Feedinfo Review Autumn 2021

REVIEW Autumn 2021 Issue

CARBON CREDITS

DEFORESTATION

ASF IN AMERICAS

Opportunities for livestock production

Amazon Soy Moratorium’s advantages and limitations

US must prepare for contamination potential

Pages 10-11

Pages 12-16

Pages 34-40

YOUR CONNECTION TO THE GLOBAL ANIMAL NUTRITION AND FEED INDUSTRY

TARGET LOW CARBON FOOTPRINT REFORMULATION OF THE FEED Better use of local feedstuffs ENZYMES, AMINO ACIDS, NIR ANALYSIS, PALATANTS

REDUCTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ANIMAL PRODUCTION THANKS TO ADISSEO NUTRITIONAL SOLUTIONS

IMPROVE FEED EFFICIENCY Better Feed Conversion Ratio ENZYMES, FEED PRESERVATIVES

ACHIEVE A BROAD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

REDUCE EXCRETION Less emission of nitrogen and phosphorus ENZYMES, AMINO ACIDS, SODIUM SULFATE

ENHANCE HEALTH STATUS OF ANIMALS

A ADI029-00

Less diseased animals, less mortality Better fertility and longevity PROBIOTICS, SELENIUM, VITAMINS, BUTYRATE, MYCOTOXINS DEACTIVATORS, AMINO ACIDS

www.adisseo.com

AND MORE...

READ FURTHER ON ADISSEO WEBSITE

WELCOME

FROM THE EDITOR

H

Welcome to the autumn edition of Feedinfo Review

ow to break through with a meaningful message on sustainability when we are positively swamped in communications on this theme?

Honestly, I was a bit intimidated by the sustainability issue for that reason. It is no great feat to identify the issues where the feed industry can and must do better on sustainability. You don’t need me to tell you that deforestation and climate change are motivating the consumer like never before; that the pressure of feeding nine or 10 billion people will require revolutions in productivity if we want to avoid transforming every last bit of wild space into farmland; or that the regulatory tolerance for emissions of nitrogen, phosphorus and greenhouse gases has reached its limit in many areas.

What the industry does need is a look beyond the greenwashing and self-congratulation which pervades the sustainability discussion. It needs to discuss why certain policies actually worked, while others turned into empty promises. It needs to talk about how to finance the expensive changes to animal husbandry that the sustainability revolution is developing.

It needs to take a serious look at the promises and prospects of new protein ingredients. And it needs to talk about getting more voices to the table to participate in these discussions. This is

Shannon Behary, editor, Feedinfo

what the current issue of Feedinfo Review seeks to do. It is quite easy to find a great number of industry communiqués talking about sustainability, but much more meaningful to ask some hard questions about them.

Still, there is more to this topic than just hot air. After spending the last few months digging into the industry’s most compelling sustainability stories I have learned there is a lot to be hopeful about. Actors in the animal production supply chains are tired of being cast as the bad guys when it comes to environmental issues and have devoted considerable R&D efforts to develop creative solutions which change that narrative. These concepts are at various stages, from those seeking regulatory approval to those looking to scale up production, but for the most part, the proof of concept is there; these are not early-stage moonshots, but tangible products.

Just as importantly, they are being pushed by companies who are leaders in their domain and who are wholeheartedly committed to being part of the solution, rather than simply trying to deny and distance themselves from the problem. Pay attention to that: there is a pretty crucial lesson there, which I hope this magazine can help illustrate. Being proactive on the sustainability front, going further than legally required and faster than your peers, is not only the right move for the planet, but also for your business’ financial health. I am glad to see that, as an industry, we have fewer and fewer voices trying to say that problems such as greenhouse gas generation or nitrogen emissions are somebody else’s problem – energy generation, maybe, or transportation – and that regulation of these amounts to big-state overreach.

But the takeaway from this magazine should be that the companies who, years ago, embraced the truth of the matter – that these are everybody’s problem – now in many cases have products nearly ready for the market. They attracted the talent, funded the development, did the research and are ready to go with solutions, just as the demands of consumers and regulators for cleaner and more ethical products reach record levels.

Fortunately for those companies who are not yet part of this sea-change coming to agriculture, there is still time to join the revolution. We have a long way to go before problems like climate change and the disappearance of irreplaceable forests are no longer existential threats. Hopefully the stories that follow will provide inspiration for how to get involved.

CONTACTS Editorial enquiries Shannon Behary – Editor +33 (0)6 70 11 27 38 shannon.behary@feedinfo.com

Feedinfo subscription enquiries Richard O’Donoghue – Client account manager +33 (0)7 88 14 28 09 richard.odonoghue@agribriefing.com

Advertising enquiries Lisa Guiraud – Global lead, Perspectives +33 (0) 6 37 46 86 47 lisa.guiraud@feedinfo.com

© AgriBriefing 2021 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system without the express prior written consent of the publisher. The contents of Feedinfo Review are subject to reproduction in information storage and retrieval systems. ISSN 1777-5566

www.feedinfo.com

AUTUMN 2021 | 3

How can the feed sector contribute to sustainability in animal production?

Through feed quality, environmental protection, and reduced antibiotic use, the animal nutrition industry offers effective solutions for more sustainable practices in animal production.

Find out more - from EW Nutrition.

Functional Innovations backed by Science ew-nutrition.com

IN THIS ISSUE

CONTENTS AUTUMN

6-9

10-11

Headline news affecting our industry

New market to open up

NEWS BITES

12-16 DEFORESTATION

Amazon Soy Moratorium advantages and limitations

20

US-CHINA TRADE

US must consider ag trade policies with China

24-25

INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES Delacon sees sustainability at its heart

28-29 PAPS

Pig/poultry processed animal proteins back in EU

34-40 US ASF RISK

CARBON CREDITS

18-19

INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES

A look at advances in phytase research with Huvepharma

22-23

ANALYST’S CORNER

Global vitamin A market waits for news from BASF

26-27 INSECT FEED

What to expect out of insect feed’s buzzy growth

30-32 INSIGHT

Israel is at the forefront of alternative meat revolution

42-43

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

US must prepare for potential ASF contamination

Adapting methane reduction strategies for grazing systems

WOMEN IN FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

RECRUITMENT UPDATES

44-46

Tough questions need diverse thinking

www.feedinfo.com

48

Industry moves

AUTUMN 2021 | 5

NEWS BITES

Headline industry news SUPPLY WOES COMPOUNDED BY CHINA POWER CRISIS

ASF ON GERMAN FARMS

Amid a supply situation for feed additives and raw materials that was already complicated by expensive shipping and long lead times, another potential issue has recently emerged. Changes to China’s coal and power generation markets caused electricity cuts in several regions across the country in late September/ early October. The outages have halted soy crushing plants, affecting the availability of soybean meal for feed, and have paused production at several feed additives manufacturers. This was identified as a major factor behind lysine prices in Europe and the US reaching its highest levels of the year in September. z The latest updates on this evolving situation are available to Feedinfo subscribers.

Germany saw its first case of ASF in farmed pigs in mid-July.

However, in the case of Germany, many countries had already banned importing its pork as it had previously notified of ASF in wild boar herds.

NATURAL DISASTERS HIT CHINA AND US The supply situation was further aggravated by natural disasters in recent months, including Typhoon In-Fa in China in late July, which caused even more backlog to build up at the ports of the world’s most important feed additive exporter, and Hurricane Ida on the US Gulf Coast in August/September, which damaged grain terminals and other infrastructure at harvest time for one of the world’s most significant grain exporters.

ASF IN AMERICAS In animal health, African swine fever (ASF) returned to the Americas for the first time in 40 years, showing up in the Caribbean island nations of the Dominican Republic in late July, and neighbouring Haiti shortly thereafter. This has worried the hog industry in the United States, as spread to its own territory a mere 133km from the Dominican Republic would impact its ASF-free status and complicate exports.

SUCCESSFUL TRIALS OF ASF VACCINE CANDIDATE However, amid the negative ASF news, one cautious bit of hope: a team including researchers from USDA ARS and from Vietnamese veterinary company Navetco reported positive results for the vaccine candidate ASFV-G-ΔI177L in trials in Vietnam which used a local breed of pigs and a recently-obtained isolate of the virus. However, much further research remains to be performed before the vaccine will be commercially available in Vietnam or any other jurisdiction.

PAP LIBERALISATION IN EU The EU enacted changes to its rules on the feeding of certain animal-derived ingredients, including poultry-, pork- and insectbased processed animal proteins. z For more information on this story, see page 28.

ACTION ON US MEAT INDUSTRY CONSOLIDATION? In a statement in early September, the White House promised to ‘crack down on illegal price fixing’ in the meat industry, calling out a lack of competition which was ‘driving down earnings for farmers while driving up prices for consumers’, and pledging to invest more than a billion dollars of Covid-19 relief money into support for small meat producers and workers on farms and in meatpackers.

Changes to China’s coal and power generation markets caused electricity cuts in several regions across the country in late September/early October.

6 | AUTUMN 2021

www.feedinfo.com

• Gosselin design & digital - RCS Rennes 480 918 366

INNOVATE FOR LIFE Expert and innovative solutions for our customers to contribute to the development of sustainable animal farming.

We, miXscience, believe in the development of sustainable animal farming, economically efficient, respectful of the welfare and health of the animals, playing an active role in the protection of our environment and producing food of high sanitary and nutritional quality.

Throughout the world, we work with our customers in the livestock sector every day to provide them with answers to these many challenges.

2, avenue Ker Lann | CS 17228 35172 BRUZ Cedex - FRANCE

www.mixscience.eu

mi science INNOVATE FOR LIFE

NEWS BITES

It is hoped new bacteriophage cocktails will combat salmonella and avian pathogenic E. coli infections in poultry.

M&A, partnerships and corporate news US$4.5 BILLION FOR SANDERSON FARMS In August, an agreement was announced which would see Cargill and Continental Grain combine forces in a joint venture to acquire Sanderson Farms. Once the transaction is completed, Cargill and Continental Grain will combine Sanderson Farms with Wayne Farms, a subsidiary of Continental Grain.

HEFTY INVESTMENTS IN PET SECTOR M&A Petfood continued to draw sizeable levels of industry investment.

In early September, ADM announced it would pay around US$600 million for a 75% stake in four private label pet treat and supplements companies. Meanwhile, in late September, Bloomberg reported that Chinese private equity firm FountainVest agreed to buy New Zealandbased pet food company Ziwi for NZ$1.5 billion (US$1.06bn).

DSM AND MEATABLE IN CULTURED MEAT PARTNERSHIP DSM announced it would be working with a startup called Meatable on the development of growth media needed to produce ‘cultured’ or ‘cell-based’ meat. The availability of cost-effective growth media is one of the main obstacles to the growth of this concept, which consists of growing animal cells in a bioreactor rather than in an animal which must be slaughtered to harvest its biomass. The announcement came in mid-September, shortly after DSM announced a rededication to sustainability within nutrition as part of a reorganisation which will see it divest its remaining non-nutrition businesses.

TRANSFORMING CO2 INTO FEED INGREDIENTS

AB Agri’s Livalta and Canada’s Pond Technologies signed an exclusive global partnership on algae-based feed ingredients. The two will feed their algae on carbon dioxide captured from industrial processes.

salmonella and avian pathogenic E. coli infections in poultry, as well as pseudomonas and aeromonas infection in aquaculture, lowering the need for antibiotics.

€100 MILLION FOR INSECT FEED It was announced in late September that French insect producer Agronutris had raised €100 million. The company is reportedly planning to deploy its first industrial unit in Rethel by the end of next year, with a second, larger site to follow.

EUROPEAN PREMIX ACQUISITION Vilomix, a subsidiary of Danish Agro Group, Agravis, and Vestjyllands Andel, announced in mid-September the acquisition of a controlling stake of premix and mineral company TEGASA (Técnica Ganadera SL), a Spanish company with turnover of around €12 million.

ANGEL YEAST BUYS SHANDONG BIO SUNKEEN Shandong Bio Sunkeen Co Ltd, a China-based manufacturer of yeast products for human and animal nutrition, has been acquired by Angel Yeast via a joint venture with an investment entity called Shandong Lufa Holding Company. The deal has been estimated to amount to CNY 100 million (US$15.4m).

EASY HOLDINGS BUYS FURST-McNESS At the end of July, South Korea’s Easy Holdings acquired Illinoisbased animal nutrition company Furst-McNess Co, which operates 12 facilities across eight states and Canada, providing over two million tonnes of premix, manufactured feeds, feed ingredients and adjacent products. Furst-McNess will retain its name and continue to operate as a stand-alone business.

NUTRECO PARTICIPATES IN FUNDRAISING

DAESANG BOOSTS STAKE IN CHENGFU

Proteon Pharmaceuticals announced in August it has received investment of €21 million in a financing round led by Nutreco, to accelerate the commercialisation of its bacteriophage products.

Proteon Pharmaceuticals hopes its bacteriophage cocktails will combat

Chengfu Food Group has expanded its near three-year-old lysine production cooperation with South Korea’s Daesang Corporation.

Chengfu said Daesang will invest approximately $22.7 million to increase its stake in Chengfu to 32.9%.

8 | AUTUMN 2021

www.feedinfo.com

NEWS BITES

Production in focus FEED ADDITIVES AND INGREDIENTS

BASF achieved startup in July for its vitamin A acetate expansion project, expected to add 1,500 tonnes per year of vitamin A acetate capacity. However, in early August, a fire at its Ludwigshafen alcoholates facility prompted a force majeure on sodium methylate and potassium methylate, widely used in the production of vitamins and other feed additives. z For more information on the impacts of these developments on the vitamins markets, see the Analyst’s Corner on page 22.

METEX NØØVISTA inaugurated its butyric acid production unit in Carling Saint-Avold (Moselle department) in late September. The company has previously indicated the new butyric acid plant would have an initial capacity of 1,000 tonnes/year.

Agrifirm opened a new feed additive production unit in Maripá, Brazil, in late September which will make products from its Agrimprove®line, as well as new functional ingredients for animal nutrition.

Nor-Feed inaugurated a new plant near Angers, France, in late September, quadrupling the phytogenic feed additive company’s production capacity in concentrated extracts.

In late August, Jefo broke ground on a new C$42.5 million production plant in Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec, which will add two production lines in the first phase and offer a potential expansion to six lines in the future.

Olmix said it was in the optimisation phase of a capital investment plan at its algae processing facility in Bréhan, Brittany. Approximately €10 million has been invested to grow algae volumes, which will quadruple over the long term.

Omaha-based agricultural marketing company Scoular is launching a fishmeal facility in Myanmar this October as part of its recent expansion into the Asia-Pacific region.

