How Sustainability Strengthens Your Organization

Sponsored by:

Organizations have long paid lip service to sustainability…

But these days, people are paying attention and it’s no longer enough to talk the talk.

If you can’t walk the walk on sustainability, you are putting your business at risk.

In this episode, I’m joined by Joel Makower, Chairman and Co-Founder of GreenBiz Group, who shares why sustainability matters more than ever and how you can start sustaining your business for the long-haul by becoming more sustainable.

Listen as we discuss:

• How sustainability mitigates risk
• The evolution of the sustainability role in business
• 3 steps for making sustainability a priority in your business

To hear all the freshest interviews in the produce industry, subscribe to Fresh Takes on Tech on Audible, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.

Listening on a desktop & can’t see the links? Just search for Fresh Takes on Tech in your favorite podcast player.

You're listening to the fresh takes on tech podcast, a show from the International fresh produce Association. This is a show for people interested in the intersection between technology and the produce and floral industries. Every week we explore the problems, solutions, people and ideas that are shaping the industry. If you are interested in the innovations that create change, this is the place for you. Let's dive in.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Well, welcome to fresh takes on tech. I'm your host, Vonnie Estes. And this is our first podcast of this season and the relaunch of the podcast. And we have a great guest that I can't wait to talk to today, Joel Makower, he's the founder of GreenBiz group. And Joel and I have known each other, I think, close to 27 years. So it's really great to have him on the show and to talk about his work in sustainability. Welcome, and good to have you, Joel.

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Thanks, Vonnie. That's been that long. It's amazing. I'm only 29. So I don't know how that worked out.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Okay, so let's start with an introduction of yourself, your work and the GreenBiz group?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Sure, well, I am a journalist and an entrepreneur. And I've spent my whole career 40 plus years starting companies, this is my third company in the mostly in the event information and media and events space. And for the past 37 years, I've been focusing at the intersection of business sustainability, and technology and innovation and corporate practice and strategy, how the world's largest companies and lots of small mid-sized ones as well are thinking about and integrating sustainability into their operations and aligning that with their core strategy, and all of that, and my company, GreenBiz group, I'm the co founder and chairman, we're about 50 people here in Oakland, California, we produce a daily news and daily, we have seven weekly free newsletters we put on for big in person events, I think thankfully back in person, as well as some virtual events throughout the year. And then we have a membership group of sustainability executives from large companies, billion dollar plus revenue companies, that we again, post COVID bring together multiple times a year for what we call peer to peer learning and what they tend to call group therapy. But this is a broad range of companies from food and ag to railroads, airlines, banks, tech companies, and so on. And so, so it's been really interesting to sit at that middle intersection and being able to listen to the conversations that companies are having.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
So you do focus a lot on the companies and what they're doing, they have tools and capabilities to solve a lot of the issues that we have around sustainability. Why do you think we don't have 100% of companies on board and practicing to the fullest extent?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, in a word change we all have, we like the idea of change, doing it is actually harder, I like to say that when it comes to change, we love the noun and hate the verb. And so this is, you know, companies have other priorities, particularly these days, your supply chain and talent acquisition and retention, and all the usual things around products and services and quality and delivery, and you know, finance and cash flow, all the things that companies deal with. And sustainability is still you know, on the list of the top five things that a CEO wants to think about on a given day, this falls to number seven or eight. And so it just doesn't rise to the top for enough companies. Having said that, there are many companies for which it does that are that see this as a as a huge risk factor, frankly, and are dealing with that and in ways that go well beyond what most the public generally sees. We can talk about this maybe but you know, most people out there assume that any company that's doing anything is ipso facto greenwashing, when in fact that actually the opposite is true that companies tend to be walking more than they're talking they actually doing more than they're actually saying and we can talk about why that's the case. But you know, this the idea of sustainability is compelling. You know, who wouldn't want to do the right thing for people on the planet while also aligning with profits and productivity? But it's not so simple and I know you know, this honor you've been in this field for a long time, but this is a these are very challenging things to do. Because there are simple things that companies do and you know, you can change out your light bulbs and tune your H fac and things like that. Sort of no brainers because they pencil out financially pretty quickly. But the harder things the higher hanging fruit if you will, is inordinately difficult to pick and so companies are struggling with that and because both change can be difficult Even when it's driven from the top, and the, as I said, the priorities don't always line up with what's going on. I mean, think about what's happening right now in the world, you know, particularly supply chains and caring about employees, customers and suppliers in Eastern Europe and you know, still dealing with the pandemic and everything else. Unfortunately, this gets shunted to the side.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
I have a couple questions from that one. You mentioned about the perception of greenwashing. And then a lot of times the public doesn't think that companies are really doing anything, and they just assume anything they say, isn't true. How did that public perception happen? And why is it happening? Because I certainly see that as well.

