forecasts. Since satellites also track weather, analytics platforms can inform users about weather forecasts and climate changes to help them improve their irrigation and fertilization practices.
Satellite-based analytics platforms provide farmers with the most extensive reports on their fields, accessible with one click of a web link.
Today, when significant catastrophes happen, satellite images help us assess the damage scale and the consequences’ nature. However, the same can be applied to smaller changes in soil, water bodies or vegetation. Moreover, by analyzing historical data and certain biophysical parameters of the land in question, these changes can be noticed in time and even anticipated.
Hence the ultimate goal of agribusinesses is to help their clients take care of their lands and produce more yields by predicting the behavior of their crops with satellite technologies. Here are a few examples.
Because of climate change, insurance companies are challenged to generate risk profiles for their clients in the agriculture industry. In their case, satellite technologies help assess the global warming risks when lending loans to farming cooperatives and agro holdings.
The end-to-end digital platforms that help food growers and commodity buyers get raw materials and monitor their fields leverage remote sensing to reach more markets and expand their possibilities. For instance, satellite technologies allow forecasting input supply needs and studying farmers’ preferences in a targeted area.
One of nature conservation agencies’ activities is to review landowners’ claims about crop damage caused by wildlife. Before deciding if a claim should be covered, it is necessary to conduct an investigation involving collecting various data and performing scouting tasks. To speed up investigations, nature conservation agencies utilize satellite-based platforms for field management and near-real-time monitoring.
Before approaching sattech companies, businesses must make preliminary work.
First, you should know your market. When agribusinesses don’t know their competitors, current market trends, and the expectations of their target audiences, chances are using modern tech will go sideways. That’s because sattech companies must understand how they can help you succeed to evaluate the potential of the partnership.
Then, you should have a clearly defined growth strategy. I often see agribusinesses expecting to build profit by adding a margin to the satellite technology solutions and reselling them. But such an attitude has never worked this way. A roadmap of further actions turns out to be crucial for the fruitful utilization of satellite technologies in the agriculture industry. Only when you know how you and your clients will be able to grow through innovations will you generate sustainable profits from it.
Finally, companies must know their users’ attitudes to satellite technologies. It might be so that, for example, a huge amount of effort will be needed to market the innovations. For that, multiple activities like webinars, consultations and workshops might do, and some sattech partners might help with it.
Ultimately, the biggest fallacy about sattech offers I see on the market is that businesses are convinced that technologies can solve any challenge. Yet it’s not the solution they should focus on, but the problem.
Satellite-based software is never one-size-fits-all and can’t be used out of the box.
The market is well-saturated, with multiple companies pursuing different goals and providing extra services for their partners. Finding a perfect sattech partner today means as much as the technology you’re chasing after.
The machines, heralded as “3D printers for the garden”, automatically plant seeds, water, detect and remove weeds, and measure soil properties.
Press Release –
Dec 30, 2022 04:00 EST
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif., December 30, 2022 (Newswire.com)
– California startup FarmBothas shipped a record number of automated farming robots in 2022 to homeowners looking for help in the garden as well as schools and universities bolstering their precision agriculture programs.
2022 marked the release of FarmBot’s newest models with the following key features:
An upgraded camera for high definition plant photography and weed detection
An improved vacuum pump for precision seed injection
More robust electronics including the latest Raspberry Pi computers
The FarmBot web app allows users to drag-and-drop their garden design like the popular video game Farmville. Then the FarmBot does the rest: it plants seeds, waters each plant according to its type, age, and the local weather, takes photos to find and remove weeds, and notifies users when the tomatoes are ripe.
FarmBots can grow many common garden veggies at the same time such as Lettuces, Onions, Radishes, Beets, Chard, Garlic, Bok Choy, Arugula, Carrots, Broccoli, and much more. By placing vining and other indeterminate crops near the ends of the bed and training them outwards, the plants can utilize double or triple the area while still being maintained by the FarmBot.
Both FarmBot Express and Genesis can grow all of the veggies needed by one person, continuously, for less cost after 2 years than shopping at the average US grocery store, while the XL bots can serve a family of four with a return on investment period as short as 1 year.
All hardware is made of stainless steel, aluminum, and weatherproof plastics, allowing FarmBot to be installed outdoors or on rooftops in all weather conditions as well as in greenhouses or indoors. FarmBot is also 100% open-source, meaning all of the CAD models, electronic schematics, software, and data are freely available online for everyone from tinkerers to teachers to learn more and customize their machine.
