February 3, 2025 • 32 mins
Join host Adam Larson as he sits down with Samantha Jewell, author and CEO, Soil Carbon Advisory at urth.io, on this episode of the Count Me In Podcast. Samantha shares her fascinating journey from organic farming to pioneering soil carbon credits in Australia. She explains the crucial role these credits play in sequestering carbon and improving soil quality. Dive into the intricacies of carbon markets, the potential of regenerative agriculture, and the impact of evolving ESG laws. Learn about the challenges in educating financial professionals and the innovative solutions Samantha is bringing to the table, including blockchain transparency and smart contracts. Discover why big businesses should consider buying soil carbon credits and what it means for our environment and future. If you’re curious about sustainability, agriculture, or climate action, this conversation is a must-listen.
Sponsor:
Today's episode is brought to you by U.S. Bank. U.S. Bank is a trusted financial partner for our clients, businesses and communities. We believe in doing the right thing and putting people first. It’s an honor to be recognized as one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies® by the Ethisphere Institute for the tenth consecutive year. From commercial credit cards and program management tools to innovative payment technologies and transportation offerings, U.S. Bank Corporate Payment Systems has the right solution to help your organization reduce payment costs, enhance control and streamline your entire payment processing function. We’ll partner with you to uncover your challenges and provide smart, clear and honest guidance to help you meet the financial goals for your business. Visit usbank.com/corporatepayments to learn more.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Adam Larson (00:21):
Welcome to Count Me In. I'm your host, Adam Larson,
and today, we're joined bySamantha Jewel, author, CEO,
soil carbon adviser at urth.io .Samantha's path in the carbon
markets began with concerns overfood ingredients and GMOs in the
19 nineties, leading to hergroundbreaking work in organic
farming and soil carbon credits.In this episode, we'll explore
(00:42):
Samantha's pioneering efforts inAustralia, where she was the
first to buy soil carbon creditsin 2006.
We'll discuss the immensepotential of regenerative
agriculture and the role offinancial markets in driving ESG
adoption. Samantha will alsoshare insights from her book,
Carbon is Not a Dirty Word, andhow emerging frameworks and
block tech technology areshaping the global carbon
(01:03):
market. Get ready to beinspired, and let's dive in.
Well, Samantha, I'm I'm veryhappy to have you on the
podcast. Thank you so much, forcoming on.
And today, we're gonna betalking about, carbon credits.
And I wanted to start a littlebit about you could share, about
(01:24):
your journey into the carbonmarkets and what kinda led you
focus on, especially, the soilcarbon credits?
Samantha Jewel (01:30):
Yeah. Look, I started 27 years ago back in
when mad cow hit England, and wemy family was feeding, 50,000
customers a week with the familyrestaurant. We're the 1st
restaurant chain in Australia in65. And I was you know, with my
first child, and I went, what?They're feeding it cow meat.
That's just the most insanething I could imagine. And I
(01:55):
kind of thought, oh, god. Wouldit we're Australians. We're so
laid back. And so, we probablyaren't paying any attention to
this.
So I I went into the familybusiness and went through every
ingredient to the stores. We hada very big menu. We made
everything from scratch, but,obviously, you're bringing
ingredients in. And I wrote toall the companies, and I was at
the same time, I discoveredGMOs, and I found a lot of
(02:17):
companies didn't even know whatthey were putting in. Like, say
they said they'd put sugar in,or sugar was extracted with a
genetically modified enzyme.
So it's kind of instrumental incause of all that actually
influencing a lot of the reallymajor companies in removing
those things from because I'msure I wasn't the only person,
but it became like, oh, thiscompany is doing this. This is a
(02:37):
family restaurant. And so, yeah,I kind of got started down that.
And the reason I I then went toorganic was there was nobody
doing paddock to platemethodology or or looking at it.
And, obviously, we couldn't notonly could we not afford to put
it into every food line, but weput over the course of time, I
(03:00):
put quite a lot of stuff in, andI obviously became more and
more, involved with the farmingmethodologies and what was going
on.
About 2,005, I was at one of Iwas paid by my family to go all
over the world for all theconferences. So I got, like, a
little mini PhD by the way I wasI was doing it, but it was sort
(03:21):
of self educated. But I found atone of the conferences, there
was the Australian of the Year,and he was saying, you know,
you're organic farmers. You'rethe single greatest solution to
the climate. And they're alllike, what?
And they said, because yourequested the most amount of
carbon, you put the carbon backout of the atmosphere and into
(03:42):
the ground. And so it was kindof that, like, epiphany moment.