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, I think early on, it was it was the activist community, the green pieces and others that that saw companies taking, you know, saying they were taking action and realizing that what they were doing either they either weren't doing what they were saying they were doing, or they were just making sort of generally gauzie kinds of commitments and statements, but nothing, not so much to back it up. Or they were dealing with some superficial things, you know, it's changing out light bulbs, but not the real problems that were there, their biggest impacts are more recently, it's, you know, became political. And I think that's factored in, in terms of company's willingness to do these things. But that's changing a lot now, because now a lot of this has been driven by Wall Street, at least for big publicly traded companies and large companies that are owned by private equity firms.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
There's real metrics that you that people are measuring. So you have to show that what you're doing, right?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Yeah, the metrics, and those are difficult, because they're not always consistent. Companies are being held accountable and being asked to provide more disclosure and transparency about their performance and their impacts. But still, even still, it gets harder to change in companies. You know, as I said, a minute ago, it's, this doesn't always rise to the top. And so companies know, they need to be able to talk the talk. And some of them, you know, genuinely want to do the right thing. But they haven't, they may not even know what the right thing is, they may think that, okay, we buy, we're buying green energy from our local utility, we've cut our waste significantly at our factory or headquarters, you know, we donate a nickel per widget sold to Ducks Unlimited, every third week in April, or whatever the you know, we're the good guys. And ignoring the fact that probably 80, or 90% of their impacts are in their supply chain, which you know, presents any number of challenges. And so, you know, there's still a lot of, despite decades of this, and so many of us, beating the drum and trying to educate the business community, there's still a lot of myths and misunderstanding about what you even need to be doing. And again, that's changing a lot, there's a whole new generation of employees coming in who are who do get it. So it's all really exciting, but it's just not changing at this scale, scope and speed we need. And we we saw recently, the latest IPCC report, and we, you know, get a little numb to those because they come out in there, I'll have these dire warnings and Code Red for the planet and all of this, but, you know, they become increasingly dire and, and still, we all sort of become numb to this. And it's sort of paralyzing for a lot of companies about what they really need to be doing, and how much of a difference they can make. One of the