All models are in stock and available for immediate worldwide shipping from FarmBot’s California warehouse, with free shipping offered to US customers. With Spring fast approaching, now is the best time to order a kit at farm.bot.
ABOUT FARMBOT:
FarmBot aims to bring open-source precision ag tools to every backyard and classroom. Our top of the line model, FarmBot Genesis XL, can continuously grow a family of four all of their daily vegetable needs and offers the most features and customizability. Our most affordable model, FarmBot Express, comes 95% pre-assembled in the box and can be installed in under an hour. Join us in taking back control of the food system! See media.farm.bot for our full press kit.
Are we finally starting to see the adoption of labor-saving robots in agriculture? The short and unfulfilling summary answer is “It depends”. Undeniably, we are seeing clear signs of progress yet, simultaneously, we see clear signs of more progress needed. (Hi-res copy of the landscape.)
Earlier this year, Western Growers Association produced an excellent report that outlined the need for robotics in agriculture. Ongoing labor challenges are, of course, a major driver, but so are rising costs, future demand, climate change impacts, and sustainability, among others. The use of robotics in agricultural production is the next progression of decades of increasing mechanization and automation to enhance crop production. Today’s crop robotics can build upon these preceding solutions and leverage newer technologies like precise navigation, vision and other sensor systems, connectivity and interoperability protocols, deep learning and artificial intelligence to address farmers’ current and future challenges.
So What is a Crop Robot?
We at The Mixing Bowl and Better Food Ventures create various market landscape maps that capture the use of technology in our food system. Our intent in producing these landscapes is to not only represent where a technology’s adoption is today, but, more importantly, where it is heading. So, as we developed this 2022 Crop Robotics Landscape, our frame of reference was to look beyond mechanization and defined automation to more autonomous crop robotics. This focus on “robotics” perhaps created the hardest challenge for us—defining a “Crop Robot”.
According to the definition of the Oxford English Dictionary, “A robot is a machine—especially one programmable by a computer—capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically.” Putting agriculture aside for a moment, that definition means that a dishwasher, washing machine, or a thermostat controlling an air conditioner could all be considered robots, not things that evoke “robot” to most people. When asking “What is a Crop Robot” in our interviews for this analysis, the theme of “labor savings” came through strongly. Must a crop robot be a labor reducing tool? This is where our definition of a crop robot started us down the “It depends” path?
If a machine is only sensing or gathering data, is it saving labor enough to be considering a robot?
If a machine does not have a fully autonomous mobility system to move around—perhaps just an implement pulled by a standard tractor—is it a robot?
If a machine is solely an autonomous mobility system not designed for any specific labor-saving agriculture task, is it a robot?
If the machine is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)/aerial drone, is it a robot? Does the answer change if there are a fleet of drones coordinating amongst themselves the spraying of a field?
Eventually, for the purposes of this robotic landscape analysis, we focused on machines that use hardware and software to perceive surroundings, analyze data and take real-time action on information related to an agricultural crop-related function without human intervention.
This definition focuses on characteristics that enable autonomous, not deterministic, actions. In many instances repetitive or constrained automation can get a task completed in an efficient and cost effective manner. Much of the existing and indispensable agricultural machinery and automation used on farms today would fit that description. However, we wanted to look specifically at robotic technologies that can take more unplanned, appropriate and timely action in the dynamic, unpredictable, and unstructured environments that exist in agricultural production. That translates to more precision, more dexterity and more autonomy.
The Crop Robotics Landscape
Our 2022 Crop Robotics Landscape includes nearly 250 companies developing crop robotic systems today. The robots are a mix: some that are self-propelled and some that aren’t, some that can navigate autonomously and those that can’t, some that are precise and some that are not, both ground-based and air-based systems, and those focused on indoor or outdoor production. In general, the systems need to offer autonomous navigation or vision-aided precision or a combination to be included on the landscape. These included areas are highlighted in gold in the chart below. The white areas are not autonomous or not complete robotic systems and are not included on the landscape.
2022 Crop Robotics
Chris Taylor
The landscape is limited to robotic solutions utilized in the production of food crops; it does not include robotics for animal farming nor for the production of cannabis. Pre-production nursery and post-harvest segments are also excluded (but note that highly automated solutions for these tasks are commercially available today). Likewise, sensor-only and analytic offerings are also not included, unless they are part of a complete robotic system.