PREMIX AND VETERINARY In late September, Cargill Animal Nutrition entered a partnership with family-owned animal feed supplier Gebrs Fuite BV to build a new factory in Hasselt, near Zwolle, in the Netherlands. The factory, expected to be fully operational in 2024, will produce Provimi-branded premixes, concentrates and young animal feeds.

Koudijs Ukraine, a De Heus subsidiary, opened a new mineral and vitamin premix plant in Lviv in late September with a production capacity of 1,500 tonnes per month, aimed at both the domestic and export markets.

Zoetis revealed in early October its plans to expand manufacturing facility in Tullamore, Ireland, to increase its capacity for producing veterinary monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and support future growth in veterinary biopharmaceuticals. The expansion is planning to break ground in early 2022 and become fully operational by 2025.

were operating at full capacity and De Heus plans to build a new factory in Pasuruan, East Java, in October.

Finally, De Heus added 400,000t of capacity for monogastric feed production through the purchase of Coppens Diervoeding in the Netherlands. The deal was announced late in July, pending regulatory approval.

Going back to Africa, Nutreco announced in early August two significant investments in production capacity in Kenya and Uganda through a joint venture with Kenya’s Unga group. The Kenyan entity will produce fish feeds intended for East African markets at Unga’s existing extruded fish feed plant in Nairobi and market them under the Skretting and Fugo brands. The Ugandan entity, meanwhile, will benefit from the transfer of Unga’s existing flour production facility in Kampala, to host a mill producing complete animal feed and concentrates sold under a range of Trouw Nutrition and Unga brands.

Mars Petcare USA was revealed to be planning a further $117 million expansion at its Fort Smith, Arkansas, pet food plant, doubling its previously-announced expansion plans for this site.

BioMar announced in late September that it will be expanding its extruded shrimp feed plant in Guayaquil, Ecuador, adding four new extruded feed lines and an additional 200,000 tonnes of capacity to the plant. The first phase of the project is expected to be completed in 2022.

Avril Group’s Sanders animal nutrition business revealed in midSeptember it plans to double the production capacity of GM-free, 100% French-origin soy in May 2022, as well as investing in production of organic feed for all species.

French feed producer Sirugue SAS Nutrition Animale is wrapping up an expansion of its factory near Dijon, boosting production capacity to 120,000 tonnes.

ForFarmers announced in late September that it would be modernising its feed mill in Izegem, Belgium, while closing its Ingelmunster site at the end of 2022.

The last quarter has seen various developments in the feed additives and ingredients sector.

FEED AND PETFOOD De Heus affirmed in late September that it was building a 100,000tonne/year compound feed plant just outside Abidjan, Ivory Coast, expected to enter into operational during the second half of next year.

Meanwhile, the Dutch company’s Indonesian representatives told Feedinfo in late August that, despite having increased production by two-three times at the two Indonesian plants it acquired in 2018, both

www.feedinfo.com

AUTUMN 2021 | 9

CARBON CREDITS After a pioneering launch in the carbon credits market, Mootral prepares to open its programme to third-party farmers.

New market to open up for carbon credits

L

ate last year, British-Swiss firm Mootral launched what are believed to be the world’s first carbon credits based on the inhibition of enteric methane production in cattle.

In short, Mootral’s feed supplement, based on garlic and citrus extracts, reduces the production of methane by the microbes in the cow’s stomach. After developing a Verified Carbon Standard methodology approved by Verra (a major certification body in the carbon market) to quantify and monitor reductions in methane emissions in cattle, the company began selling ‘CowCredits’.

CowCredits can be purchased by companies interested in offsetting their carbon footprint, amounting to a CO2 equivalent of one-tonne per cow per year of greenhouse gas emissions averted.

Until now, the small amount of CowCredits made available to the carbon offset markets were based on the reductions at Mootral’s own flagship farm in the UK. Soon, for the first time, the programme will be taking on its first farmers outside of Mootral. By the end of the year, the company plans to undertake a recruitment campaign to bring on farmers managing about 5,000 cows per quarter until the programme spans 20,000 cows in 2022.

Christelle Girard, director of the carbon workstream at Mootral, says: “We need to demonstrate that we can do it at scale.”

Huge unmet demand for such credits Out of the slightly more than 300 credits which have been generated up to now by Mootral’s programme and which can be viewed on the Verra registry, about 100 have actually been purchased. According to Girard, this is a function of the company taking the time to find the right long-term partner for this project and not a function of the lack of demand for these credits. On the contrary, she says, they have been approached by very many different companies. As one of the only carbon credit projects physically located in Western Europe in the last year and one of the only ones in the UK for the last decade, the project presents an attractive opportunity for consumer-facing companies in the oil and gas industry who might want to tell a nice story about how their investment in carbon credits is staying in an offset project in the local community.

10 | AUTUMN 2021

Mootral plans to undertake a recruitment campaign to bring on farmers managing about 5,000 cows per quarter to its CowCredits programme.

Moreover, Girard adds, traders in these kinds of credits have also shown an interest, particularly those who have been commissioned by buyers with a requirement to purchase a large number of carbon credits and who are interested in high quality, verifiable GHG reduction projects. “[The traders] were just buying and selling. Now they realise that the offer is not big enough and they are also facing specific requests from clients who want to have more high quality credits. They ask [the traders] to help search the markets to find new projects, interesting projects. Some carbon traders are actually considering investing themselves into new projects, to help projects to develop, [in order to] sell the credit afterwards to their clients.”

And it is not just the location of the project that makes it ‘high quality’. Mootral’s programme also receives high marks on two other criteria which are important to carbon buyers.

One is permanence. For some projects in the carbon credit world, the greenhouse gas in question could be released into the atmosphere later, under certain conditions; for example, if you are planting a forest that eventually burns, you are tying up carbon dioxide outside of the atmosphere (hopefully by a meaningful amount of time) rather than completely removing it from the biosphere forever. However, with Mootral, methane is not being sequestered in order to delay an eventual escape into the atmosphere; it is, instead, being cancelled out, or never produced to begin with, making this a highly ‘permanent’ intervention.

The other important criteria is additionality. That means that the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would not have happened in the absence of a carbon offset programme. Given that comparable programmes for enteric methane mitigation do not exist, asserts Girard, “we are starting from zero, so everything we do on that subject is additional.”

Given this level of interest, Mootral can allow itself to take its

www.feedinfo.com

CARBON CREDITS

“We ask for three to five years of commitment, because we are treating living animals. It’s not like something you can switch on and off” CHRISTELLE GIRARD time and find buyers who fit the project. Ideally, the company would like to find a partner in the dairy value chain, such as someone who uses the milk or other byproducts. More importantly, though, they want somebody who will be involved for several years, to guarantee a certain level of continuity for the most important stakeholders – the farmers and animals.

“Our approach is to embark them on a long-term relationship. We ask for three to five years of commitment, because we are treating living animals. It’s not like something you can switch on and off.”

Finally, she adds, Mootral’s carbon credits are on the expensive end, at €70 per credit. This is simple enough to understand: the money is supposed to help reimburse the cost of buying the Mootral methane-reducing feed supplement.

“We will keep an administrative fee because we are managing [the project], we are the one organising audits and verification and so on. But at the end of the day, the idea is actually to give back

www.feedinfo.com

to the farmer the proceeds of the carbon credit; the core business of Mootral is to sell the feed supplement. That’s the basis of our business, so the idea is to use the proceeds of the carbon credit to start the process and compensate for the price of the treatment.”

With the slate of potential credit-buyers currently looking healthy enough, the concern at the moment is in finding the right farmers to participate in the generation of those credits. The terms of the current credits on the Verra registry require that these be UK-based dairy farmers. Given that Mootral is not yet certified for use in organic production, they must be conventional producers. And for administrative simplicity, Mootral is looking for those with a minimum of 150 lactating cows on average, at least among this inaugural class for the programme.

There are, moreover, some requirements for historical data that are necessary to establish a baseline in order for the carbonreduction methodology to be properly applied. This may prove to be a complicated sticking point for some, acknowledges Girard; while it is standard to track things like milk production per cow, collecting and keeping data about parameters like dry matter intake is not necessarily something that most producers will already be doing.

Finally, and not the least important, the programme is looking for producers who believe in the mission of reducing their operation’s contributions to climate change. Girard calls this the ‘pioneer mindset’, and says it is essential to ensure that the farmers remain committed during an unprecedented sort of transition process.

“It’s an additional constraint: you have to feed your cows [the supplement], you have to measure and then you have to report what you’re doing,” she explains. “The payback will come at some stage, but might not be a very fast return on investment. [So] you need to believe in it.”

Of course, the company already has deep roots in the UK, where its own pilot project is operational.

“We have expressions of interest. We have farms around our flagship farm, because the family that holds this farm are pretty influential people in their area. Some of the neighbours have expressed interest,” adds Girard.

“Also, we are in contact with dairy companies that would give us access to their farm network, their suppliers.”

Expansion elsewhere When it comes to the potential development of this programme abroad, the company is, of course, enthusiastic, but much work remains to be done. In fact, Girard says the commercial development is not necessarily the main chokepoint; a much more important one is having the proper studies in place regarding how the Mootral methane-reducing feed additive conducts itself under local conditions – whether the same effects are observed under different management styles, feed composition and other variables.

In her telling, it is very important for the company to conduct this research thoroughly, working in cooperation with universities in order to have the validation of the academic and broader scientific communities.

“You need to have peer reviewed publications. [Research] needs to be robust, otherwise you may jeopardise everything. So that’s critical.

“We are pretty advanced in [studies in] the beef industry in the USA, so that will probably be one of the next projects,” she says.

“We are also looking at the Netherlands’ dairy cows. That’s probably the two that are the most advanced.”

AUTUMN 2021 | 11

DEFORESTATION The Brazilian cattle industry is characterised by low productivity.

A closer look at the landmark supply chain initiative as deforestation discussions reignite.

Amazon Soy Moratorium advantages and limitations

D

eforestation has been a hot topic in recent years. Some of the debate was surely sparked by the dramatic Brazilian fire seasons of 2019 and 2020. The issue remained in the spotlight as students went on strike to demand action on the climate, while researchers argued the Amazon was close to hitting a tipping point wherein the tree cover was no longer sufficiently large to trap enough moisture to maintain a tropical rainforest environment1. And in the EU, the issue has long since entered the political realm, thanks to the debate surrounding the EU-Mercosur trade deal signed in 2020. Before the end of this year, the European Commission is planning to introduce a law to prevent the sale of products linked with deforestation.

For all of these reasons and more, the private sector is increasingly hearing the call from both consumers and regulators that it must take action to eliminate deforestation in its supply chains. Of course, in doing so, they must also be careful not to lose credibility with meaningless greenwashing; indeed, the movement is littered with broken corporate promises, with a report from the Boston Consulting Group and World Wildlife Fund this year stating: “Current [corporate deforestation commitments] have had a limited impact and completely failed to meet targets, with deforestation and conversion continuing at alarming levels.”2 However, it is important to remember that not all such efforts have petered out without meaningful impact. Today’s feature examines the

18,000sq.km 12 | AUTUMN 2021

Deforestation avoided by the ASM in its first decade.

Amazon Soy Moratorium, one of the most transformative private sector deforestation initiatives ever, in order to help understand why it worked, what its limitations are and how it might be extended into an even more effective vehicle to contain deforestation.

Background and effects of the Amazon Soy Moratorium Following a much-discussed Greenpeace report in April 2006 about the connection between deforestation and the meat industry via the soy used in animal feed, the Amazon Soy Moratorium (sometimes abbreviated to SoyM or ASM) was signed a few months later. An agreement between the private sector, government and civil society, the ASM banned trading in soy which was grown on areas within the Amazon Biome that were deforested after July 2008. The ASM’s corporate signatories were organised under the Brazilian Vegetable Oil Industry Association (Abiove) and the National Grain Exporters’ Association (Anec) and represented nearly all the trade in Brazilian Amazonian soy of the time (87% of total soy volumes as of 2019).3 Often described as the first voluntary private sector deforestation initiative of its kind, the moratorium has generally been seen as a success story. Citing a work done by researchers at the University of Wisconsin, a USAID case study observes: “Between 2001 and 2006, soybean fields expanded by one million hectares in the Amazon biome and direct conversion of forests to soy production contributed to record deforestation rates [Gibbs et al. 2015]. Until 2006, Brazil had been the world leader in tropical deforestation, clearing an average of 19,500sq. km annually from 1996 to 2005. After the SoyM, deforestation for soy dramatically decreased, falling to only about 1% of expansion in the

www.feedinfo.com

Opteinics

TM

A practical, profitable way to help care for the planet It’s increasingly important that we understand more about the impacts of our products, both commercially and environmentally. Opteinics™ is our industry’s leading-edge platform for sustainability insights that will help you: Identify key footprint factors and reduce them Save time and money via formulation connectivity Reduce risk and future-proof your market position Get trusted results with validated methodology

The science of sustainable feed that succeeds

opteinics@basf.com basf.com/opteinics

DEFORESTATION Amazon biome by 2014, even though soy area increased in the area by 1.3m hectares.”4 Meanwhile, the WWF, in a 2021 publication, said: “After 15 years of existence [ASM] is still considered the greatest and most effective zero-gross conversion agreement ever. Since 2006, soy in the Amazon biome has expanded by over 4m hectares – from 1.1m hectares in 2006 to over 5.1m hectares in 2020 – with only approximately 100,000 hectares of deforestation.”5 Abiove agrees, saying: “This moratorium is the most successful example of the reconciliation of large-scale agricultural production and environmental sustainability, in terms of its most critical aspect: zero deforestation.”6

But how much of that was the ASM, really?

It is remarkable to have the industry and the environmentalists on the same page, singing the praises of a single policy. Of course, the Amazon Soy Moratorium did not take place in a vacuum, either; other initiatives were implemented over the time period, and it is not unreasonable to ask if the ASM is getting credit for the effects of other policies.

This question was investigated by a group led by Dr Robert Heilmayr, of the University of Santa Barbara’s School of Environmental Science and Management, in a 2020 paper. As he explained to Feedinfo, they untangled the effects of overlapping private and public sector interventions through close attention to the spatial footprint and timing of each one, in order to attempt to estimate what could be properly attributed to the moratorium and what might have happened anyways.

What Dr Heilmayr and his colleagues found was that ‘the main insight from the study was that the Amazon Soy Moratorium prevented about 18,000sq.km of deforestation over its first decade. So that’s between 2006 and 2016 and that’s basically a 35% reduction from what we think would have happened without the Amazon Soy Moratorium. So that’s a really significant area of deforestation that the policy protected [against].”