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Things that I have seen in my career, and this is definitely improving as well, but certainly early on, people would hire a sustainability officer. And that person would be mid-level in the organization, you know, not report to the CEO would be kind of mid level. And they're like, Okay, check. You know, we hired our sustainability officer, now we're doing sustainability stuff, and it just didn't work very well, you know, and that person wasn't empowered and it didn't go through the whole organization. How are you seeing that, that change? Are those people getting more power and more influence? Is sustainability starting to really be a part of what everyone does? What's happening with that now?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Yeah, you're right. I mean, for a long time, it was, you know, the sustainability person was seen as a, you know, off to the side that the tree hugger, the person who's gonna come up and, you know, come along and make things differently. It was like, oh, here comes Vonnie look busy, you know, and so that's changing a lot because there's still somebody in more and more people who have that sustainability title, sort of the quarterback, if you will, inside a company, but now it's being pushed out to facilities and operations and supply chain and finance and marketing and communications and government relations, Investor Relations and CFO and many other parts of the operation. And so it's less seen as a distraction or something off to the side again, because you know, employees get this employees realize you can't just sort of talk the talk and have a little window dressing here. You really need to be doing things and they want their employees employers to be doing these things and to be part of the solution and they're proud of Have them when they are. And again, that doesn't happen just by creating, you know, the, you know, as I said, the glossy reported to a nephew superficial kinds of things.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
I've heard you talk about the return on investment for climate and the risk of inaction. Can you define this and explain why it's important?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Sure, I think you're referring to a piece I wrote earlier this year called the new ROI for climate, the risk of inaction. And you know, for a long time, how can we risk the economy or risk our business by investing in these kinds of changes that we're being asked to do to reduce our carbon or environmental footprint? And increasingly, we're seeing that it's actually we're flipping the script on that, that what's the risk of not doing these things? So we learned during the pandemic, that you know, this whole idea of flattening the curve, that the earlier you take action, the better your odds of mitigating the risks and minimizing the damage, but then we're starting to see, you know, these risks that can be found at pretty much every level company, community, national, global and catastrophic damage from extreme weather, the disruption of supply chains, the displacement of workforces, the increased burdens on the already reeling healthcare establishment a, you know, and you can measure these in monetary terms as well as just in lives and livelihoods. And so we're starting to see, you know, what is how does this filter down at the company level, what's the risk of inaction? How much more is it's going to cost later, to harden the targets, if you will, to make sure that we are less susceptible to extreme weather, for example, or the disruptions caused by extreme weather, because that's going to be increasing. So a lot of these things are is, as we learned, during the pandemic, that our supply chains are pretty fragile and brittle. And, and so you know, taking earlier action and making sure you're ready for what's coming, and it is coming. There's no no dispute about that is really what companies need to be doing. You know, we, every year in January, around the time of Davos, the World Economic Forum, big event, the World Economic Forum, and Marshall McLennan put out an annual Global Risks report where they, the 17th edition came out in January this year, they asked more than 1000 global experts to rank 37 global risks as their as to their potential to cause significant negative impact over the next decade. And the top ones were all climate related and biodiversity loss, extreme weather. And so these things are coming. And so what is the risk of waiting too long?