Additionally, we only included companies that are providing their robotic systems commercially to others. If they develop robotics only for their own internal use or only offer services then they are not included, nor are academic or consortium research projects unless they appear to be heading to a commercial offering. Product companies should have reached at least the demonstrable-prototype stage in their development. Finally, companies appear only once on the landscape, even though some may offer multiple or multi-use robotic solutions. They are also placed according to their most sophisticated or primary function.
The landscape is segmented vertically by crop production system: broadacre row crops, field-grown specialty, orchard and vineyard, and indoor. The landscape is also segmented horizontally by functional area: autonomous movement, crop management, and harvest. Within those functional areas are the more specific task/product segments described here:
Autonomous Movement
Navigation/Autonomy – more sophisticated autosteer systems with headland turning capability and autonomous navigation systems
Small Tractor/Platform – smaller, people size autonomous tractors and carriers
Large Tractor – larger autonomous tractors and carriers
Indoor Platform – smaller autonomous carriers specifically for indoor farms
Crop Management
Scouting and Indoor Scouting – autonomous mapping and scouting robots and aerial drones; note that robots appearing in other task/product categories may have scouting capabilities in addition to their primary function
Preparation & Planting – autonomous field preparation and planting robots
Drone Application – spraying and spreading aerial drones
Some of the task/product segments, like Large Tractor, span multiple crop systems, as the robotic solutions within them may be applicable to more than one crop type. Logo positions within these landscape boxes are not necessarily indicative of crop system applicability.
The diversity of offerings appearing on the landscape is perhaps the biggest takeaway; crop robotics is a very active sector across tasks and crops types. In the Autonomous Movement area, although autosteer has been in wide use for many years, more robust autonomous navigation technology and fully autonomous tractors and smaller multi-use motive platforms are just entering the market. In Crop Management there is a mix of self-propelled and trailed and attached implements. Vision-aided precision crop care tasks like spot spraying and weeding are areas of heavy development activity, particularly for the less automated specialty crop sector. Finally, high-value, high-labor crops like strawberries, fresh-market tomatoes, and orchard fruit are the focus for many robotic harvesting initiatives. As noted, there is a lot of activity; however, successful commercialization is more rare.
Traversing the Valley of Death to Achieve Scale
The Government of the United Kingdom recently released a report that reviews Automation in Horticulture. In the report they include the automation lifecycle analysis graphic shown below that they refer to as “Technology Readiness Levels in Horticulture”. If we were to map the more than 600 companies we researched in our analysis, well over 90 percent of these companies would still be labeled in the “Research” or “System Development” phases. Historically, many agriculture robotics companies have failed to succeed, perishing in the “Valley of Death”. Only a handful of companies have reached “Commercialization”, a phase where companies attempt to traverse the perilous journey from product success to business success and profitability.
“Automation in Horticulture Review”
Dept. of Environment Food & Rural Affairs, Government of the United Kingdom July, 2022
There are many reasons why ag robotics has had a high failure rate in reaching commercial scale. At its core, it has been very difficult to provide a reliable machine capable of providing value to a farmer on par with a non-robotic or manual solution at a cost effective price point.
Amongst the technical challenges crop robotics companies face are:
Design: In the early days a company may want to vary its product design to try new things. But at some point as it begins to scale, it needs to lock in standardization to the degree possible. Updating deployed systems remains a continuous challenge.
Manufacturing: Maturing companies move from custom to standardized manufacturing. One company we spoke with had gone from building machines itself, to just building a base and then having vendors doing sub-assembly. Now they have gotten to a point of maturation that not a single team member touches a wrench as all manufacturing is done by partners.
Reliability: A metric commonly used is hours of uninterrupted operation, and scaling requires going from “faults per mile” to “miles per fault”. The ability to handle the adverse and unpredictable conditions of agricultural production exacerbates the difficulty in creating a reliable machine. As an example, one person told about the unforeseen challenge of working in vineyards where the acid from grape juice accelerates equipment deterioration.
Operation: At some point in the scaling process, farm staff will operate the machine without the presence of robotic solution provider support staff. At this point, there are often knowledge gaps on how to effectively operate the machine that need to be resolved. A step in scaling is getting farm staff trained to operate the machines themselves.