However, Dr Heilmayr is quick to emphasise that this success was only possible thanks to significant groundwork lain by the Brazilian government, which constructed and maintained systems that allowed for the quick implementation and for the oversight of the moratorium.

“The Amazon Soy Moratorium’s success was really predicated on the investments that the Brazilian government had made in deforestation, monitoring and property registration; implementation of the moratorium was tied into PRODES, which is how the Brazilian government monitors deforestation across the Amazon, and the CAR, the rural cadaster of properties. So, using these two government systems, this private system was able to emerge quite rapidly and be incredibly effective at targeting properties that were violating the letter of the law of the Amazon Soy Moratorium.”

“Over the last two-and-a-half years, illegal fires and deforestation have been the highest they have ever been in over a decade” GREENPEACE 14 | AUTUMN 2021

Even the fact of having a previously-established definition of what counted as forest, and thus counted as deforestation, was of help in the Brazilian case.

Dr Heilmayr says: “I do a lot of work in Indonesia around oil palm and one of the interesting contrasts there is, you don’t have a common, widely agreed-upon definition of deforestation. [This allowed] an amazingly quick response; Greenpeace had issued their report that triggered negotiations around the soy moratorium in 2006 and within several months, the NGOs and the main soy traders through Abiove had come to a clear agreement on how they were going to implement this policy. [This was] partly because they had the structure there: what is deforestation in the Amazon? What is our widely agreed upon metric that we’re going to use to track this and to monitor implementation?

And a lot of that built off of government programmes that had been supported by the Brazilian government through its space agency for a decade beforehand.”

Strengths and weaknesses According to Dr Heilmayr, two of the greatest strengths of the ASM as a private sector initiative were related to its scope.

On the demand side, he points out, the traders committed to only buying soy unconnected with new Amazonian deforestation was huge – over 90%, and even today, still over 87%.

“This gives a very significant signal to farmers that their market is dependent on environmental performance.”

Still, this comes with a weakness. Whereas traditional purchasers of soy, especially Europe, have been highly committed to the effort, new demand has grown up in the intervening years which doesn’t necessarily attach the same level of importance to the deforestation effort.

“The growing importance of China as a purchaser of Brazilian soy might undermine some of the strength [of the ASM], European and US markets are pushing for these deforestation [-free] commodities.

If you have a downstream buyer that’s less committed to those environmental attributes of the commodity, that maybe weakens the ability to impose those types of private requirements upon the market as a whole.”

And on the supply side, Heilmayr adds that the sheer amount of land covered by the moratorium made it highly impactful.

“This was applied across the entirety of the Brazilian Amazon, so you just had this really large spatial scale of adoption that really made it more difficult for farmers to just shift over a few kilometres and clear a different patch of forest.”

However, as he and others acknowledge, while this is a huge step forward, the Amazon is not the only South American ecosystem under threat. The Cerrado, a South American tropical savannah, has suffered greatly from the expansion of soy, even as the threat from soy to the Amazonian rainforest has receded dramatically7. Indeed, some are demanding a moratorium-like policy to be extended to the Cerrado.

“If you had a similar commitment in terms of market share and spatial geography the Cerrado would be an exciting place to expand that type of commitment to. If you adopted [a similar policy] across the entirety of the Cerrado, you are really blocking off one of the primary places where you might expect leakage, spillover of deforestation moving to.”

Another huge white space for expansion of private-sector commitments on deforestation is the beef trade. Indeed, there are credible concerns that, since soy can no longer be grown on newly-

www.feedinfo.com

Don’t step into the trap

We can help you avoid traps by providing evidence that 65 units of MetAMINO® will achieve comparable performance* to 100 units of MHA-FA. Change to MetAMINO®, take the savings and benefit from additional advantages.

Trust in science. Trust 65. www.metamino.com *For references and the proposition of the guarantee, please contact us or visit our website.

DEFORESTATION cleared forest if it is to be traded with much of the market, it has consequently been expanding into pastureland where cattle were raised – causing cattlemen, whose sector is bound by much leakier deforestation commitments, to take up the expansion into the Amazon.

This concept is called ‘indirect deforestation’. According to Trase, a deforestation monitoring initiative funded by the UK’s Global Canopy and the Stockholm Environmental Institute, between 2008 and 2018, around 4.2m hectares of the Amazon and 5.9m hectares of the Cerrado were converted to pasture “and in both the Amazon and Cerrado, for every hectare of soy expansion onto pasture there is at least one hectare of pasture expansion onto forest.”8 This is exasperating, not least because the Brazilian cattle industry is characterised by low productivity and it is understood that an intensification and professionalisation of production would allow output to continue to rise without the physical footprint of the industry expanding. But, in Trase’s view, it also points to the need for privatesector conservation efforts to join up to avoid simply displacing the deforestation onto someone else’s turf.

“To address the challenge of indirect land use change linked to soy, it is vital that conservation and supply chain policies do not focus exclusively on one commodity [soy], or one region [the Amazon] but consider all the major commodities that are competing for available land [in particular soy and cattle, but also cotton, corn and other major crops]. Efforts to monitor the success of any supply chain intervention should also consider the overall pattern of deforestation and not only that of a specific commodity. If supply chain and deforestation policies remain focused on specific commodities and regions, they risk cleaning up the supply chains of individual companies and buyers, but not contributing to a net decrease in deforestation.”

Waning governmental commitment to deforestation Finally, one last aspect concerning the Amazon’s deforestation situation must be discussed in the context of the moratorium’s efficacy: the impacts that the changing political winds of Brazil have

had on the commitment to pursue and enforce environmental policies.

As Greenpeace told Feedinfo: “From the mid-2000s to the early 2010s, deforestation fell dramatically thanks to the Government’s Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the Amazon.

In addition, the international community provided some financial support for environmental agencies and conservation and supported the voluntary zero deforestation commitment of the Amazon Soy Moratorium. However, after reaching the lowest rate in 2012, the Brazil National Congress approved a new forest code which, amongst other setbacks, provided an amnesty to illegal deforestation that took place prior to 2008. Over time, rates of deforestation slowly increased again.”

By all accounts, this has accelerated since the beginning of the mandate of President Bolsonaro, with his openly pro-business platform.

“Since President Bolsonaro came into power in January 2019, environmental enforcement has been aggressively dismantled, environmental agencies have been starved of resources and the military has been used to performatively lead the combat against deforestation, while weakening the appropriate environmental agency.

Over the last two-and-a-half years, illegal fires and deforestation have been the highest they have ever been in over a decade,” Greenpeace asserts.

Still, this also offers some validation of the importance of private sector voluntary action as a necessary complement of government leadership on the deforestation issue.

In the words of Dr Heilmayr: “For me there’s a bit of hope, in that what we see with the Amazon Soy Moratorium is that it was quite effective. This type of intervention, if it’s clearly put in place and supported by downstream buyers and fully implemented, could serve as a kind of backstop. Even when you have these political cycles that maybe undermine and restrengthen conservation policies at the federal level, maybe these private initiatives can serve as backstop to protect some environmental attributes.”

Works cited in this piece are listed here.

Before the end of this year, the European Commission is planning to introduce a law to prevent the sale of products linked with deforestation.

16 | AUTUMN 2021

www.feedinfo.com

Custom made R&D aquafeeds Nutrition trials with fish and shrimp

SPAROS is a science and technology-driven SME dedicated to the development and testing of new products and tailored nutritional solutions for the aquaculture market.

We offer the alliance of a strong scientific background in the areas of fish nutrition and aquaculture with a flexible pilot-scale feed mill.

We are able to manufacture small R&D batches of aquafeeds with our twin-screw extruder, vacuum coater for post-extrusion application of fats and heat-labile additives and a fluid-bed dryer for the encapsulation of bioactive compounds.

SPAROS team masters key concepts, techniques and methodologies in the areas of aquafeed technology, digestive physiology, nutritional modulation of metabolism and immune status in fish and we provide in vivo nutrition trials with fish (tilapia, trout, salmon, carp, seabream, seabass, turbot…) and shrimp for evaluating the efficacy and tolerance of novel raw materials and feed additives.

INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES | Sponsored

Advances in phytase research environmental challenges, say

[Feedinfo] Which sustainability issues do you think the animal nutrition and feed industry should be prioritising?

[Erik Vanderbeke] Besides reducing the carbon footprint of our value chains, phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) pollution are two major issues when considering local environmental concerns for animal producers. We in the animal nutrition industry can play a part in addressing this issue, as optimal nutrient digestion and efficient utilisation by the animal is key to minimise the excretion of P and N into the environment.

Linked to this is optimal gut health and gut functioning, as it is well documented that overage of nutrients like N can lead to GI-tract disorders, which increases the excretion of overall nutrients into the environment.

[Feedinfo] Can you tell us more about the challenge of P excretion and why is it such a huge issue for livestock value chains?

[Erik Vanderbeke] The primary nutrients of plant raw materials are protein and energy, but they also contain indigestible phosphorus.

Typically, only around 25% of the total phosphorus that is naturally present in plant raw materials is digestible. This is because plants store P as phytate-P and production animals do not have digestive enzymes that can break down phytate-P efficiently.

This means that other digestible phosphorus sources such as mineral phosphates are added to animal diets to ensure the required quantity of digestible Dr Erik Vanderbeke P for optimal animal growth.

18 | AUTUMN 2021

Fig 2. % P reduction in manure as function of phytase quantity (FTU/kg feed) Figure 1: Reduction of P excretion in manure dry matter used in pigs and broilers

as function of phytase (FTU/kg feed) quantity used 0 FTU

P in manure (g/kg dry matter)

W

hen addressing sustainability in livestock farming, animal feed can play a massive part in impacting some of the issues we face. One challenge that many livestock producers are currently grappling with is phosphorus and nitrogen pollution, which can lead to eutrophication in bodies of water, destroying aquatic ecosystems.

Animal nutritionists are working to develop tailored solutions that are not only benefiting livestock producers economically, but are also addressing some of the environmental issues we are up against. We spoke to Dr Erik Vanderbeke, global director development for feed additives and enzymes at Huvepharma, to understand more about how advances in our knowledge of phytases and their modes of action are helping us to target phosphorous and nitrogen pollution and how we are learning that not all phytases are considered equal when it comes to overcoming this challenge.

500 FTU

1,000 FTU

1,500 FTU

12 10.2

10 8

8 6.4

6 4

5.2

4.9 4

4.5

3.4

2 0 Broiler

Piglet

Excess indigestible P present in animal feed will be excreted. The manure of these animals is spread on agricultural land, which can lead to P entering the soil and leads to leaching of P into bodies of water.

It is for this reason that in areas of intensive animal production, manure is transported outside of production areas, which means additional costs to livestock producers. To limit the excretion of P into the environment, nutritionists try to formulate feeds that not only have optimal digestible nutrients needed for efficient growth, but that also limit indigestible excess of nutrients in the diets.

[Feedinfo] How can phytases play a role in tackling some of these environmental issues?

[Erik Vanderbeke] Making plant P digestible is the most efficient and cost-effective solution in terms of P supply in animal diets and this is where phytase comes in. As phytase generates digestible P, it is possible to reduce the total P content of animal diets, which reduces the quantity of P that is excreted into the environment by more than 50% (see Fig 1 and Fig 2).

Added phytase degrades phytate-P during digestion inside the animal’s digestive tract. For enzymes to be effective in the digestive GI tract, there is a limited timeframe available for action and challenging conditions for it to work in. The newest generation of E. coli phytases are particularly well selected and adapted for this purpose. They are exceptionally resistant to proteolytic digestion by animal digestive enzymes, have high speeds of action and are highly effective even with low concentrations of phytate.

Another important characteristic of new commercial E. coli phytases is their optimal pH activity profile, making them able to work in all parts of the upper GI tract. This part of the total GI tract covers both slightly acidic pH and highly acidic pH sections. Slightly acidic pH

www.feedinfo.com

Sponsored | INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES

(pH 4-6) conditions represent an important part of the timeframe available and are found in the crop of poultry and in some parts of the stomach of pigs. Highly acidic conditions are found in the gizzard of poultry and some other parts of the stomach of pigs (pH 1.5 to 4).

A broad and well equilibrated pH activity profile of the phytase used ensures that phytate-P will be hydrolysed, starting in time in the slightly acidic GI tract zones, and that free phosphates will be released from phytate before the area in the GI tract where P is absorbed (in the small intestine). As described extensively in literature, added phytase can liberate 25-50% of phytate-P already in the crop of poultry, so skewed highly acidic pH activity phytases will be less suited compared to broad spectrum pH active phytases covering all pH activity zones.

Beside P, protein and amino-acid digestibility (N digestibility) is influenced by the presence of phytate-P in the GI tract of animals.

Scientific literature indicates that phytate-P binds majorly to proteins in acidic conditions in the stomach of pigs and in the gizzard of poultry. Use of efficient phytases will help to breakdown phytate, making the proteins free for digestion and so ensuring less N is excreted into the environment.

[Feedinfo] You mentioned calcium’s link to phosphorous. Can you tell us more about this relationship and the challenges calcium can cause in monogastric animals?

[Erik Vanderbeke] It has long been documented that the proportion of Ca to P has an important impact on P digestibility. Since the 1980s, research described that lower Ca content in pig diets had a positive impact on P digestibility. The Ca/P ratio influences the digestibility of P and more specifically the metabolisation of P in the animal’s body. It was also documented that excess Ca acts as an anti-nutrient, influencing negatively gut health and general digestibility of nutrients like proteins and amino acids.

Today our nutritionists see that Ca is, in many cases, oversupplied in diets based on the idea that there should be enough Ca in the diet.

Optimal diet formulation in terms of a minimal environmental impact of P will involve the selection of the right phytase that creates the minimum needed digestible P by hydrolysing plant phytate-P in time, the selection of the right Ca/P ratio in the diet for optimal metabolisation of P and formulating feed according to the lowest total phosphorus level possible to avoid excess P in the diet to be excreted.

[Feedinfo] What role can phytase products play in addressing these challenges linked to calcium?

[Erik Vanderbeke] Calcium binds efficiently to certain phytate-P forms making them less accessible for phytase action. Calcium and phytate-P form insoluble complexes at neutral pHs. Phytate present in plant material contains 6 P groups, bound to one inositol

www.feedinfo.com

quantity (FTU/kg feed) in pigs and broilers 500 FTU

1,000 FTU

1,500 FTU

70%

Reduction in P excretion

helping tackle ys Huvepharma

Fig 2. % P reduction in manure as function of phytase quantity (FTU/kg feed) Figure 2: Pbroilers reduction in manure as function of phytase used in pigs and

58%

60% 50% 40%

56%

50% 39%

49% 37%

30% 20% 10% 0% Broiler

Piglet

Fig 2. % P reduction in manure as function of phytase quantity (FTU/kg feed) Figure 3: Phytate-P molecule containing 6 phosphate used in pigs and broilers

molecules (IP6)

molecule (Fig3), which is called IP6 (inositol hexaphosphate).