I was so fed up with theinfighting and the organic the
different paradigms about howyou do something. And I thought,
this is it. This is the solutionbecause it's annulment.
It's in everything. So how youget there? I'll leave it to the
farmer. I'm not the farmer. Idon't know how to do it.
(04:03):
Mhmm. Probably do know how to doit now, but let's just say I
don't know how to do it. And, Iwent down this rabbit hole,
which I have literally nevercome out of, and I became the
1st person to buy soil carboncredit that got the Australian
government recognizing it as afinancial tool in 2006. And I
went on to then watch them for14 years. The debating, how do
(04:28):
we measure this?
And it's pretty obvious, takeshovel out, stick it to the
ground. And if it's going black,that's carbon. That's about it,
really. I mean, obviously,there's other factors to it, but
it it becomes very obvious. Andso I really have been on that
bandwagon for a long time.
And so I do know that there is abig difference between a good
(04:49):
credit and a bad credit and, andhow to get that. And I I really
kind of became obsessed withbeing that focal point, being
that bridge between the city andthe finance markets and the
country and the farmers whodon't know anything about
finance markets or or not. Theydo. They know about agriculture,
(05:10):
but not necessarily about thiswhole climate issue. Because
then you'd have just as manypeople in the farming side as
you would in the city side whosay that climate doesn't even
exist, which it does.
I mean, really, it does. It'sjust Mhmm. Put that one to bed
and move on. But, I will saythat agriculture has the single
(05:31):
greatest capacity. So one thingwe really do economically rely
on and manage and have influenceover that we can make the
greatest impact on the climatebecause if everything went
regenerative, actually trulyregenerating the soils, we could
soak up twice what we emit.
(05:51):
And I think a lot of peopledon't realize that because the
agronomist measure only sort ofwhere's your thing? About that
deep 6 inches. They're reallyonly measuring where the where
the roots are of the plant. Andthat's that's their whole focus.
It's about chemicals, what we doto make the cut the plant pump
out of the ground.
But, actually, we measure ameter into the ground, and we
(06:11):
work with farmers that have beendeveloping carbon for many, many
years. The plants, when allowedto do their thing with
biodiversity, with root density,they actually take the carbon
many meters into the ground. Andthat's kind of really where the
agronomists and scientists havegot it wrong because they only
measure a very short distance.They don't realize capacity of
the Earth to take it into theground. So there is different
(06:34):
ways of doing that, obviously,and does require change of
mindset and therefore funding,which is where I come in, is
trying to get that money acrossthe line between the 2.
And we're we're very close tobeing able to do that. That was
a long winded story, wasn't it?
Adam Larson (06:50):
That's quite alright. I mean, it was nice to
kind of hear the trajectory ofof your passion and, you know,
kind of how you got there. And Ithink we could kinda just take a
quick step back. Maybe you candefine what a soil carbon credit
is as opposed to other types ofcarbon credits because people
listening might not under quiteunderstand what we're talking
about here.
Samantha Jewel (07:07):
Absolutely. And that's probably one of the
biggest hurdles for a lot ofpeople because most people think
you say carbon, they say trees.
Adam Larson (07:14):
Mhmm.
Samantha Jewel (07:14):
And, and, obviously, trees are the simple
thing to do because you can uselook at them with a satellite.
You don't have to go out. We goout and do soil cores, and then
they take them to a laboratory.And it's it's kind of the Rolls
Royce of carbon because of the,laboratory testing of it and the
depth and quality of it. So
Adam Larson (07:34):
Yeah. Yeah.
Samantha Jewel (07:35):
You're looking at stable carbon that will be
there for, you know, a lotlonger than a tree grows, and
you've got to say and you say,oh, we've got this whole 25 year
thing on it. It's like, well,look, if you got the carbon into
the ground at depth, you'vespent a bit of time getting it
there anyway. And you don't wantto get rid of it because the
carbon actually provides a wholeraft of reasons why once it's in
(07:59):
the soil, it actually improveseverything. So it's not
something a farmer wants to getrid of. In fact, people buy land
based on how good the carbon iswithout realizing it because
they just call it good soil.
And and that's it is geologicalfactors. That's the minerals and
rocks that are in it. So thedifference between, let's say,
(08:21):
an energy credit, a lot of thatis what I call mitigation. It's
like I won't put carbon into theatmosphere. So that would be
biochar.