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Yeah, I think this idea of flipping this, the script is really applicable to the produce industry and to agriculture, because we're not only trying to mitigate climate change, but we're also hugely at the effect of climate change. And so I'm already seeing places where it's too hot to grow the way that they were growing, or it's too cold, or the temperature swings are too up and down, or it's too wet, it's too dry, you know, so there really is a lot of changes that that we have to make, to be able to continue to grow the way that we grow, you know, people are looking at growing indoors as a way to mitigate that, you know, there's a big issue with water, we're not, you know, especially here in California, you know, we're not going to have the water that we need. So have you looked at that and thought about like with food? How do we work with this where we know climate change is coming?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Yeah. I mean, you're right about flipping the script for a long time. Certainly, when it came to climate change, or even things like biodiversity, the question was just, you know, what's the impact of business on the climate? And that's still a question. But increasingly, the question is, what's the impact of changing climate on business, you know, to my earlier point around supply chains around being able to grow things? And so yeah, I mean, this whole push towards regenerative agriculture and, you know, how do you raise beef in a way that aligns with with being able to improve this soil health? And how can that then affect other crops, including, you know, fresh fruit and other produce and flowers and all of those things, you know, you're starting to understand that there that we have to sort of look at new ways of it's not just a matter of conducting business the same way, you know, with climate in mind, in some ways, business is going to have to change the way they do things. And agriculture, farmers, at least, traditionally have been stewards of the land. But you know, over the past 50 or 70 years, you know, really, the inputs have really started to take a toll and we're one of our biggest national security threats or global security threats really is soil health, and we're just not taking care of that. As I say, We're biting the land that feeds us. And there are agricultural techniques that are well known and established but sort of had been set aside for years around how do you farm in a way that improves enhances the soil and by the way, also sequestered carbon and may create some new revenue streams as there's a price on carbon. So those are still you know, back to my main word here change those things, those changes are hard, but they're starting to see movement, there were much more mainstream operations or end users, the McDonald's of the worlds or the Cargill is not the end users. But the main buyers of these crops and commodities are basically asking if not demanding these kinds of changes, because they understand that the continuity of their own business is dependent upon being able to ensure that that we have, you know, healthy soil and abundant crops, despite the new changes that are happening in the climate.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Driscoll is the global market leader of fresh strawberries, blueberries, raspberries and blackberries. With more than 100 years of farming heritage. Driscoll is a pioneer of berry flavor, innovation, and the trusted consumer brand of only the finest berries. Yeah, I mean, I may be a little close to it. So I'd love to hear your perspective of in the industry, we're kind of scrambling and figuring out what you know, everybody wants for gender tobacco, and everybody's talking about like, what does that mean? And how do we supply it? And how do we make money doing it? How do we not lose money doing it? And so I'd love to hear some of your thoughts from I mean, you have a broader worldview on how people are talking about regenerative ag and what the expectations are, can you give us a little window into that?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, first of all, I'm not sure we have clear definitions of what regenerative ag even means. And so it's, it is sort of this, you know, this vague term that sounds good and probably is good. But what does that mean? And how regenerative is regenerative? I know, that's a funny sentence. But those are the kinds of questions that it ultimately gets down to. And then there's also an assumption that you have to flip a switch and stop doing this and start doing that. And and that's, you know, may may be ideal, maybe actually, what's needed is, you know, make change at the level that we need to be making change. But it's not pragmatic from a real world view of companies and supply chains, and all of that. So I think what we're really encouraging progress, or is even just with companies that are starting to do some pilot projects, and not just how do you work with landowners and smallholders and others in terms of changing their operations? But how do you measure that? How do you measure soil carbon? And how do you measure carbon? You know, soil health, and then looking obviously, at the, at the, at the quantity and