At slightly acidic pH (4-6), phytase can already act on phytate.

Phytase enzymes will split off P from IP6 phytate one by one to generate IP5 and lower forms. There are 3-phytases and 6-phytases which will start P splitting at the 3 position or the 6 position respectively. Calcium binds primarily to IP6 and much less to IP5 and lower forms of phytate, and this complexation happens majorly at neutral pHs. IP6 degraded to IP5 by E. coli 6-phytase was proven to complex less easily with calcium than compared to IP5 generated by 3-phytases. This means splitting off one phosphate group as fast as possible with the right phytase, before the more neutral pH parts in the GI tract, is the best solution for avoiding the formation of insoluble calcium-phytate complexes.

[Feedinfo] When considering sustainability do you think all phytase products are considered equal?

[Erik Vanderbeke] From the above it is clear that a well selected E. coli 6-phytase with a broad pH profile can be an advantage to efficiently degrade phytate-P from plant origin. Being able to hydrolyse phytate-P in the slightly acidic pH crop of poultry and in the slightly acidic zones in the stomach of pigs will allow us to minimise the excretion of P into the environment in the most secure way.

It is evident that optimal total diet composition with respect to Ca, Ca/P, total P and total N content will give the best guarantee to obtain feeds that can reduce the environmental impact of P and N. Published in association with Huvepharma.

AUTUMN 2021 | 19

US-CHINA TRADE Tariffs on imported additives and ingredients are costing the industry.

US must consider ag trade policies with China

U

S farmers are shipping record volumes of crops and meat to China, with year-to-date exports totalling $13.8 billion, up 128% compared to the same period in 2020, according to the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) January to June 2021 data.

Speaking at AFIA’s Purchasing and Ingredient Supplier Conference (PISC) in August, former US trade negotiator and VP global situational awareness and chief economist at Aimpoint Research, Gregg Doud, said: “There’s a legitimate chance China could come close to reach its promised level of [around] $40bn for the year.”

China pledged to purchase more than $8bn of US agricultural products over two years under the phase one trade deal between the two countries.

The February 14, 2020, implementation of the phase one deal between the US and China established new US tariffs on imports from China for the foreseeable future.

Average US tariffs on imports from China remain elevated at 19.3%. According to data from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, these tariffs are more than six times higher than before the trade war began in 2018 and cover 66.4% of Chinese exports to the US. In retaliation for US tariff increases on Chinese imports, China implemented tariff increases on imports of US products, including animal food products such as whey, alfalfa meals and pellets, animal and vegetable fats and oils, meat and bone meal, fishmeal, beet pulp, dried distillers’ grains with solubles, pet food, and other preparations used in animal feeding.

The tariffs paid by US importers were kept in place to guarantee that China meets its obligations under the US-China phase one trade deal.

US does not make these products According to the AFIA, at least four tariffed feed ingredients are predominantly, or exclusively in some cases, sourced from China.

Gina Tumbarello, AFIA’s senior director of international policy and trade, said: “While the US-China phase one agreement addressed several constraints keeping US animal food products out of the Chinese market, the industry now has increased tariff barriers.

“The AFIA has asked for remediation of tariffs that China has imposed on US animal food products that are limiting our industry’s ability to compete in their market.”

The most favoured nation (MFN) tariff on US imports of vitamin K is 5.5%. In September 2019, vitamin K imports from China became subject to a 10% ad valorem duty, which increased to 15% in August 2020, making the vitamin K tariff rate on imports from China 20.5%.

The MFN tariff on US imports of inositol is zero. However,

20 | AUTUMN 2021

“One company expressed that the additional tariffs on their vitamin D3 and B12 imports cost them an estimated $500,000/year and $227,000/year respectively.”

GINA TUMBARELLO in September 2019, imports from China became subject to a 10% ad valorem duty, which increased to 30% in March 2020, making the tariff rate on imports from China 30%.

Vitamin D3 and vitamin B12 imports from China became subject to a 10% ad valorem duty each.

“One company expressed that the additional tariffs on their vitamin D3 and B12 imports cost them an estimated $500,000/year and $227,000/year respectively,” Tumbarello said. “This is one of many US companies importing these vital ingredients for animal food use.”

The AFIA has requested the exclusion of vitamin D3, vitamin K, vitamin B12 and inositol from Section 301 tariffs.

“The intent of the Section 301 tariffs was to protect domestic production. However, not only does the US not produce these products, but the animal food industry also depends on these inputs for feed and pet food manufacturing,” Tumbarello said.

The negotiated deal under the Trump administration with China expires at the end of this year.

“We have to be mindful on January 1 of next year, the US will still have $360bn worth of tariffs on imports from China,” Doud said.

All the structural changes negotiated in the phase one agreement will stand; however, another conversation will likely be coming, he added.

Tumbarello said: “The administration has said they do not have a timeline for change. We are several months into this process and we are not hearing any strategy for continuing the talks. This is not encouraging.

“Agriculture is a shining star when it comes to exports.

It brings much value to the US economy. Unfortunately, the tariffs are causing this region to lose its competitive advantage and fall behind the competition. It would be a shame not to consider agriculture trade policy as part of the US economic recovery strategy,” Tumbarello added.

www.feedinfo.com

A Force For Change

Promoting a more diverse & sustainable future for our global industry Sign Up To WFA Updates!

And get year round Diversity & Inclusion news relevant to the food and agriculture industry

Attend an exclusive 2-day face-to-face Summit

Take part in regular digital meet ups and sessions

Participate in our outreach and learning programmes such as our mentorship scheme and yearly industry survey

#WFA21 #AForceForChange wfasummit.com

ANALYST’S CORNER

In early August, BASF declared force majeure on sodium methylate, potassium methylate and sodium ethylate following a fire at its Ludwigshafen alcoholates facility.

Availability of sodium methylate is a cause of uncertainty.

Global vitamin A market waits for news

V

itamin A spot prices remained largely stable across global markets following the issue of a letter from producer BASF, save for Europe where remaining offers firmed up amid reduced availability at the beginning of September. Market participants discussed the impact of uncertainty over supply in Q4 and in Q1 2022 with Feedinfo.

Recent disruptions in European production According to the letter sent by BASF to its customers at the end of August and shared with Feedinfo by a market source, the company said it was not ready to supply commercial volumes of feed-grade vitamin A 1000 but had succeeded in restoring high quality standards. BASF has been experiencing stability issues with its vitamin A 1000 since summer 2020.

The plant in Ludwigshafen has a nameplate capacity of 5,600 tonnes/year of feed-grade vitamin A 1000, according to Feedinfo’s Delphi analytics service.

Another vitamin A producer said: “It is very difficult to produce an A 1000 form and even more difficult for AD3 as there is an even larger oil phase for that form. The product needs to perform with full vitamin stability and activity to the finished feed

22 | AUTUMN 2021

product while sensitive to the influence of the environment. And doing this in a safe way in production and in transport/storage is a major challenge. The further postponement of commercial product in a line of several delays shows how great the challenge is.”

In early August, BASF declared force majeure on sodium methylate, potassium methylate and sodium ethylate following a fire at the Ludwigshafen alcoholates facility. Sodium and potassium methylate are widely used in the production of vitamin A, vitamin E, carotenoids and D-Calpan, the company told Feedinfo.

In the same month, several sources reported that supplier Evonik had also declared force majeure on sodium methylate. A company spokesperson declined to comment on the issue.

In mid-September, Feedinfo saw information that suggested the force majeures declared by BASF and Evonik on sodium methylate were having a serious impact on DSM’s vitamin A production. While the company seemed confident that it could avoid a declaration of force majeure on vitamin A, it still expected to have only 70% of its planned volume available in Q4.

DSM was exploring further mitigation measures but at the time was offering vitamin A to loyal customers only.

www.feedinfo.com

ANALYST’S CORNER The Europe vitamin A 1000 average spot price for September was €71.11/kg DDP, up from €69.39/kg in August.

Market sources have been acknowledging uncertainty over supply. In mid-September, a consumer said that prices had been on a rising trend and were above €70/kg DDP NW Europe.

A producer said it was offering material at €72-€74/kg and receiving orders at that level.

A trader said that price offers from China had been stable and there was no sign yet of a steep increase, as had been expected following the force majeures.

“Chinese producers are looking to EU production of vitamin A and anticipate on the volume output to either increase or decrease the price. At the moment we see a stable price [$72/ kg ex. China]. The feeling is that there is not enough material in the EU and buyers are in a wait-and-see modus as well as speculating,” said the trader.

At the start of September, another trader said it had sold material for spot delivery at €72.50/kg and would continue to offer at this price, noting there were hardly any offers available on the market.

The source added that following the letter from BASF there was likely to be some speculation on the market.

“The letter from BASF is not a surprise, it’s clear that nothing will change on the market in the next six weeks but by then, it will be mid-October. Now, big speculations will start [for market participants] – should I let my inventories go down and wait [for more supply and lower prices]? Others will buy now to avoid the risk,” said the trader. It added that barely anyone was offering material in Europe.

One producer shared the prevailing uncertainty: “We are in touch with BASF’s alcoholates unit and review mitigation options but unfortunately we could still not get any concrete volumes from BASF on sodium methylates. Uncertainty remains.”

Producers and resellers had previously noted that the market tends to buy on a quarterly basis and suggested that purchasing was likely to start at the beginning of September. However, they acknowledged good coverage on the market during the summer.

BASF letter has limited impact on the Americas market The Americas market remained strangely quiet following the announcements. Prices were mostly steady in September, with some higher offers being tested in the market.

The US Midwest vitamin A 1000 average spot price for September was €74.28/kg DDP, up from $73.17/kg in August.

A buyer said that every seller was talking about vitamin A going up but offers received in mid-September ranged from $72-$78/ kg delivered.

Another buyer said the market was quiet and steady and offers were from $71-$76/kg delivered.

Several market sources had anticipated supply chain issues and took extra coverage earlier in the year. As a result, many premixers said they were covered through the end of 2021, but not for Q1 2022.

When Covid-19 disrupted all global shipping markets, US prices spiked because of increased shipping costs and transit times. However, buyers compensated by adjusting their buying patterns to focus on longer term purchases (for example, buying supplies for six months instead of three). As a result, buyers

www.feedinfo.com

“We could still not get any concrete volumes from BASF on sodium methylates.

Uncertainty remains” PRODUCER purchased greater volumes during Q1 and Q2, while Q3 was quieter.

Vitamin A exports from China recorded a substantial increase in Q2 this year over Q2 2020. Chinese exports of vitamin A feedgrade powder (excluding AD3) increased by 16.6% to 837t in Q2 2021 compared with 718t in Q2 2020. Germany was the leading destination, followed by the US. Winter in the northern hemisphere is peak premix production season. The North American Q4 premix bid cycle usually kicks off in mid-September, with vitamin producers needing to provide pricing and availability information if they expect to win business to close out the calendar year.

A lot of the big poultry and swine integrators, and the larger pet food companies, are now doing six- and 12-month premix contracts. This is beginning to reduce the importance of the quarterly premix bid cycles. However, there is still significant demand from spot players, according to distributors and traders.

A market source interpreted the BASF letter as an indication that there would not be any BASF vitamin A for the US market during Q4 and speculated that the seller would not be a participant again until the first half of 2022.

“After the issues with the below-spec A 1000 sold into the US and European markets in late 2019 and 2020, blenders will want to ensure the new product meets specs and has no stability issues,” the source said. “This will probably slow down the reintroduction of a new BASF A 1000 product, regardless of price incentives.”

China prices steady but supply shortages possible Elsewhere, China’s export and domestic prices remained fairly stable, but in mid-August two Chinese producers suspended their offers because of the BASF force majeure on alcoholates.

Feedinfo data shows that average vitamin A 1000 export prices held steady at around $72.50/kg from the last week of July until early September, when they increased to $73.50/kg for the remainder of the month.

Domestic vitamin A 500 prices averaged CNY 283/kg in September, their lowest level since the start of April.

One producer said it expected the market to experience a temporary supply shortage. It noted that ZMC, NHU and Adisseo were under maintenance, so overall supply was insufficient.

It added that shipping space is very tight this year and sea freight bookings will be delayed; moreover, overseas customers needed to stock up in advance for Q4, which was exacerbating the problem.

AUTUMN 2021 | 23

INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES | Sponsored

Delacon sees sustainability at the heart of its business

Q

uestions around the sustainability of livestock production might have become more intense in recent years, but for phytogenic feed additive company Delacon, sustainability has long been a focus of its work. For over 30 years, the company has been a key player in finding sustainable solutions for some of the global livestock sector’s challenges, helping producers improve diets, reduce emissions, and save costs.

In this Industry Perspectives, Delacon’s chief executive officer Markus Dedl explains why sustainability continues to be at the heart of business innovations, operations and partnerships, and how the company is continuing its quest to be more efficient and environmentally-friendly in the long-term.

[Feedinfo] Do you think livestock producers are currently doing enough to meet sustainability targets? In which areas and which sectors do you think more work needs to be done?

[Markus Dedl] Improving farm management and optimising feed rations are crucial for creating a more sustainable livestock production chain. Livestock producers therefore have an essential role to play.

To meet sustainability targets, stakeholders across the sector – from livestock producers and feed manufacturers to scientists, technology suppliers, regulators and governments – need to pull together and align to achieve a common goal of creating efficient, high-performing, sustainable and high-welfare livestock systems. In my opinion, this is the only way we can ensure long-term, high-quality animal protein production across the globe, while at the same time meeting consumers’ needs and high expectations.

Markus Dedl

[Feedinfo] The EU’s Green Deal has made organic farming a major goal to achieve by 2030. How do you see this impacting European animal agriculture’s sustainability initiatives?

[Markus Dedl] We can see an increasing interest in organic production, which is leading to an increase in demand for organic feed and feed additives.

Organic farming is commonly perceived as being kinder to humans, animals, the environment and the climate.

24 | AUTUMN 2021

However, we have to be aware that organic does not necessarily mean sustainable, and that conventional farms can also operate sustainably. No single system of production can be the silver bullet for globally sustainable animal agriculture.

Instead, it is more about balancing the use of innovative solutions and technologies to ensure the common goal of efficient, environmentally-friendly feed and food production.

