How does Ceradis adapt to the new requirements of the agribusiness market during these times of global distress?

Although the turmoil of the past few years has negatively affected society, it has triggered a disruption in the industry, making us go towards greener technologies. Both the energy and the food price crises are now pushing farmers to do more with less. Agribusiness comes from an era where crop protection and fertilizing solutions were cheap, very effective and easy to use. The shift that is being driven by regulatory bodies and consumers alike points us towards a transition to less input and more biologicals. 

Because of the war in Ukraine, the price of basic fertilizers (known as NPK) has increased by 50%. As a result, an array of solutions that work in symbiosis and reduce the need for nitrogen fertilizers became highly sought after. These new biostimulants also reduce energy consumption. Producing NPKs required around 1.2% of global energy. 

What is the difference between the more traditional fertilizing and crop protection solutions and the products that you provide?

Traditional fertilizers are spread on the soil in generous quantities so that the plants can take up the amount of nutrition needed, but the surplus usually ends up in water streams. Case in point, the Mississippi river has so much nitrogen that algae reproduce in excess and take all the oxygen, thus leading to dying populations of fish in the Gulf of Mexico.

The new technologies that we propose allow lower leeching into the soil so that the bulk of the product will not run off into the rivers. Developing technologies that enhance the uptake of a product and make it more bioavailable for plants is the new paradigm of agriculture. 

Crop protection has always been more heavily regulated, due to its direct interaction with the food and its inherent toxicity. Moreover, these chemicals tend to be the more expensive solution, so farmers are already accustomed to using them in smaller quantities. However, they still have their particular side effects, which can be avoided by using biologicals, such as CeraMax - which is a Natamycin product that has proven to be very efficient against Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS) in soybeans. There are not many options that solve this particular issue, and we are happy to offer a valuable bio-alternative that can successfully address it. Besides fending off fungi, CeraMax also better preserves the soil biome and has better interaction with biostimulants.

How do you perceive the appetite for your solutions in North America, as a relatively new market you are approaching?

The farming system in the U.S. is extremely professional and the industry is strong in terms of cost-benefit ratio, so you have to clearly position yourself and highlight the benefits of your product. It is a competitive and large market. However, there is less regulatory pressure compared to Europe and the need to switch to alternative solutions is not as stringent. Moreover, the market is strongly integrated, with big companies having well-established relationships with retailers. As a result, it takes a lot of grit to be able to break into these firm links. 

Still, we have been able to strike a partnership with AgroFresh which is an important player in the post-harvest crop solution space. Fruits have a long journey from harvest to shelf (for example bananas are kept in containers for several weeks,) so they need to be protected with post-harvest solutions that are mostly chemical based. The deal with AgroFresh is to bring Natamycin as a biological alternative that has the same level of efficacy as the traditional options, but is organic and has less side effects. 

What are some of the main challenges that you are facing now and how can they be overcome?

Besides the unrest in Eastern Europe, which led to a spike in food prices, the total population of the world is continually growing. By 2050, we will need to produce twice the amount that we were producing a few years ago, and that with less input. This in itself is a fundamental challenge that we need to tackle, and we are trying our best to be part of the solution. As more and more big companies perceive that this change requires a shift across the entire agricultural system, innovative solutions will continue to appear. Stopping crop protection altogether is not a realistic option due to the need for monocultures to achieve efficiency. The EU ambition to reduce the use of chemicals by 50% is already a difficult task in itself. Yet we believe it is achievable, as it is exactly the goal we had set for ourselves to achieve with our solutions. Agriculture will continue to need to do ‘more with less’ since I am convinced that consumers will keep pressing for this change which is in the end beneficial for all of us.