quality of the crops? Is those better or worse, the same? And so this is a slow, unfortunately, to slow, but transition. But again, I think the the idea that we need to make big changes quickly, can be paralyzing to a lot of companies. And so it's, you know, it's easier to just do what you always do, because first of all, you have to be in business. And second of all, it ain't broke, at least right now. And so making those kinds of changes, it doesn't have to be in a big way. But I think you know, my two word advice here, just start somewhere. Vonnie Ests, IFPA Yeah, no, I think that's definitely true. Because people I do see a lot of people get paralyzed, just saying, I can't do all that, you know, I can't do all that. And so, you know, a lot of times, it's just like, pick two things, you know, to do differently, and to think about soil health, and how you might do something differently. Because as you said, you know, the luck, a lot of the technology that's been developed over the last century, it has was good, we were able to feed more people and create more calories. And but now, you know, we've kind of done a lot of damage along the way. And so what do we need to do to kind of use technology and use information to wind that back and start regenerating the soil? It's, it's a huge issue. And I think as we're talking about greenwashing earlier, there's a lot of grower groups that feel like oh, now you're going to put something else on me that I have to lose money on. So that's a lot of the conversation is, you know, the risk ends up being taken by the grower, which is not where the risk should live, because he or she is not getting the advantage of changing these practices, you know, so there needs to be some sort of way where they don't have to take all the risk and spend all the money to do practices that really are best for the planet, to produce food for people. So it's a it's an interesting process. And I think, you know, it isn't a flip of the switch. And that's what a lot of people would like to see is just that the switches were all regenerative now, but I think it's a slow process and just increasingly using technology and not using technology, you know, to grow more sustainably and in a regenerative way.

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
And you brought up I think, an interesting point that where this stuff happens much more quickly is when it is a partnership when it is a collaboration between maybe multiple players, sometimes different parts of the value chain. Sometimes it's multiple companies that are that basically share the same suppliers or the same country suppliers, you know, how do we work with a specific country to help their farmers for this crop improve their the sustainability profile and so those these things don't just happen? because you ask your supplier to make a change, and then they say, Well, I don't know, you know, or sorry, no, you're just not in. And there's nothing you can do about it. Because you're not that big of a buyer. You know, it does require partnerships. Sometimes it requires third parties who bring folks together, whether those are public agencies, or sometimes environmental groups on the ground NGOs, or trade associations. And that's really how this stuff works. It just doesn't work by issuing new orders.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
So what role do you think policy and regulation plays? Can it play a positive role? Or is it always just make more trouble? Or how do you see that?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
No, AI policy is important. I mean, we need to set the floor, we need to provide incentives we need. And those are things that that that government can do? Well, sometimes we need subsidies, discounted loans, or loan guarantees, or any number of other things, which the agricultural community is very familiar with it, they just maybe for the wrong kinds of things, or at least the kinds of things that, frankly, may be causing some of these problems rather than addressing them. And so you know, government can absolutely play a role here. What's also fascinating is how much change has taken place in at least in the United States, in the absence of policy leadership, where, you know, we certainly over the past, you know, let's say five years, there hasn't been the kind of leadership or whether even if when there has been the right kind of leadership, there may be other forces on the lobbying front, and, you know, legislative fronts. Again, this could be at the national or the state and local levels that thwarts the kinds of changes that need to be made. But what's fascinating, as I said, is how much is happening. Because this is ultimately about business risk, regulatory risk, financial risk, reputational risk, technology risk, right to operate risk, if you're the largest water user in a water stressed area, you may not be able to do business, or if your supplier is, you know, they may not be able to operate. And so you know, these are increasing risks. And so companies need to be doing these things for risk mitigation purposes. And government can help and could accelerate a lot of these things and could stimulate even more change. But as I said, it's really impressive how much is taking place?