[Feedinfo] How is Delacon helping livestock producers around the world address problem areas and improve livestock sustainability?

[Markus Dedl] For Delacon, supporting animal health and boosting feed efficiency are key to sustainable and profitable animal production. We are focusing on extensive research and well formulated phytogenic feed additives that are standardised, specific and science-based. Through this we have been able to ensure that we can help producers achieve these goals.

With products that improve feed conversion and gut integrity we can support animals’ resilience and, therefore, performance.

Meanwhile, by optimising their nutrient utilisation we can reduce the amount of resources used, contributing to responsible land and water use, including soil health. All these benefits can translate into more profitability in animal farming. What is more, nutrition can play a major role in emission reduction, too.

Our phytogenic solutions increase nutrient digestibility and are proven to reduce ammonia emissions by up to 30%.

Delacon products are also proven to decrease milk urea concentration in ruminants, consequently mitigating methane production by up to 10%. With the emission unit at our Performing Nature Research Centre, we are using state-ofthe-art facilities to further develop and precisely analyse the influence of phytogenic feed additives on the production of ammonia and greenhouse gases. In the end, these benefits are not only for producers. Consumers also get to enjoy products that they know are safe, natural and sustainable.

[Feedinfo] What goals has Delacon set for itself to be more environmentally conscious? What can you report on the success of these endeavours?

[Markus Dedl] For us, sustainability means thinking longterm and pursuing a holistic approach. In setting goals, it is important to know where your biggest impact as an organisation could be. Due to their various modes of action, Delacon’s phytogenic solutions can significantly contribute to the challenges facing the livestock sector, while also supporting the agricultural value chain in becoming more sustainable by

www.feedinfo.com

Sponsored | INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES saving resources and nutrients and by lowering emissions and residues. Looking at our growing global market share, this is our biggest lever in terms of sustainability, while also being closely linked to our vision and our mission.

If you aim to make the world more sustainable every day, you consequently need to ‘walk the talk’. Sustainability is part of Delacon’s DNA, which means it is integrated into the structures, processes and decisions of our daily work. We have launched several corporate sustainability initiatives that focus on energy, mobility, emissions, local sourcing, social initiatives and buildings. Our most recent investments in sustainable technology are becoming visible in the daily operations of our newly-constructed Delacon Hub in Austria. It provides a space for all who are dedicated to phytogenics and unites office, production site and in-house laboratory for quality assurance in one place.

[Feedinfo] Why did the company decide this hub was important?

What sustainability products and projects have come out of it so far?

[Markus Dedl] We have been active in phytogenic feed additives since the very beginning in the 1980s. The category has grown substantially since then, and by all indications it will continue to do so. As global expert in phytogenics, our investment in the Delacon Hub shows our commitment to the category and our drive to develop it even further. With the hub, we are entering a new era of exploration, collaboration and learning about plants’ processes and potential. This helps us in understanding how they can be the key to feeding a growing world population, truly living one of our values: ‘growing together’.

Besides impacting lives with our phytogenic solutions produced at the hub, and based on our company culture, it comes very naturally to us to deploy state-of-the-art technologies in our facilities: from innovative building insulation, heat recirculation and modern filtration technologies, to our own solar power plant on the roof of the buildings and using only renewable energy for operating. Once again proving that, at Delacon, sustainability truly is part of our DNA. [Feedinfo] Do you think animal production can ever be wholly sustainable? Or is the current goal just to lower its impact? Is this enough?

[Markus Dedl] I am convinced that there is huge potential to make the animal production sector more sustainable.

“Our phytogenic solutions increase nutrient digestibility and are proven to reduce ammonia emissions by up to 30%” MARKUS DEDL

State-of-the-art technologies for Delacon’s facilities: modern solar power plant on the roof.

For everyone in the industry, it is important to continuously ask ourselves if we can do better to move forward and grow. Sustainable actions need to become an integral part of thinking and decision making in business in general. In addition, scientific research and entrepreneurial spirit resulting in innovative technologies will be among the main drivers for sustainability.

There is no doubt that sustainability on a high, technical level requires certain efforts, but at the end of the day it brings significant returns, both environmental and economic. For example, saving resources also means saving money; healthier animals mean better productivity and less need for antibiotics – all of it resulting in higher profitability for producers. I am confident that sustainability will become mainstream, just as phytogenics started as a niche market and turned into a popular one.

[Feedinfo] How do you see Delacon’s approach to sustainability evolving in future?

[Markus Dedl] In the feed and feed additive industry, we all have a common goal: nourishing the world with high-quality protein. This goal can only be achieved with strong commitment and support of partners worldwide. Ultimately, it is crucial to not only talk about sustainable actions in your company; you need to live it and to practice what you preach, especially when you are a leader and pioneer and want to continue being viewed as such.

Wherever possible, sustainability should be linked to companies’ products, solutions and goals, forming a lasting strategy so they can endure in the long run. At Delacon, we are developing technologies that work in the long-term, ensuring that we are using resources sustainably and fostering lasting partnerships. We will keep on using the natural, synergistic power of phytogenics and will further unlock the phytogenic universe for better lives. That is our story.

Published in association with Delacon.

www.feedinfo.com

AUTUMN 2021 | 25

INSECTS Insect feed is sustainable, but can it scale massively and rapidly?

What to expect out of insect feed’s buzzy growth

M

any benefits come with the use of insect feed, which boasts a high-quality high protein content between 50-80% and an efficient production process which is highly sustainable and, in some cases, fully circular. Considering the current discussions on the EU authorisation of insect Processed Animal Proteins (PAPs) for poultry and pig nutrition, European production of insects for feed is expected to increase rapidly in the coming years. According to International Platform of Insects for Food and Feed (IPIFF) members, the authorisation of insect PAPs in poultry and pig feed will offer new opportunities and strengthen partnerships between insect and animal farms.

Recent data released by IPIFF shows that more than €1 billion has been invested in the insect feed sector since its establishment and this figure is expected to reach €3bn by 2025. Meanwhile, the total turnover of insect feed operators in Europe is expected to exceed €2bn per year by the end of the decade.

This growth is, of course, dependent on logistical considerations such as the construction of new facilities and the production capacity of the sector. Consumer readiness for the idea is another relevant factor, which may be driven by trends such as the demand for animal-derived products with a lower carbon footprint.

Markets poised for growth By 2025, IPIFF estimates that most of the demand for insect feed will come from the pet food sector (approximately 40-50% of the insect meal produced), followed by the aquaculture industry (25-35%). However, according to forecasts, the next relevant market for insects as feed operators in terms of quantities of insect meal sold will be the poultry (20-30%) and pig markets (5-15%). IPIFF does warn, however, that the forecasts for the different markets will also depend on how legislation will progress, notably which markets may open first.

IPIFF also says that by 2030, the share of insect feed used in aquaculture is likely to surpass the pet food market (reaching 30-40%). However, the quantities of insect-derived ingredients used in aquaculture depends on how quickly EU fish farming will be upscaled.

At present, insect consumption in the aqua feed market is only a few thousand tonnes per year. By 2030, the pet food market may see a slower increase in demand for insect feed and its overall share of the market could drop to 30-35%.

Meanwhile, the use of insect feed in poultry and pig diets will likely increase gradually by the end of the decade and represent a similar market share to the one from 2025.

By 2030, IPIFF believes that more than 10% of the fish

26 | AUTUMN 2021

The larvae of black soldier flies are used as insect protein.

consumed in the EU will be derived from fish farms that use insect protein in their aqua feed formulations; one in 40 eggs consumed in the EU will be derived from insect-fed laying hens; one in 50 chicken meat servings consumed in the EU will be derived from insect-fed broilers; and one in 100 pork servings consumed in the EU will be derived from insect-fed pigs.

But these figures are based on the hypothesis that the use of diverse substrates in insect farms producing insects for the feed markets is authorised by the mid-2020s. These could include former foodstuffs and catering waste, as such materials deemed unsuitable for other farmed animals would be better upcycled by insect bioconversion. This factor alone would play a key role in accelerating the growth of the sector.

In a more ‘business-as-usual’ scenario in which the diversification of substrates used does not occur as fast as desired, the figures would be lower. About 5% of the fish consumed in the EU would be derived from fish farms that use insect protein in their aqua feed formulations; one in 80 eggs consumed in the EU would be derived from insect-fed laying hens; and one in 100 chicken meat servings consumed in the EU would come from insect-fed broilers.

Total production capacity of the European insect sector may reach one million tonnes of insect meal by 2030 as investment in the industry has grown exponentially in the last few years, especially after the EU permitted the use of insects in aqua feed in 2017. This enabled multiple European producers to grow their businesses. However, IPIFF stresses that this remains an aspirational target, which can be met only

www.feedinfo.com

INSECTS if the appropriate conditions are achieved and that regulatory developments continue as planned.

Rabobank warns costs will limit Dutch agricultural market specialist Rabobank also sees huge growth in terms of insect feed demand and scaling up of production, but not as high as IPIFF does.

Rabobank, in a report published earlier this year, estimated that demand for insect feed on a global basis could reach 500,000t/year by 2030; so not as high as IPIFF outlines but nevertheless 50 times more than the 10,000t produced in 2020.

Rabobank forecasts insect feed consumption in the aquaculture sector to reach 200,000t by 2030, which will account for 40% of the estimated insect market. By 2030 Rabobank also expects aqua feed consumption to have exceeded that of pet food but estimates the pet food industry will still use 150,000t of insect protein each year.

According to Rabobank, insect feed demand in the poultry industry is forecast to reach 70,000t annually by 2030.

It is expected that the greatest growth percentage will be seen in layer hens as the egg market allows for differentiated concepts and categories – such as free-range, organic, omega3 added – which gives space to market insect-fed eggs. For Rabobank the potential is more limited for broilers, due to the high price point of insects compared to soybean meal.

For the pig sector, however, Rabobank forecasts 30,000t will

www.feedinfo.com

be used annually by 2030: a limiting factor being the pricing relative to soy-based animal feeds.

Rabobank also flags the cost of the final product as a limiting factor for the adoption rate of insect protein in animal feed “Currently, one tonne of insect protein costs between €3,500 and €5,500, which is considerably more than the €1,200€2,000/t for fishmeal or $370/t for soymeal, making it hard for farmers to choose insects as a direct alternative,” Rabobank said in its report, but added that insect feed supporters believe the price is justified as the sustainability, nutritional and health benefits allow for insects to be marketed as a premium product.

Moving forward, as insect feed producers ramp up and build large-scale facilities, increased supply will help drive down costs. Beyond 2030, Rabobank argues that the increased supply and lower costs will allow insect feeds to compete with traditional aqua feeds and soy proteins as supply expansion becomes easier with increased scale.

“After reaching half a million metric tonnes (by 2030), it will get easier for the industry to expand supply. From that point on, it will take much less time to double or even quadruple production volume and exceed one million metric tonnes,” Rabobank said.

40%

Insect feed demand in the poultry sector is forecast to reach 70,000t annually by 2030 – 40% of the estimated insect market.

AUTUMN 2021 | 27

PAPS Long-awaited changes on use of processed animal proteins in pig and poultry diets take effect.

Pig and poultry PAPs on the menu again in EU

T

he European Commission (EC) finally authorised the reintroduction of Processed Animal Proteins (PAPs) into pig and poultry feed – feed ingredients that had been absent from the menu for 20 years.

This became official with the adoption of the decision to amend the feed ban regulation on August 17, 2021, and the subsequent publication of Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1372 in the Official Journal of the EU on August 18, 2021.

Beyond the authorisation of pig and poultry PAPs, the changes which were published in August also authorised the use of insect PAPs in feed for poultry and pigs, a significant expansion for this growing category, which had previously been restricted within the EU to aqua feed and pet food.

Now that PAPs of porcine and poultry origin are reauthorised (although, of course, with the ban on intra-species feeding still in place to prevent animals consuming PAPs from their own species), the EU feed sector suddenly has access again to an additional source of protein-rich ingredients. With a 70% protein deficit, which the EU covers today by imports, the market potential for ingredients like poultry/pig PAPs is huge. Moreover, champions of these ingredients argue they could lower the feed sector’s carbon footprint should they replace traditional protein sources like soy.

For Sjors Beerendonk, president of the European Fat Processors and Renderers Association (EFPRA), PAPs have been finally recognised by all parties as a valuable, safe and a highly sustainable feed ingredient.

Until recently, the notion of sustainability hadn’t been included in the discussion around PAPs. Moreover, PAPs are explicitly named in the EU’s Green Deal. And according to

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAPS AND MBM z PAPs and meat and bone meal (MBM) are produced from different categories of animal by-product and as a result have very different uses. In the EU, PAPs are defined as originating from category 3 material only, while MBM refers to products originating from the more dangerous categories 1 and 2 as defined in the BSE regulation. MBM cannot be used as a feed ingredient but is valued instead as a source of green energy and a raw material in a variety of industrial applications. And while PAPs and MBM are both derived by means of the rendering process, the regulations governing the production of PAPs ensures they are never produced in the same processing facility as MBM.

28 | AUTUMN 2021

The reintroduction of PAPs into pig and poultry feed has finally been authorised by the European Commission.

Beerendonk, it is most likely a combination of PAPs’ nutritional profiles and their lower carbon footprint potential which prompted the EC to accelerate their reauthorisation.

“Feed producers recognise the nutritional value of PAPs in their formulas. But additionally, all feed manufacturers have ambitious sustainability targets and the use of PAPs can significantly contribute to this. That is certainly a driver for the positive attitude and why the feed industry is looking at the change in regulation as an opportunity. PAPs have always been a highly valued and appreciated feed component,” he told Feedinfo.

Potential alternative to soy Multiple scientific articles have been published in which it has been concluded that it is possible to partially replace soybean meal in animal diets with tested pig or poultry PAPs. For example, a study by M.M. van Krimpen, P. Bikker and J. van Harn, of Wageningen University, in 2018 determined that with pig PAPs it was possible to maintain performance results, litter quality, footpad health, gait, bone quality or intestinal health of male broilers.

Beerendonk added: “New research results show that PAPs can replace soy efficiently and with a better carbon footprint.

We have calculated that the use of the 2.9 million tonnes of PAPs available in Europe can replace 3.47mt of imported soy (46% protein). This is equivalent to 2.44mt CO2 eq per year for PAPs versus 14.02mt CO2 eq per year for soy. Analysis from the

www.feedinfo.com

PICTURE: SARIA A/S GMBH & CO KG

PAPS

Cooker/steriliser for animal byproducts.

renowned Schothorst Institute has shown that prohibiting the use of PAPs in Europe required an additional 880,000 hectares of land to grow soy.”