That would be, you know, I, redoreducing things, turning lights
off. You're reducing your bill.You're putting in renewables,
which are not emitting carbon tocreate energy. These are all
(08:43):
things that probably people aremore familiar with. But when
you're talking actuallyreversing the climate, you're
talking about taking carbon outof the atmosphere.
Well, people only probably knowabout carbon catcher, which is a
little bit of a furphy becausethe enormous amount of energy
that it takes to create it andplants do it in simple days
breath. Mhmm. So it seems a bitridiculous to spend all that
(09:07):
money on a machine when if youput that same money into
farmers, you would achieve itwithin a few seasons. Because,
obviously, it only really is ishappening in the growing season
when the plant is growing andtaking the carbon into it to
photosynthesize. That's thesimplicity of it.
Mhmm. So does is that clearenough differentiation?
Adam Larson (09:30):
Yeah. No. I think that's pretty clear. I I like
that differentiation. It'sbeautiful how the earth has
created, how growing seasons aredifferent on different parts of
the world.
You know? And so when one seasonis done, then the other part of
the season is grabbing thecarbon from their side. So it's
a it's a really kind of abeautiful thing the way you
described it. So as we're apodcast, you know, for
accounting and financeprofessionals, and you've talked
(09:51):
to many different CSOs, you'vehad to educate CFOs, different
businesses. You know, what aresome of the big challenges that
you've encountered as you try toeducate these teams saying, hey.
This is important. You need topay attention.
Samantha Jewel (10:02):
Well, because it's a lot of money, and people
don't really wanna do it in thefirst place.
Adam Larson (10:08):
Yeah.
Samantha Jewel (10:10):
Every region is different because a lot of the I
mean, the main people buyingcarbon are really big
multinationals, so they'redealing with every region. And
the regions themselves havedifferent rules. So some might
say, we only do carbon that issequestered in our in our
nation, or we only do carbonthat is under our rules, or and
(10:32):
that's very hard because youmight be growing it under a
particular methodology orparadigm, and it's there is no
international standard. Sogetting, a CFO up to being
willing to spend money on it isproblematic because they know
nothing about the science. Andso they've gotta bring a science
(10:53):
person on who can understandwhat you're saying and translate
it into their local standard.
And most of them just say,that's all too hard. I just want
the box ticked, and I don'tthink about it. And that's a
problem in itself because someof the companies that I won't
name have been that arepredominantly used in America
have been, you know, corrupt.They've been, you know, saying
(11:18):
tree selling trees that weren'tthere effectively and using
different maps. And so we werewe're using a much more rigorous
system.
And, so, actually, it's it'sit's much more like, yes. We've
truly sequestered the cap, andthere's I think the other things
to be aware of is that whilstthe CFO may not understand how
(11:41):
to get there or how to do thescience, they they have to sort
of, I suppose it's aboutdeveloping relationships, like
with everything. And why dothese podcasts? It's about you
need to know who I am and howcan you trust me. So I've been
doing this a long time.
I'm a true OG in the carbonspace. And, I work now with, a
(12:02):
wonderful guy out of the UAE,and I'm looking at relocating
over there at the moment, who'sbeen doing this for a long, long
time. So it's it it it talked tobig business and and and
translating my passion speakinto financial speak for them.
And that primarily the big thingwe're we're seeing is that
(12:23):
scientific education and gettingthat across the line into a way
in which they can understand itthat meets their metrics. So,
basically, the CFO has their ownboxes to tick mainly around ESG
and, you know, where the e andthe ESG, but the s and the g are
also I mean, obviously,governance is the big part that
we that we do already in it.
(12:46):
And I suppose the big s part ofit, the social part of this
whole thing is that if you don'tget the simple concept that
farms are being turned into bigagribusiness and humans are
leaving the land at a massiverate, so we've got in my
lifetime, it's gone from 2thirds globally, lived on the
(13:08):
land and and worked the land,and 1 third were in the cities.
It's now 5050, and they'resaying within a few years, it'll
be 2 thirds in the cities and 1third on the on the land. Now
the problem with that is thatthat means machines are doing
everything. Agribusiness isdoing it. You've gotta be huge
to stay in the market.
Food is incredibly cheap. Andwhat is going out in all that is
(13:30):
nutrition, nutrients, foodsecurity, and carbon, and water.
So because we're destroyingsoils, because agribusiness
almost can't do it right, I justhaven't seen them do it well.
And because they don't walk theland, because land isn't
homogeneous. It's differenteverywhere.
