Tackling enteric emissions part 3: the case for biogenic interventions

This is the third post in a short series I’m writing as I learn and think ‘out loud’ about viable solutions for reducing or eliminating enteric emissions from livestock, and whether & where a venture-scale opportunity might exist. I started with the size and shape of the problem and then mapped out the solution space specifically for reducing enteric emissions.

Today, I’m making the case for zooming in on biogenic interventions- approaches to modify the rumen of the animal, for example through feed additives, so that it produces less methane.

Making the case for biogenic interventions

I see a few challenges with genetics, grazing management, and digital enablers that lead me to be particularly bullish on biogenic interventions.

Of course, the reality is that this is not an either-or kind of question. We need many kinds of solutions to tackle climate change, and we need them fast.

I also appreciate that the above is not a comprehensive list. I look forward to feedback about what I’m missing :)

Summary: I’m bullish on biogenic interventions, but big questions remain

Where I land is that with biogenic interventions, the time to impact is short, they seem to be effective for reducing emissions and there’s increasing evidence of productivity gains (more on this tomorrow), and they are entirely compatible with existing practices (i.e., adoption does not require any practice changes for primary producers).

Like any intervention in a complex system, though, there are no silver bullets. I see several challenges and barriers to adoption that must be addressed.

Tomorrow, I’ll be laying out my questions in an attempt to define the characteristics of a solution that can get to scale and deliver impact.

At Tenacious Ventures, we back innovators at the intersection of digitally native agriculture and climate solutions. To get regular podcasts, research & insights on all things agtech, subscribe to our newsletter.