It will most likely take time for the EU PAP manufacturing sector to fully cater to the new demand which can be expected moving forward. Moreover, feed compounders will need to learn about how to effectively incorporate poultry and pig PAPs in feed after having stopped doing so for 20 years.

What is beyond the animal nutrition sector’s control, however, is consumer hesitation and perhaps even religious considerations.

Consumers in general could show resistance because of the negative history surrounding PAPs. Equally, religious concerns could surface as different groups avoid eating pork and, therefore, chicken fed with pork PAP might be rejected by some. Not only would this create uncertainty for some consumers, but the question of how supermarkets address such considerations, at the level of packaging and labelling, must also be answered.

An important consideration from the perspective of rendering industry infrastructure which comes to mind is the practicality

of keeping strictly single-origin ingredient production lines in place. This could require significant investment by the sector.

Barriers regarding production and consumer acceptance could ultimately limit uptake.

However, both policymakers and animal producers are keen to emphasise that the decision to change the rules was one that reflected science consensus and was taken with caution. In the words of Fabien Schneegans, a policy officer in the European Commission’s DG Santé unit on food hygiene, behind the rule change was a “will to lift any regulatory constraint which could not be justified by the science,” noting that the EU’s rules on PAP use, which took effect in the wake of the BSE crisis, were much stricter than those of the rest of the world.

Meanwhile, Antonio Tavares, president of the pork group of Copa-Cogeca, feels that the EC’s delay in approving these rule changes was incomprehensible; speaking at a webinar organised

by IPIFF, he deplores that Copa-Cogeca began discussions on new PAP rules in 2005 and a positive EFSA opinion on the matter came in 2007… only to have the authorisation for use come 14 years later, in 2021. “The producers demand politicians listen to scientific advice and abide by it,” he affirmed.

EVOLUTION OF THE EU’S PAP REGULATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY z In response to the European BSE crisis in the 1990s, the EC adopted Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001, laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), also known as ‘the BSE regulation’. Article 7, as detailed in Annex IV, installed a ban on the use of PAPs and meat and bone meal (MBM) in feed for farmed animals.

In 2009, the BSE-related feed ban was supplemented with provisions prohibiting intra-species recycling applicable to all food-producing animals (Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009). Other animal-derived products besides PAPs, such as collagen-derived from non-ruminants and hydrolysed protein derived from parts of non-ruminants or from ruminant hides and skins, were not

www.feedinfo.com

subject to the ‘feed ban’. By 2010, the EC had already published a TSE roadmap with the aim of gradually relaxing the feed ban for aquaculture, poultry and pigs. Subsequently in 2013, the feeding of PAPs from pigs and poultry as well as insect PAPs was reauthorised for aquaculture.

However, despite the TSE roadmap and several attempts by sector associations and players, the use of PAPs from poultry for pigs and the use of PAPs from pigs for poultry had not gained the necessary regulatory support until earlier on this year. This came in mid-April when a proposal for the re-introduction of poultry PAPs and pig PAPs gained approval in a Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed meeting. A large majority of EU members states received the proposal positively.

AUTUMN 2021 | 29

SECTION SUB-SECTION ALTERNATIVE MEAT Between 2018 and 2020, investments in alternative protein companies in Israel increased eight-fold.

Rehovot emerges as hub for unique cultured and fermented solutions.

Israel is at forefront of alternative meat revolution

T

he demand for meat alternatives is rising globally. The largest suppliers to the industry, US-based Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods, are garnering attention for expanding partnerships with big-name brands and celebrities, all while seeing their values skyrocket. However, it is a smaller, less-assuming nation which seems to be at the forefront of the alternative protein revolution: Israel.

Between 2018 and 2020, investments in alternative protein companies in Israel increased eight-fold, from $14 million to $114m, according to data from Good Food Institute Israel (GFI). Last year, despite the impacts of Covid-19, alternative protein investment grew 174% over the previous year, a greater growth rate than for any other industry investment in the country.

The country has more than 100 alternative protein companies, of which, 40 are considered startups. Israel has a history of technology innovation, especially in food science, which, combined with a range of initiatives to support new businesses, have led some to dub it ‘Startup Nation’. The name has stuck in part due to the area known as Silicon Wadi, which, much like its US namesake Silicon Valley (wadi is valley in Arabic), is an area with a disproportionately high concentration of technology firms that sprang up in the 1960s.

Most of the 100-plus alternative protein companies in Israel are producing the more common plant-based meat alternatives.

However, it is the companies producing cultured meat and proteins derived from fermentation techniques that are really pushing the boundaries of food technology – as they aim to produce real meat without harming animals.

With five dedicated cultured meat producers and 10 focused on

30 | AUTUMN 2021

fermentation-derived proteins, Israel is second only to the US for the number of companies focused on this niche sector of the alternative proteins landscape. Not bad for a country with a population of just 9m people. Even more uniquely, a number of alternative protein businesses are located in Rehovot, a city of just over 100,000 people located 20km south of Tel Aviv.

To get a better understanding surrounding the dynamics of the alternative protein industry in Israel, Feedinfo spoke to a number of associated companies, to get a local perspective on drivers and trends in the Israeli alternative meat landscape.

Strength in numbers Aleph Farms, Redefine Meat, SavorEat and Future Meat Technologies are just some of the alternative protein companies which have set up in Rehovot. Eshchar Ben-Shitrit, Redefine Meat’s chief executive, told us that Rehovot is like any other technology business ecosystem in that companies are all inspired by one another and naturally align themselves close together.

“SuperMeat and Aleph Farms were the first [Rehovot-based alternative meat companies], and the rest followed suit,” Ben-Shitrit confirmed.

Redefine Meat, which produces 3D printed plant-based meat alternatives, says it set the record last year for Series A investment in an alternative protein company when they recouped $29m in one round of financing, on its way to securing $35m in total funding to date.

Future Meat Technologies, the company behind what claims to be the world’s first industrial cultured meat facility, which opened in June

www.feedinfo.com

INSIGHT

The Israeli Government sees the alternative protein industry as the future of meat production.

of this year, expects the facility to produce 500kg of cultured meat products a day once at full capacity.

Aleph Farms, which in July received funding from meat-producing giant BRF, produces 3D-printed cultured meat and has raised $118m in funding since it was founded in 2018. Marketing comms manager at Aleph, Yoav Reisler, told us: “Israel has a long history of innovation in general, focused on food in particular,” adding that kosher food producer Tivall coined the phrase ‘alternative meat’ long before it was internationally recognised.

Collaboration As is the case across other businesses, collaboration with partners, research agencies, academia, government institutions and non-profit organisations is a big factor in Israel’s alternative protein companies.

For example, Aleph Farms “was founded and nurtured by The Kitchen Hub, an incubator owned by the Strauss Group and the Israel Innovation Authority, in collaboration with the Biomedical Engineering faculty of the Technion,” Reisler said.

Analogues of these businesses and partners do not exist in every nation.

The Kitchen Hub is one of two technology incubators (Fresh Start is the other) set up by the Israeli government to support equity financing, business mentoring and more for food tech startups. The Israel Innovation Authority is responsible for ‘fostering the development of industrial R&D within the state of Israel’, and helps businesses continue to grow. Technion, or the Israel Institute of Technology, located 100km north of Rehovot, is one of the world’s top 10 science and technology research universities and regularly collaborates with industry players.

Additionally, Israel spends 4.3% of its GDP on research and development – the most of any country – according to the World Economic Forum.

Israel has worked hard to make cultured meat a focus of its industry.

Reisler told Feedinfo: “Last year its government announced a national plan that positions alternative proteins as a central economic growth engine and a solution for food security.”

Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even became the first head of state to taste cultivated meat when presented with GFI Israel’s roadmap to make Israel the world leader in alternative proteins. As a result, the government invested in two technology incubators in The Kitchen Hub and Fresh Start.

32 | AUTUMN 2021

“Last year [Israel’s] government announced a national plan that positions alternative proteins as a central economic growth engine and a solution for food security” YOAV REISLER With food security in the Middle East notoriously tight, and most nations reliant on imports to provide meat to their populations – Israel currently only exports 5% of the food it produces – the Israeli government sees the alternative protein industry as the future of meat production, a way for it to supply its population with domestically-produced meat and a path to cementing itself as a worldwide supplier of raw ingredients and technology in a booming industry.

Veganism Additionally, Israel is home to the world’s largest per capita population of vegans, at around 5% of the population, as well as even more vegetarians, so there is already a strong domestic market for meat alternatives. Last year alone, plant-based product sales grew 13 times faster than sales of animal-based products, with plant-based minced meat sales growing 58% and plant-based milk now accounting for 13% of all milk sales, data from GFI showed.

In addition to a burgeoning vegan/vegetarian population, the history of kosher food laws in Israel makes it a natural location to develop meat alternatives. Despite most cultured and fermentation-derived meats still awaiting kosher classification, in what is proving a complex issue, the nation’s strict kosher laws implemented in most restaurants and hotels make ‘non-meat’ options increasingly popular.

“Generally animal welfare is held in high regard by the Jewish tradition,” Reisler added, making Israel the ideal place to lead the alternative meat revolution.

www.feedinfo.com

ASF IN AMERICAS Experts worry at deadly swine disease’s proximity to US territory as risks intensify.

US must prepare for potential African swine fever contamination

A

frican swine fever (ASF) was confirmed in the Dominican Republic in late July, marking its first detection in the Western Hemisphere and the closest to the US in 40 years.

Despite not being a US state, Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States. The distance between Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, and Aguadilla Pueblo, Puerto Rico, is just 82.6 miles (133km).

Speaking at AFIA’s purchasing and ingredient supplier conference (PISC) in Orlando, Florida, Dr. Cassandra Jones of Kansas State University said: “The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) does not distinguish between territories and states for positive ASF status.

“Therefore, the US would be considered affected if Puerto Rico or other US territories were to have confirmed cases.”

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) said last week that if the virus reaches US territories, it will be considered mainland America. An outbreak of ASF could prompt some countries to block pork imports from the entire US. “There is significant Caribbean travel and trade today, so this is one we believe is a real risk for entry into Puerto Rico and potentially, the US mainland,” Dr. Jones said. “The scary thing is the unknowns. How did it arrive? How did it spread so far before being detected? How can it be eradicated?”

Dr. Jones went on to explain that the disease moves through transmission. The most common way it is transmitted is direct nose-to-nose contact.

“The US had previously been preventing live pig and pork product imports from the Dominican Republic to prevent the introduction of Classical Swine Fever Virus, which is found in the country. We believe this helped prevent any transmission of ASF to the US,” Dr. Jones said. “But we have fomite (non-living objects) transmission, feed and ingredient movement, people movement, vessel movement that are now under closer scrutiny.”

“Since we know the virus survives in fomites for extensive periods, it can spread to new areas this way. Crosscontamination risk is very high. Human-based traffic has likely led to some fomite transmission,” Dr. Jones said. “The virus is spreading faster than the speed of research. While we are researching it, the virus continues to replicate and spread.”

Dr. Jones said the industry should look at history as it considers the ‘what ifs’.

34 | AUTUMN 2021

The most common way ASF is transmitted is direct nose-to-nose contact.

ASF was last in the Western Hemisphere in 1978-1980 when case-based transmission spread quickly in four countries: Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic and Brazil. Eradication of the disease required the complete depopulation of the Dominican Republic and Haitian pigs.

“As we see travel and traffic across these different islands, we know this can spread,” Dr. Jones said. “This is an area where they have had a significant earthquake and now a tropical storm that is causing challenges in addition to a significant disease. The impact of its spread to these surrounding areas also would be devastating for developing countries.”

Most likely cause of entry This transboundary animal disease can be spread by live or dead pigs, domestic or wild, and even by pork products.

Transmission can also occur via contaminated feed and fomites such as shoes, clothes, vehicles, knives and equipment, due to the high environmental resistance of the ASF virus, according to the OIE. It is known to be transmissible contaminated water, or through objects that have been contaminated with blood.

Swill feeding, or the use of post-consumer leftovers to feed animals, is also considered a transmission risk because of the possibility for contaminated pork to be included.

www.feedinfo.com

YOUR GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY SOLUTION. Sustainable farming practices are foundational to the growth and production of U.S. Soy. Recently, the U.S. Soybean Export Council (USSEC) mapped U.S. Soy’s strategic objectives directly to the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – 17 goals that aim to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure all people enjoy peace and prosperity by 2030. With the strategic objectives tied directly to specific SDGs and the targets under those goals, the U.S. Soy industry has identified areas where we can have the greatest impact in supporting progress toward global sustainable development.

U.S. Soy is committed to supporting these goals and sustainable development to 2030 and beyond.

Sourcing verified sustainable U.S. Soy that meets EU sustainability requirements is simple with the U.S. Soy Sustainability Assurance Protocol (SSAP).

The SSAP certificate offers an origin specific, sustainability verification of U.S. Soy. Indicate to your soy supplier that you require a U.S. Soy SSAP certificate for your U.S. soy purchase.

For more info, visit USSOY.org

ASF IN AMERICAS The most likely cause of entry into the US could be transmission on fomites, but it is possible the virus could enter through the feed supply chain, Dr. Jones said.

“If the virus enters, it is more likely to occur through smuggled pork than through a feed ingredient, but the possibility exists,” Dr. Jones said. “We must take care of our business and make plans. Trust the USDA and what they are doing and telling us to do.”

The virus can be transmitted from wild boars or ticks to domestic pigs as well, Dr. Jones said.

“We have a concern with the presence of ticks and wild boar. Finding those animals is challenging and the eradication efforts are not strong enough for [the situation when] one of those animals migrates to another area, dies, and then swine feed on its carcass.”

Challenges to diagnosis ASF has a high but delayed fatality rate, which leads to frequent misdiagnosis.

“In the case of the Dominican Republic, it does have a high fatality case rate, but it is a delayed case rate, meaning we have an initial disease occurrence and 90-100% of those animals are going to die, but they don’t die overnight. So this is not rapid mortality.”

Early reports of ASF in the Dominican Republic were in two provinces. Less than two weeks later, it was reported in 15 provinces. On 16 August, it was reported that the cases were not just in July, but the virus had been in the country since April.

“A huge problem with this virus is there is misdiagnosis and confusion. A producer will have a couple of fatalities and respiratory symptoms that make us question whether this is PRRS or pneumonia. While we are investigating, we are spreading the disease and affected pigs are affecting other pigs in the herd,” Dr. Jones said.

In some cases, affected pigs can be asymptomatic, Dr. Jones said. “We have seen asymptomatic pigs affect other pigs in the past. Now we believe the newest cases are from luggage and fomite transmission.”