And a farmer with a smalleramount of land actually is
(13:53):
physically walking the land andgetting out of his tractor and
looking at the land and workworking with it, where a big
agribusiness is working prettymuch on robotics. Everything is
chemically sprayed, and it'sit's more problematic because
it's harder for them to embracethe concept that weeds need to
be there. There's a reason forthem. There's a whole lot of
(14:16):
other factors that comeinvolved. And I think it's where
you see diseases increasing notjust from bad diet, but, I mean,
some people eat very well, andthey source all their
ingredients well.
But the nutrients, even inorganic agriculture, are not in
the soil anymore. They're justnot there because of this
destruction of this atmosphericeverything exchange. So I hope
(14:41):
to tell you that I said saidthat simply.
Adam Larson (14:45):
No. I think that's a you you you're definitely a
great educator in explaining whywe need to care about it. And I
guess the the next question Iwould have, you know, for a CFO
of you know, let's say they're aCFO in some industry that
doesn't connect it. They don'tthink it's connected to
agribusiness at all, and they'relike, well, okay. So how does
like, why would a soil credit bea part of my my company's ESG
(15:07):
strategy, but we don't eventouch those those aspects of the
land?
Maybe we can help break downthose barriers a little bit.
Samantha Jewel (15:14):
Yeah. So, obviously, it's more easy for
somebody who has a supply chainconnection. And in Europe, for
instance, they've just passed anew I think it's a tax law. I'm
not sure which law it is, butthey've just passed a law where
a business that has a directsupply chain can claim, putting
investing money into that supplychain to get it to carbon
(15:35):
neutral so they can actuallyhave that as a tax write off. I
don't think it's in Americathat's only in a few places.
And but and a lot of thearguments about it are well, is
the business getting to net zerothemselves? So say you're a
steel factory and you'rewherever you are. You will do
whatever you can to reduce yourenergy and the the simple
(15:57):
points, but they might get to acertain point where you
literally there is no othertechnology. There's no other way
you can reduce your carbon.Mhmm.
So you have to buy some carbonoffsets to offset that gap
between what you've got leftover. And the point is that by
buying a soil carbon credit, youare buying a direct impact onto
(16:19):
the land that is, no matterwhich way you look at it,
supporting you. It's supportingyou atmospherically. I mean,
it's it is all related. So itdoesn't matter which industry
you're in, the earth issomething you're on and is
you're a part of no matter whereyou are.
We are actually allinterconnected. So it doesn't
matter which industry you're in.If there isn't a direct
(16:41):
correlation to your supplychain, you can buy a soil carbon
credit, and it is related towhat you're doing because it
cannot be. I mean, you breatheand you eat. Both of them are
involved.
You have staff. You have, youknow, there's just no way you're
not involved in it.
Adam Larson (16:59):
Yeah. I I see. I I really see what you're saying.
So the ROI is a healthy peopleand a healthy earth. Is that the
ROI?
Because from a business
Samantha Jewel (17:07):
perspective Look. You can if you wanna go
just from that sort of socialaspect, yes. Yeah. You can as
well. You are going to be iflet's say you're a business and
you trade, I mean, it's probablymore difficult for a business
that's only working within itslocal area.
But at this point, it's reallyonly major businesses that are
affected by the global laws thatare occurring. So my
(17:29):
understanding is Trump haspretty much said, forget it.
Climate change doesn't exist,and I'm gonna get that gold oil.
I mean, I've heard him on histalks. And that's that's fine.
But a lot of businesses inAmerica and other were trade
internationally. And so the mostimportant thing is, well, if I'm
in one country which says, isthat net zero, and you're in
(17:51):
another country, which is anunbeliever, you will have a tax
on what you are importing. Theywill either not take it, the
product, because it hasn't gotthose carbon credits already
embedded in it, or you will be,you know and you or you'll be
taxed against it, or you mightjust not even be able to trade
with people because they've madesome policy around that. So it
(18:12):
it's pretty important for abusiness to weigh all those
things up and, to see if theydon't do it, where that cost is
gonna come in for them down theline. And, if they they buy
carbon credits, which the otherbig thing to be aware of is
there's not that many of themaround.
Right now, we have, you know,whilst it's difficult to get
(18:35):
across the line in terms of CFOsunderstanding it, we have
1,000,000,000 of tons beingrequested of which there just
isn't that many. I mean, ittakes a year to develop carbon
to the ground and do all themeasurements and all the
auditing and all the, you know,to stop. So there's no
greenwashing. But there is notthat many carbon credits. So if
you're a business that is seeingthe light, you wanna get ahead
(18:56):
of it.