Service: Another metric we heard was about decreasing service support resource requirements: How could a robotics company switch from having X number of people support a single unit to having a single person support Y number of different units?
A last technical facet of scaling is the ease with which a platform can be modified to serve multiple crops or multiple tasks. The space is still so early that we don’t have that many data points about repurposing technology for multiple crops/tasks. However, it is something many companies are obviously looking to prove to upsell customers or convince investors they have the potential to serve a larger market.
We heard from numerous crop robotic startups and investors that the technology challenges need to be tackled first, then the economic and business challenges can be addressed. The reality, of course, is that a successful crop robotic solution developer must face several challenges simultaneously: sustaining a business while refining product-market fit to get paying customers; refining product-market fit while sustaining the interest of investors; and sustaining the engagement of farmer customers.
On the business side, we tried to identify when a company could claim it had made it through the “Valley of Death”. One group we spoke with very simply said there were three key business questions to ask:
Can we sell it?
Does demand outstrip supply?
Do the unit economics work out for all parties?
The answer to the question of “Can we sell it?” usually equated to when and if the robot could perform the task on par with a human—a comparable performance for a comparable cost. That performance clearly varies by crop and task. As an example, there was a generally shared sense that “picking” was the most difficult task to achieve on par with the time, accuracy and cost of a human.
One thread that came up in our conversations is that many farmers may not yet see the longer-term potential of what robots can do in agriculture. They look at (and value) them merely as a way to replace the tasks a human does—but do not look at what more efficient approaches beyond the capabilities of humans that could be enabled with these powerful platforms.
In our discussions we probed on whether the business model of a crop robotics company made a substantial difference in whether they could sell it. Responses were wide-ranging as to whether there is a benefit to having a “Robotics as a Service” (RaaS) model versus a machine buy/lease model. Our net conclusion regarding business models is that, while it may be advantageous to offer “Robotics-as-a-Service” (RaaS) in the early stages of a company’s development, over the longer run companies should plan to operate under both a buy/lease and a RaaS model. The advantages of RaaS in the early days are that they 1) allow a farmer to “try before you buy” which lowers the complexity and cost, and, thus, lowers the barrier to adoption and 2) offer a startup to work more closely with farmers to understand problems and identify potential new challenges to solve.
Many startups have “hyped” their solutions too early, before they could conquer the many complexities involved with successfully operating in the market. This “hype” has caused many farmers to be leery of crop robotics in general. Farmers just want (and need) things to work and many may have been burned in the past by adopting technologies that were not fully mature. As one startup said, “It is hard to get them to understand the iterative process”. Still, farmers are also known as problem solvers and many continue to engage with startups to help mature solutions.
Of course, the “Can we sell it?” question should really be extended to “Can we sell and support it?”. An interesting point to watch between incumbents and new solution providers will be the scaling of startups and the resulting need for those companies to have a cost-effective sales and service channel. Incumbent vendors, of course, have those channels, and John Deere and GUSS Automation have announced just such a partnership.
Like farmers, investors also walk hand-in-hand with a robotics startup crossing the Valley of Death. Investor sentiment toward agriculture robotics is mixed. On the one hand, there is an acknowledgement that there have not been notable exits of profitable startups in this space (as opposed to those just having desirable technology). On the other hand, there is a recognition that agriculture’s labor issues are becoming more acute and large potential markets could be realized this time around. Investors also see that the quality of the technology and startup teams have improved in the last few years.
It is encouraging to see more investors looking at the space than a few years ago, writing bigger checks in later rounds, and investing at high valuations. Investors also understand the challenges better than before so that they can differentiate between segments developers are targeting, e.g., the difficulty of harvesting in an open field versus scouting in a greenhouse.
What Gives us Optimism Crop Robotics is Making Progress?
So, given the above, why do we feel optimistic that crop robotics is making healthy progress? For a number of reasons, the Valley of Death may not be as wide nor as fatal as it has been in the past for companies in this space.
Beyond the growing need for labor-saving solutions in agriculture, we are optimistic that crop robotics is making progress simply because of the underlying technology progress that has occurred in the last decade or so. Again and again in the interviews we conducted, we heard phrases similar to “this would not have been possible a decade ago”. Someone flat out stated that a few years ago “The machines weren’t ready” for the conditions of farming. Large scale improvements in core compute technology, accessibility and performance of computer vision systems, deep learning capabilities, and even automated mobility systems have come a long way in the last ten years.