Currently, there is no approved vaccine for ASF. According to the OIE, prevention in countries free of the disease depends on the implementation of appropriate import policies and biosecurity measures, ensuring that neither infected live pigs nor pork products are introduced into areas free of ASF. Since 2007 the disease has been reported in multiple countries across Africa, Asia, and Europe, in domestic and wild pig populations.

Feed supply chain risks Animal food is not the most likely way that ASF or another disease will enter the US, but it is possible, Dr. Jones warned.

“Our risk in feed is small but meaningful,” Dr. Jones said.

“There have been past occurrences when transmission of feed ingredients has led to virus contamination.”

Tote bags carrying animal food from China was the most likely source of PEDV entry into the US, according to the USDA in 2015. Rice straw from China was the most likely source of foot and mouth disease (FMD) entry into Japan, according

36 | AUTUMN 2021

to the Japan Ministry of Agriculture in 2001. Forage and hay from Southeast Asia were the most likely source of FMD in South Korea, according to the South Korean Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency in 2014.

“Feed is not the most likely route of viral entry into animals, but the movement of feed can quickly spread disease,” Dr. Jones said. “For ASF transmission to occur in feed, the feed must get contaminated, then the virus has to survive transport and the pig has to have a high enough

“The virus is spreading faster than the speed of research. While we are researching it, the virus continues to replicate and spread” DR. CASSANDRA JONES www.feedinfo.com

ASF IN AMERICAS ASF was confirmed in the Dominican Republic in late July, marking its first detection in the Western Hemisphere and the closest to the US in 40 years.

dose to result in infection. These are unlikely situations.”

Dr. Jones said that the worst-case scenario would be contaminated ingredients going into a mill to feed several farms.

“We use a lot of people and vehicles to move material.

So when we are talking about fomite transmission, this contamination would be possible,” Dr. Jones said.

Highest feed risks There are different risks for different feed ingredients. The highest chances are whole grains and seeds because these could come into contact with an infected wild boar, Dr. Jones said.

There is a moderate risk for processed grains and seeds in these affected regions.

“More extreme chemical treatment [of these products] could disrupt virus growth,” Dr. Jones said.

The lowest risk is the synthetically derived ingredients.

“But the risk is not created equal. For example, if we have a fermented ingredient like an amino acid, it is not likely to be impacted during production. But there is some risk if it comes from an infected country where it is handled and transported, but not the same risk as if grown in a field.”

www.feedinfo.com

Contamination by transport Dr. Jones referenced some field research Kansas State University (KSU) did on the likelihood of ASF contamination in feed ingredients in Vietnam. In the study, 17 of 2,328 (0.7%) samples from the feed supply contained ASF DNA as determined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

“Less than 1% of the samples of feed in Vietnam where ASF is strong had been infected,” Dr. Jones said. “None of these were in ingredients, three were on feed-contact surfaces in mills, four were on non-feed contact surfaces in mills, two were on people in mills, one was on complete feed, and seven were on feed trucks.”

“We’re not seeing contaminated ingredients in production.

Feed movement can transmit the virus, but the probability it can spread in feed is unlikely,” Dr. Jones said.

Kansas State University also did a biosecurity experiment in the US to study the impact of ASF-contaminated ingredients on contamination of subsequent batches of feed manufactured on the same equipment.

What was most alarming, Dr. Jones said, was the survival of ASF in contaminated feed over time. It was still stable after six months.

“If it gets in, it stays in, and it’s going to stay in a long time,” Dr. Jones said.

The KSU experiment looked at four different infection areas: any feed contact surface zone, anything near the feed contact zone, anything in the facility but further away, and then transit services. For the experiment, the transit service was the shoes workers wore.

“The feed contact surfaces were pretty highly contaminated as expected. About 75% of surfaces were ASF positive. Even after cleaning, it still had 40-50% positive contamination.

And then outside of the mixer and outside of the equipment nearby, it spread to various surfaces because of dust. Shoes (transport) stayed positive the whole time and contaminated much of the facility.”

“People and vehicles are moving in and out of these zones all of the time, which creates risk for spreading the disease,” Dr. Jones said.

Needed response from the feed industry If the pathogens enter the animal food supply chain, the virus can move everywhere and quickly.

Dr. Jones provided critical tips on how the industry can prevent and prepare for a foreign animal disease outbreak.

“Exclude high-risk ingredients. Implement feed mill biosecurity, consider taking steps to minimize further risk of disease survival and infectivity with active mitigation,” Dr. Jones said.

There are many initiatives in place, including the Feed Risk Task Force, US Swine Health Improvement Program, and a working group to develop a Gateway Import Program.

“We have known this and have suspected it, so [everyone needs to] get involved. Understand and address the risk. Be a responsible traveller and importer. Act on what you should implement now and develop and practice steps for the ‘what if’.

Research. Improve detection and extraction from ingredients, evaluate and enforce biosecurity, Sanitize feed delivery trucks.”

AUTUMN 2021 | 37

ASF IN AMERICAS Every mill needs to do a biosecurity audit, says Dr Jones.

Preventing pathogen transfer The hurdles the industry needs to get over to prevent pathogen transfer through the supply chain are excluding high-risk ingredients and extending biosecurity practices from farms to mills, in addition to active mitigation, according to Dr. Jones.

The risk is not that it comes in through feed; it spreads through feed distribution and delivery, Dr. Jones explained, referencing that the KSU research in Vietnam showed the virus was transmitted through feed trucks.

“We have seen this with other pathogens like PRRS also,” Dr. Jones said. “On farms, we have biosecurity in place. We shower from site to site, change clothes and shoes on farms. But in delivery, we don’t do that. So there is potential in delivery for it to spread to other mills, farms, and other production systems.”

KSU looked at truck sanitation and found the most severe risk was not inside the feed trucks where the feed is, but in the cab where the driver is. Drivers get out and walk around farm to farm, mill to mill, touching things, picking up stuff on their clothes and shoes, and then contaminate the vehicle.

“Not much of what we have looked at to sanitize cabs works,” Dr. Jones said. “The best research is to spray with bleach and water, but the best advice is to have the driver stay in the truck. Truck sanitation is much more challenging on the interior cab where the driver sits.”

The industry can protect itself by being well informed on the origin and distribution of ingredients.

“Know and trust your suppliers and their supplier and their supplier. Do not use grains or oilseeds from regions with foreign animal disease,” Dr. Jones said. “If using other ingredients from regions with foreign animal diseases, take steps to ensure they are at low risk for disease transmission.”

38 | AUTUMN 2021

As container shipping becomes more constrained and expensive, more ingredients are moving via bulk shipment, creating additional risks, Dr. Jones said.

“If delivered in bulk, require new bags and/or washout tickets or proof of low-risk previous loads in all containers before arrival at your facility. If delivered in totes, obtain proof that bags were new and totes were clean,” she said.

Biosecurity feed mill audits Taking steps to achieve biosecurity at feed mills is also essential.

KSU researched a case in Brazil on the transmission of the Senecavirus A by auditing three mills. The group took 573 samples; 381 were ingredients or feed, and 192 were environmental swabs.

The mill with the highest audit score locked entry doors, had employees change shoes and clothing, had handwashing stations inside the mill, and had a scale within the fenced perimeter that was only for company-owned pigs.

“If ASF gets in [the feed equipment], it stays in, and it’s going to stay in a long time” DR. CASSANDRA JONES www.feedinfo.com

Agrimprove is Agrifirm’s functional feed ingredients brand. We develop new ideas in animal health and nutrition and grow these ideas into tangible improvements throughout the agri-food chain. In collaboration with the industry, we deploy the power of science to safeguard the responsible production of food protein for future generations.

agrifirm.com agrimprove.com

ASF IN AMERICAS “Every mill needs to do a biosecurity audit,” Dr. Jones said.

“In this case, the transmission was not from ingredients. It was from people and the environment.”

“The first thing is to look at people’s movement; where are they allowed to go and where should they be allowed to go. Yes, there is some risk of ingredient entry. A big risk is at the receiving pit, but the people movement aspect of the supply chain is by far the biggest risk of where we see the transmission of disease,” Dr. Jones said.

AFIA suggests the best practices to address feed mill biosecurity. These include: develop a plan and audit it. Use receiving mats at the receiving pit. Stagger deliveries in a dynamic pyramid of risk. Clean and disinfect vehicles after returning to the mill, change shoes, sanitize floors (10% bleach, 1% virkon S, traffic cop). Do not use dust as an ingredient.

Create lines of separation.

The final hurdle is active mitigation, Dr. Jones explained.

Chemical additives can be used dose-dependently under appropriate FDA use; however, these are not approved for virus or mitigation.

Also, companies may rely on viral decay, heating, and quarantine, Dr. Jones said.

In 2020, a case of infectious ASF was present in wheat, barley, rye, and tricate immediately after inoculation but not after two hours at room temperature, Dr. Jones said. However, viral decay does not protect against post-processing crosscontamination.

“If we can control and prevent ASF, those actions are going to prevent other diseases. So the consensus is that if we can control the transmission of FMDV and ASF, we will address the other foreign animal diseases (FADs).”

Additional swine health concerns Beyond foreign animal diseases, Salmonella enterica and its monophasic variant serotype I 4, [5], 12:1 should be on the radar as well, Dr. Jones said.

Salmonella can be transmitted through feed and has been found in feed mills. “The feed supply chain is not the most likely route of viral entry into animals, but it can quickly spread disease. We all play a role in preventing pathogen entry and spread,” Dr. Jones said.

US response A positive ASF case would trigger federal, state, and local emergency response plans, which include detailed surveillance action plans. There is also a North American response strategy that has been developed with Canada and Mexico.

The USDA is working to have documentation ready, if needed, to work with trading partners to regionalize the mainland and prove there are mitigation measures in place to protect the US swine herd and continue trade.

If ASF enters the US, either a US territory or mainland US, the USDA will likely issue a stop movement standstill order for

40-50% 40 | AUTUMN 2021

Percentage of surfaces which were still ASF positive after cleaning in a KSU experiment.

ASF has a high but delayed fatality rate, which leads to frequent misdiagnosis.

detection in domestic swine and feral swine. The movement would be for live swine and swine germplasm, not for pork or pork products that have passed Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) inspection.

The strategy would establish quarantines and movement controls with eradication by stamping-out, Dr. Jones said.

Stamping out consists of depopulation of clinically affected swine and, as appropriate, swine directly exposed to the virus.

Depopulation and disposal must be conducted with biosecurity to prevent further viral spread.

US actions to prevent ASF spread Dr. Jones said that there are actions to prevent ASF introduction into the US, adding that the US continues to prohibit live pig and pork imports from the Dominican Republic, a practice that was already in place because the country had been positive for classical swine fever.

The USDA is assisting the Dominican Republic in eradicating ASF by providing testing support, personal protective equipment, and increasing biosecurity outreach.

The USDA has also deployed prevention efforts with Puerto Rico by speeding up a six-year plan to eradicate feral swine from the island. In addition, Puerto Rico does participate in the national ASF and Classical Swine Fever surveillance plan.

More beagles are being put to work in Miami, Dr. Jones said.

The USDA is working closely with the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to protect US ports of entry. CBP’s beagle brigade aids in the identification of smuggled animal products, primarily in passengers’ luggage. Additionally, USDA and CBP are working with airlines to ensure proper trash disposal from airplanes with passengers from high-risk countries.

“We have a greater emphasis on pork smuggling through aircraft and seacraft vessels and cruise passenger luggage,” Dr. Jones said. “The government uses those dogs heavily on traffic from Southeast Asia, Europe, and the Caribbean.

“Be a responsible traveler and importer. We need to start thinking about and taking action to improve biosecurity, and take steps for the ‘what if’, because ‘what if’ is getting closer every day,” Dr. Jones said.

www.feedinfo.com

We share your passion for nutrition

cargill.com/animal-nutrition

INTERVIEW Pasture-fed ruminants present different challenges to mitigating greenhouse gas emissions.

Adapting methane reduction strategies for grazing systems

M

ethane is a potent GHG. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that methane emissions alone have contributed to half of the 1°C temperature rise the planet has witnessed since the pre-industrial era. As recently as September, the US and EU jointly announced the Global Methane Pledge, an initiative to reduce global methane emissions that will be launched at the November edition of the UN Climate Change Conference (COP 26). Countries which join the pledge will have a collective goal of reducing methane emissions by at least 30% of 2020 levels by 2030.

Agriculture will have an important role to play in this transition, as emissions from manure and gastroenteric releases from livestock are significant contributors to the total anthropogenic (caused by human activity rather than by natural processes) emissions of methane.

But we are still in the early days of learning how, exactly, ruminant production can continue to operate with a lighter methane footprint.

One of the institutions seeking to answer this question is the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium (PGgRc), a New Zealand-based organisation founded in 2003 whose aim is to provide practical knowledge and tools to help farmers and agriculturalists mitigate GHG emissions in an economically viable way. PGgRc is funded by eight sector partners as well as being supported by the New Zealand government.

In the last few years, the organisation has focused on the study and trial of four key potential methane reduction methods that could benefit the agricultural sector: low-methane animals, low-methane feeds, methane vaccine and methane inhibitors. Feedinfo spoke to Mark Aspin, general manager at PGgRc, to get a better understanding of the processes involved in each area of study and the success of the various trials.

Portable accumulation trailer used

by PGgRc to measure methane emissions from breeding stock.

42 | AUTUMN 2021

[Feedinfo] In your own words, who are PGgRc and what have you set out to achieve?

[PGgRc] PGgRc are a partnership between the ruminant livestock industries in New Zealand (dairy, beef, sheep and deer) along with the national research institute AgResearch that has been investing with NZ Government since 2003 to discover and develop cost-effective methods to reduce methane and nitrous oxide – the two non-CO2 GHG that these animal systems produce. Over that time the consortium has directed ~ NZ$85m into this research. PGgRc is a unique NZ approach where livestock farmers have invested directly to find ways to reduce methane and nitrous oxide. Most of the work has been on methane reduction, which accounts for 80% of a ruminant’s emissions and for which few options have been available.

[Feedinfo] Can you share with us a short explanation of each of the four pillars of study – animal genomic selection, low GHG feed, methane vaccination and methanogen inhibitors – and an explanation of where progress is at on each?

[PGgRc] Considerable progress has been made breeding low emitting sheep, data which is now being made available to the sheep sector, and work has commenced in breeding low emitting cattle and deer. The understanding we have from our sheep studies inform what’s possible in other species and cattle measurement and selection is now being developed in our dairy sector.

On the second, research has identified plant species that reduce methane when eaten; however the ability for these to replace pasture as the major element of the diet is limited. Some forage crops, such as brassica rape, plantain and fodder beet, show promise, but they need to be the majority of the diet to do this and this will limit their utility.