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Was involved in the ethanol and second generation ethanol industry for a while. And you look at that industry and how that was a lot of that was driven by legislation. And it was this really, you know, he talked about how it all ended up. But at the time, you know, a lot of money got put in, and a lot of people started paying attention to ethanol, and there was a lot of legislation, and it really got people going in. And we may be getting close to that around carbon, you know, where people are thinking, you know, from a risk mitigation, and from a legislation point of view is that it might help to put some things in place to to get people start developing more technologies and support technologies to be developed to really understand what's going on in the soil, measuring carbon and being able to do something to sequester it. So I think, you know, we may, I'm hoping, you know, we may be headed toward some sort of Nexus like that, where regulation can actually help.

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, I hope it doesn't happen the way that ethanol happened, because that to me, was just was too prescriptive and incentivize things. And again, I believe that a lot of that was the result of lobbying by certain interests. I think it's better when government can set some broad goals or some broad, yeah, broad goals around carbon emissions reduction, or maybe soil health or water use, and let the free market figure out how to do that and create the incentives, both the carrots and the sticks for doing the right thing and, you know, penalize those who are the cheaters, and the laggards and who aren't doing it. But I think that the ethanol thing, you know, said, All right, we're all going to march down this direction. And here's billions of dollars to help, you know, pave the way and then turned out to not be the right direction. And I think if that had been a broader goal of how do we reduce petroleum use overall, which I think was what the ethanol thing was getting to and carbon emissions, then there are other ways to do that. And then all of a sudden, there, maybe it's a price on carbon. I'm not an advocate for any particular remedy there. Because there's lots of men, I'm not a policy geek. But I think that there are a lot of ways you can incentivize the market and provide the financial stimulus. And again, the regulatory penalties for not hitting in those directions. That's what we need to see and let let technology let competition and let all of that soar.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
We've talked a little bit about supply chain and one of the things that I'm certainly seeing is when large companies like Walmart or McDonald's or cardio like you've mentioned before, when they have the market power to say look, this is What we want from our suppliers and this is what our expectations are. And that that changes everything. It sounds like they have an awful lot of power. But it also that's a ways without regulation. And that's a way to make big changes where they make demands, they need to meet their goals, and for them to meet their goals, they need to reach down their supply chain and have the supply chain help them meet those goals. Have you seen some case studies around that of how the larger companies have kind of forced change down the supply chain?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, you name two of them. And I think, you know, McDonald's and Walmart. It cuts both ways. I mean, I think, you know, a lot of suppliers to Walmart, and even those that are, you know, so deeply engaged with sustainability efforts don't really like the heavy hand that Walmart can have. And Walmart can force you know, the suppliers to absorb all of the costs of change and still deliver the product at the same price or less. And, look, Walmart is a hugely positive force in sustainability. And the commitments they've made project gigaton, and in particular, I think you're having a big impact, including in agriculture, you know, some of the sometimes the big companies have big, heavy hammers, and it's one way of doing it, and it may work. And sometimes it does, if you're the 900 pound gorilla, you kind of you can kind of call those shots. But there's lots and lots of other smaller, you know, you know, companies that even they're big, but they're nowhere near the size of a McDonald's or Walmart, who are also working with their suppliers and may not have the market clout to affect the kind of change but you know, there's strength in numbers here, where you start to see multiple brands, you know, really lean into this because they're driven by their customers, whether they're in grocery stores, or that are actual shoppers, demanding these kinds of things, or whether they're, you know, being revealed under the klieg lights of disclosure by activist groups or government agencies that that, you know, or investors that are ranking and rating these companies for there's unsustainability issues, you know, there's lots of different ways to affect change. But yeah, I mean, look, supply chains is, first of all, were overwhelmingly for, you know, most sectors where anywhere from 80 to 95%, of environmental, and particularly climate impacts lie. And so that is how change happens, you know, you ask your supplier who asked their supplier, and it can go down, you know, sometimes three or five or more different levels, with all the the middleman and aggregators and everything else it takes place that ultimately is how it has to happen. And again, as sort of as I was talking about on the government side, are these characteristics. And there are good examples of both.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
So wrapping up, I have one last question for you, if companies in food and produce are interested in being better in creating a more equitable future for themselves through sustainable practices, what are the three actionable steps in doing so?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Wow, I'm going to give you a higher level answer maybe than the one you want. But I think the first thing is to what's your impact? Do you really understand your impacts and not just yours, but the impacts as they go down through your supply chain, and even in this is less relevant in the produce sector? But you know, what happens after you sell something? What are the impacts there? And that could go to food waste, and some other issues. But do you understand those things? Because I don't know that most companies do. And now that you do, that's one number two is well, what's the plan? Do you have a plan in place? Is it a bold plan, hopefully, that aligns maybe with science based targets that have been established by independent organizations? There's specific targets and timetables that you're going to be doing things? And is their disclosure, interim disclosure, saying, Okay, I have a 2040 or 2050, or even 2030 goal. But what am I doing next year or the year after that? How do I track my progress? And then number three is, how are you talking about this stuff, both internally and externally, upstream and downstream to your various communities? And is that aligned with what you're actually doing? Obviously, companies get in trouble when they get too far ahead of their skis on these things. That's where the word greenwashing often comes in. But it's also about aligning actual company policies and strategies and commitments with the, with their memberships in organizations and trade associations, perhaps, but also their lobbying activities, because there's a lot of cases of some of the most proactive companies, the leaders, if you will, in sustainability, that are either members of groups that are lobbying against all of everything that I think you and I want to see happen or are things that we know just need to happen or where and that's that used to be sort of in the back behind the scenes. Now it's becoming much more visible and it used to be safe for companies to keep, you know, keep quiet on some of these issues because they were controversial. And now you know, Being on the sidelines is becoming a less and less safe space. So companies are being asked to, you know, take a position on some of these things. Are you for price on carbon or against it? You know what it is don't just sit quietly and hope that it sorts itself out. So what do you know? What are you doing? And what are you saying are the three things that I go? I mean, I can, you know, we get deeper into some specific things that, you know, companies must be doing, but it really all stems from those three things.

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
Well, I think that's the end of our time for our listeners out there who would love to get in touch with you? What is the best way for them to contact you?

Joel Makower, GreenBiz Group
Well, first of all, I encourage them to check out greenbiz.com It's FREE Daily News, seven different newsletters, including one called Food weekly looking at food sustainability issues. That's fresh every Wednesday and in general, you know, on LinkedIn, I'm there on LinkedIn, it's just Macau hour. We'd love to be in touch and I look forward to hearing from people

Vonnie Estes, IFPA
As always love talking to you, and thanks for the work that you do and your thoughts on this. The International fresh produce association is bringing new technology to solve industries big challenges through the new fresh field catalyst accelerator. The six-month immersive program works with technology companies outside of produce and floral to experience the challenges in our industry, and develop innovative solutions for a healthier world. Applications are due April 4. Find out more at fresh produce.com You've been listening to fresh takes on tech a podcast from the International fresh produce Association. Keep connected with us by subscribing to the show and your favorite podcast player. If you like what you've heard, please rate the show that helps us keep delivering the latest on produce technology. Thank you for listening. Until next time.