In addition to the improved technology base, there is more seasoned talent than a decade ago and that talent brings a range of experiences from across the robotics landscape, including insight into scaling to success. In this regard, crop robotics can leverage the broader, better-funded robotics spaces of self-driving vehicles and warehouse automation. Equally important, most of the teams that are seeing success employ a combination of robotics experts and farm experts. Past ag robotics teams may have had the technological prowess to develop a solution but may not have understood the ag market or the realities of farming environments.
We are also optimistic because the depth and breadth of crop robotic solutions is expanding, as illustrated by the number of companies represented on our landscape. Although large commodity row crop farms—like those of the Midwestern US—are already highly automated and have even adopted robotic autosteer systems en masse, a very clear indication of progress is that we are seeing a more diverse set of crop robotic solutions than in years past.
For example, new robotic platforms are successfully undertaking labor-saving tasks that are of modest difficulty. Perhaps the best example of this is the GUSS autonomous sprayer that can work in orchards. The self-powered GUSS machine navigates autonomously and can adjust its spraying selectively based on its ultrasonic sensors. It has reached commercial scale. We are also starting to see more solutions targeting farmers who have been underserved by labor-saving automation solutions, such as smaller farm operations or niche specialty crop systems. Examples of this are Burro, Naio or farm-ng. Lastly, we are seeing the development of “smart implements”. By not taking on the burden of developing autonomous movement, these solutions can be pulled behind a tractor to focus on complex agriculture tasks like vision-guided selective weeding and spraying. Verdant, Farmwise and Carbon Robotics are examples of this kind of solution.
One encouraging trend we are also watching is the role of incumbent agriculture equipment providers, particularly in specialty crops. John Deere (Blue River,Bear Flag Robotics) as well as Case New Holland (Raven Industries) have signaled a willingness to acquire companies in crop robotics to complement their ongoing internal R&D efforts. Yamaha and Toyota, through their venture funds, have also shown a desire to partner and invest in the space. The question remains to be seen if other incumbent equipment players have the willingness to invest in the assemblage of technology and talent required to bring robotic solutions to the marketplace.
Looking Ahead
The drivers for increased automation in agriculture are readily apparent and are likely to continue to increase over time. Thus, a large opportunity exists for robotic solutions that can help farmers mitigate their production challenges. That is, as long as those solutions perform well and at reasonable cost in the real world of commercial farm operations. As we observed while researching the landscape, there is an impressive number of companies focused on developing crop robotics solutions across a breadth of crop systems and tasks, and with more commercial focus than past projects. However, the market continues to feel early as companies continue to navigate the difficult process of creating and deploying robust solutions at scale for this challenging industry. Still, there is more room for optimism and more tangible progress being made now than ever before. The Crop Robotics “Valley of Death” that so many startups have failed to cross appears to be becoming less wide and ominous in great part due to the break-neck speed of technological progress. While a robotic revolution in crop production is likely still some time off, we are seeing a promising evolution and expect to see more successful crop robotic companies in the not too distant future.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources and The Vine for their strong interest in crop robotics and their continued support of this project. Thank you to Simon Pearson, Director, Lincoln Institute for Agri-Food Technology and Professor of Agri-Food Technology, University of Lincoln in the UK for his insights and the use of the graphic from the Automation in Horticulture Review report. Thank you to Walt Duflock of Western Growers Association for sharing his detailed perspective on the ag robotics sector. Most importantly we would like to acknowledge all the start-ups and innovators who are working tirelessly to make crop robotics a much needed reality. A special thanks to those entrepreneurs and investors that spoke with us and provided a unique view into the challenges and excitement of a crop robotic business.
Bios
Chris Taylor is a Senior Consultant on The Mixing Bowl team and has spent more than 20 years on global IT strategy and development innovation in manufacturing, design and healthcare, focusing most recently on AgTech.
Michael Rose is a Partner at The Mixing Bowl and Better Food Ventures where he brings more than 25 years immersed in new venture creation and innovation as an operating executive and investor across the Food Tech, AgTech, restaurant, Internet, and mobile sectors.
Rob Trice founded The Mixing Bowl to connect food, agriculture and IT innovators for thought and action leadership and Better Food Ventures to invest in startups harnessing IT for positive impact in Agrifoodtech.