Feed additives, be they natural or man-made, are often cited globally as a way forward because of their significant reduction potential (3090% per day). What’s not always obvious is that these work best in systems where the feed is fed to livestock, rather than in free grazing systems as a supplement, where the impacts will be much reduced (5-20%) as they will not always be present in the rumen through the period of digestion. We are creating inhibitors for a slow-release capsule that delivers a targeted chemical compound and have found significant reductions in small scale livestock trials. Additional larger scale trials are being planned.

The fourth approach is a methane vaccine, harnessing the animal’s immune system to create antibodies to reduce methane production, which we have demonstrated can work in principle at pure culture level and for which further trials are underway with the intention of demonstrating proof of concept. This approach, if it can be made to work (and it’s very tricky science at play here) could offer all global

www.feedinfo.com

NZ RUMINANTS

New Zealand as a country contributes around 0.17% of the total global GHG emissions, with just under half of that coming from its livestock sector.

ruminants a game-changing option as it could be used in any farming system.

The partnership programme has advanced three of these methods (genetics, inhibitors, feeds) through proof of concept and into development and deployment, while the methane vaccine has shown promise in laboratory scale experiments with pure microbial cultures, but we still have to confirm reductions in animal trials.

[Feedinfo] Which of the methods showed the greatest results in reducing methane levels both in the lab and in real-world trials?

[PGgRc] The most significant reductions we have seen have been with some of the small molecule compounds we are testing, with 30-40% methane reductions. Our challenge in NZ is translating these potentials into a working solution for grazing systems where the animals don’t have daily access to supplements as in many of the northern hemisphere’s agricultural systems.

We have also seen 30% reduction/day in methane with forage rape – an annual crop offered to livestock. However, the application of this in our NZ systems (where animals only receive this feed for six/52 weeks a year) means that the national impact for this would be very small (1%).

[Feedinfo] Which of the four methods studied do you believe is most likely to have the greatest impact on global attempts to reduce agricultural methane in the coming years?

[PGgRc] The direct methane methods (inhibitors and vaccine) have the most potential, as they target the methane producing archaea in the rumen (methanogens). Of these, the inhibitors have proven to be a viable solution, so they offer the most likely path forward for the immediate future, but they will require ongoing costs to deploy. The utility of a vaccine (which will hopefully require no more than annual expenses) offers a lot of promise for all livestock systems, but the concept is unproven.

www.feedinfo.com

Finally, we should note that the ruminant animal is unique in that it is born functionally monogastric and develops a rumen in the first 14 weeks of life. This may potentially be an avenue that can be exploited to set up a rumen ecology that is permanently lower in methane; understanding of this is only just emerging and it offers a substantial opportunity if that is the case. In dairy systems many cattle are artificially reared and this approach could be employed through those systems.

[Feedinfo] To conclude, is there a reason why New Zealand appears to be at the very forefront of agricultural methane reduction research? Is it related to the number of ruminant livestock across the two islands?

[PGgRc] It’s really quite simple: although New Zealand as a country only contributes around 0.17% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions, just under half of that comes from our livestock sector.

Among developed countries, we stick out at 48%; the next closest to us is Ireland at 32% of total emissions coming from agriculture. France, I think, is around 17% of emissions from agriculture.

This is also high compared to other economic sectors: we sit at about 90% renewable for energy and the other big challenge for us in terms of industrial GHG production is transport, which is likely to be solved elsewhere with technology we will then import (we like our cars). Moreover, for us, the animal agriculture sector, especially that of ruminants (very few pigs or chickens), is a mainstay of our economy; this is even more true in Covid-19 times now that tourism, previously the main source of foreign currency, is now essentially non-existent.

Finally, there’s the structure of the sector; we have largely grazing systems which are a long way from crop and feed sources, and therefore we have a largely self-sufficient sector that likes to roll its sleeves up and take on the major challenges. Our science and scientists are highly regarded globally and most especially in the ruminant field.

AUTUMN 2021 | 43

INTERVIEW

A

sk virtually anyone who is thinking strategically about the agriculture and food production sectors to name the issue that is most worrying them. There is next to no doubt that their answer will be related to sustainability: Climate change, the allocation of scarce resources, etc.

Well, according to Elisabeth Mork-Eidem, of AgriBriefing’s executive team, the agriculture industry is foolishly handicapping itself as it searches for solutions to the complex, expensive, supply-chain-spanning problems of sustainability.

“If we’re going to tackle, as an industry, the largest challenge that it’s ever going to be faced with, we need to have as many different voices as possible around the table,” she says.

This was one of the many reasons behind the creation of Women in Food and Agriculture (WFA), a campaign spearheaded

by AgriBriefing (the parent company of brands including Feedinfo, Urner Barry, Agrimoney, and Stratégie Grains, among others).

According to Mork-Eidem, the idea formed in 2018.

“I was going to a lot of trade shows, both in UK farming and internationally, and seeing a distinct lack of women.”

This sparked research to validate whether this was, in fact, part of a larger problem within the industry, and turned into the WFA initiative, which launched on International Women’s Day in 2019 and culminated in an event in December that same year.

Since that first successful conference, the movement has gained momentum. It now includes year-round articles, podcasts and other stories published through the channels of the various AgriBriefing brands highlighting women of note in the industry; a survey reaching thousands of participants from all parts of the vast agribusiness world; an online community organising regular networking and informative sessions for women; and a mentoring scheme to help connect women in the industry with resources and contacts to help inspire them and shape their career.

Deep into the planning of a WFA Livestream taking place in December and the next Women in Food and Agriculture Summit in Frankfurt am Main on June 14-15 next year, Mork-Eidem and her

Elisabeth Mork-Eidem (left) and Olga Korzhova.

44 | AUTUMN 2021

The Women in Food and Agriculture event brings together stakeholders from across the supply chain.

WFA: Tough questions need diverse thinking colleague Olga Korzhova, head of event content for the Women in Food and Agriculture summit, shared why WFA is important, particularly within the context of an industry attempting to adapt to new expectations in terms of environmental and social responsibility and how it sees its own impacts.

Why WFA? Mork-Eidem is very clear from the outset: WFA is not about changing women to better fit into the food and agriculture industry; it is about addressing whatever cultural or other barriers exist within these sectors which prevent women from fully participating. She acknowledges the need for an event for women in food and agriculture was not self-evident to all, especially at the beginning.

“There was some pushback from individuals as well, saying ‘we don’t need this, we as women should be able to stand on our own feet and [deal with things] without having, you know, a sisterhood’.” However, she says, for the most part, the feedback was “overwhelmingly positive, saying, ‘this is something we really want to get involved in and that we see value in’.”

Korzhova adds her experience from having headed up the preevent research.

“Yes, we did have some people who would say ‘I don’t understand, I’ve never had any issues being a woman in this industry, I think [WFA]’s not for me’. Then I would come back and say ‘yes, you are doing great, you’re in the C-suite, now you’re CEO we need you as a role model, there are others that need that support’.”

However, both insist that the case for the existence of WFA is certainly not only a moral one; there is also a business case, in that having a diverse workforce can improve performance on several metrics. Chairmen of FTSE 350 companies who have worked to improve the gender balance of their boards have reported the benefits of diverse perspectives, more challenging debate and improved decision making1, while research covered in the Harvard Business Review demonstrates a causal (though

www.feedinfo.com

INTERVIEW Since the first successful WFA event in 2019, the movement has gained momentum.

WFA EVENTS

context-dependent) link between the inclusion of women and better financial returns2.

Moreover, Mork-Eidem advocates powerfully for the creative potential that comes from having a wide swathe of participants from different parts of the supply chain and different professional backgrounds come together to talk about big problems.

“You gain the perspective of someone who sits next to you in the value chain and how [an issue] affects them and you gain the understanding of how your work in your part of the value chain is affecting those further up or downstream from where you sit.”

Ensuring participants continue making progress towards diversity goals is also important to the campaign. The WFA pledge consists of five items; companies associated with the movement commit to such things as having a diversity and inclusion strategy which is reviewed annually and taking part in the annual WFA diversity survey, while individuals commit to promoting an inclusive culture at their place of work and being an active and engaged participant in the WFA community.

Mork-Eidem believes that any company serious about recruiting the best talent has an interest in demonstrating publicly that their dedication to inclusivity is concrete and ongoing.

“As a woman working in the industry, I think it’s going to become more and more important to look at the company that you work for, or might want to work for, and say hey, how are they doing when it comes to meeting certain goals? Look at their boards – do they have enough female representation?

Do they have an adequate representation of women in senior management? If you don’t see yourself represented in a company, you’re not going to go there.”

‘Wow’ moment Having started from the realization of just how few women were present at other events, the two WFA organisers say that the most powerful moments brought about by WFA have been at the campaign’s live event.

“I think that for me, it was this ‘wow’ moment – and it wasn’t just me. We had it collectively,” says Mork-Eidem.

Korzhova concurs. “Yes, it was this kind of electric atmosphere.”

46 | AUTUMN 2021

z People of all genders who are passionate about diversity in the industry are invited to the 2021 WFA Livestream on December 2 and the Women in Food and Agriculture summit in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, from June 14-15, 2022.

For more information, go to www.wfasummit.com She recalls a couple of individual experiences that really impressed her – a 16-year-old invited to present and being approached afterwards with internship offers by companies in the industry, or a woman who was motivated by some of the presentations at the event to take her career in another direction joining a later networking event and talking about how WFA had inspired changes in how she approached her professional ambitions.

Mork-Eidem adds to that the experience of another group for whom the WFA event can be transformative – the men who attend.

“The feedback we have from the men in the room is that they finally understood what it was like to be a woman at a ‘normal’ event. They don’t get it until they are in a situation where it’s like ‘oh OK, so this is how it feels to not look like everyone else around you. This is what it feels like to potentially be slightly intimidated by putting your hand up, because what you’re going to say might not be what the person next to you would think’.”

Finally, for both, there is the power that comes from solidarity, from hearing about how others have successfully navigated the same struggles as you. Korzhova shares how it was important for her to include issues around balancing parenthood and professional life.

“Coming back to work from maternity, paternity leave; those are real-life issues.”

Similarly, Mork-Eidem adds: “I think for people of my age, who’ve been working for a long time in such a male-dominated industry, we’ve been thinking the same things and we’ve been feeling the same. And now we’re finally allowed to talk about it, without being judged. These are things that I just wouldn’t say 20 years ago.

“And realising that we can help with that conversation and that women that are coming into the industry now will start at a very different place, with a very different tone, than what we had when coming into it. I think that is the real impact of WFA.” Works cited in this piece are listed here.

www.feedinfo.com

Your complete view of the global animal nutrition industry

Independent feed additives price reporting & analysis

The fastest industry news & insight

Boost decisionmaking with thorough & independent regular feed additive price reporting & analysis

Keep informed with the fastest news & insights, written & curated

by Feedinfo, sent to your inbox daily

Extensive information on scientific innovation

Innovate with confidence, with an extensive library of journals, legislative information & research

Find out why Feedinfo is the industry's favourite source of animal nutrition & feed intelligence, get your free trial, today:

www.feedinfo.com/demo

RECRUITMENT UPDATES

INDUSTRY MOVES Recent senior job moves within the global animal nutrition industry ADM ANIMAL NUTRITION appointed Ruben Beltran as vicepresident North America for the Feed Additives and Ingredients business unit, in September.

Lars F. Snijders announced in September that he will be leaving his position as general manager of FRAnklin Group BV (FRAMELCO GROUP). He will be succeeded by Peter Zondervan, currently COO.

AGRIBRIEFING appointed Julien Hardwick as EU managing director in September. In the role, he will oversee operations for Feedinfo, as well as sister services Tallage – Stratégie Grains and Agrimoney.

GMP+ INTERNATIONAL welcomed Bram Schuit as new commercial director starting September 1, 2021. He joins Roland van der Post to complete the new management.

ALLTECH IRELAND announced new hires for its pig and poultry teams: Dr Hazel Rooney has been appointed as technical pig coordinator and Paula Mc Cooey as poultry manager.

HAMLET PROTEIN made a few appointments over the last few months. Jessika van Leeuwen PhD MSc joined the company as category manager swine.

The company also welcomed Henrik Pedersen as plant manager in Horsens. And Nicolas Anglade joined the ruminants team as category manager ruminants.

AKVA GROUP appointed Cecilie Låhne as sales director. She replaces Hans-Øyvind Sagen, who will take on the new role as senior vice-president key accounts in AKVA group.

AMLAN INTERNATIONAL hired animal health veteran Betty Yuriko as country manager in September.

INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES’ health and biosciences division has appointed Pauel Fokin as vice-president of the Danisco Animal Nutrition business.

Derk-Jan Terhorst started as BARENTZ INTERNATIONAL B.V.’S chief financial officer and as a member of the board on September 1, 2021. Following Terhorst’s appointment, Jos van der Linden stepped down as CFO and board member after 24 years.

The INTERNATIONAL FEED INDUSTRY FEDERATION (IFIF) has announced that Ruud Tijssens, group director public and cooperative affairs, Royal Agrifirm Group, was elected as IFIF’s new chairman for 2022-2023 on September 21, 2021.

BENCHMARK GENETICS appointed Adrian Antonsen as applied genetics consultant, a newly-established position in the company, to strengthen its external consultancy services.

NATURAL BIOLOGICS welcomed Denny Sells as the new midAtlantic regional sales manager in August.

DELACON appointed chief operating officer Michael Fischer in July.

David Bravo joined NUTRECO as chief science officer in July to lead the company’s new fundamental research unit. Also, after leading the company for the past three years, Rob Koremans retired from his role as CEO this summer. Fulco van Lede joined Nutreco as CEO as of August 2021.

Ellen de Brabander, PhD joins ELANCO to lead innovation and regulatory affairs.

Anthony Lin took on the role of global marketing and communications director at VERAMARIS from September 1, 2021.

BIOMAR appointed Franck Bodin as managing director for the new BioMar Viet Uc feed business unit in Vietnam.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND SERVICES z As part of our industry recruitment service, Feedinfo covers recent senior job moves within the global animal nutrition industry, helping industry colleagues keep up to date with new roles, board appointments and business changes. Please send any announcements to recruitment@feedinfo.com

48 | AUTUMN 2021

z In addition, organisations seeking to recruit specialist or senior staff can take advantage of Feedinfo’s recruitment service, which offers an audience of engaged and highly qualified animal nutrition specialists, managers and executives. For more details, contact our recruitment specialist, Dineo Komane at dineo.komane@agribriefing.com

www.feedinfo.com