You can trade carbon credits.You can put them in the carbon
market and, you know, cover yourcost on them. You can, you know,
you can buy a surplus trade sumand offset what you need for
yourself. You can store them forthe next year or, you know,
because the price might be goingup there just like every other
market. They have their ownmarket volatility.
So, obviously, the difficultthing with that is that at this
(19:19):
point is there isn't aninternational framework. So
you'll have I know there's a lotof carbon credits coming out of,
say, Africa, where you say,well, how authentic is the on
the ground? Like, wheneverthere's, you know, difficulty in
the governance of something, youcan't the value becomes
different because you're you'resaying, well, who's you've gotta
(19:42):
have some other methodologythat's valuing it and putting
insurance in it. And so therethere are a lot of other factors
that are coming in to try andget around the fact that there
is no global framework for us.And I've been I'm trying to sell
a very different carbon creditto, let's say, the Australian
carbon credit unit, which is a25 year credit.
I'm selling a 1 year commoditycredit, which the CFO can write
(20:04):
off on their books and put as anasset as opposed to a 25 year
forward promise, which is aderivative. So and I believe the
SEC just recently called thecarbon credits derivatives
because they're a forwardpromise. But I am selling a 1
year credit, which doesn't havethat, problem. And the way I try
and explain it to people is tolook at it as a fractionalized
(20:27):
credit. So because it's not youknow what?
I mean, the 25 year credit is,say I don't know. In Europe,
they're selling for between€60.80 a ton, and an Australian
common credit sitting today ataround 35 Australian dollars of
credit. So they're all differentMhmm. Based on different rules.
(20:50):
And and I we're selling onethat's probably around 10 US
dollars a credit, but it's a 1year credit, and it's got a lot
more rigor around it.
And because it's measured everyyear, there's a lot more expense
in it. It's not every 3 years or5 years, and the farmer actually
enters it. And they have to theyhave to offset their own
(21:12):
footprint as well before theysell them. And there's this
whole discussion about methane,which is I'm not gonna go into,
but it's it's actually notaccurate the way it's measured.
Some people have got a cowinside like Holland, and others
have got them out on the groundwalking, and it's very different
amelioration of the cow, but inin the methane in that.
Anyway, that's another subject.
Adam Larson (21:33):
That's that mean that seems like a a lot to keep
track of. And and you approachyou you connect with, you know,
carbon credits across all thedifferent regions. How do you
manage the, like, okay, this inEurope, this in US, this over
here in Asia, this in Africa?Like, how do you manage the
different all the differentrules? Because there's no global
standard, as you've saidalready.
Samantha Jewel (21:52):
Yeah. Look, the big thing really is to talk to
each market. And then I mean, aton of carbon is a ton of
carbon. You know, like, it it'skind of ridiculous. You know,
we'll have, say, the Europeanmarket saying, well, how did
they grow it?
What grasses were they growing?What and it's like it's kind of
(22:14):
irrelevant. They could be anagribusiness doing it with high
chemical. I believe theywouldn't be able to achieve it.
But let's say they did.
You that isn't the point. Thepoint is if they've got a ton of
carbon, they've taken out of theatmosphere, it's in the ground.
How they got it there is notactually relevant. But at this
point, it's all about the storybecause there isn't everywhere
(22:36):
laws, they want the PR thing, soyou might have to represent the
information. Whereas there aresome like Stella McCartney, the
company in, England, theMcCartney daughter has a whole
fashion label.
She sources her wool and sendsher executives out to one of my
farms in West Australia toactually talk to the farmer and
(22:58):
learn what they're doing on theland. And that's there's such a
desire to not have thegreenwashing. People are really
hanging on themselves to do theresearch. So, you can do that.
Absolutely.
In fact, we encourage it. All ofour farmers will welcome any
exec that wants to come out andlook at what they're doing. So,
(23:18):
and and I suppose even withfarmers throughout America that
I know, they are, upset aboutthe greenwashing to the degree
that they don't even wanna enterthe carbon market. So there is a
lot of education still to goboth sides to get that across
the line because there's alwayscharlatans everywhere. There's
always snake oil salesman.
(23:39):
So you've kinda gotta work withthat. I worked through the
Bitcoin thing thinkingblockchain was the best thing in
the world, so I'm very aware ofthese different parameters that
have to be traversed in thesedifferent regions. And you look.
We just work with client 1 on 1and and basically design what
they need. So some of them areare more difficult because you
(24:02):
gotta go back to the farmer andsay, look.
You've gotta give us all theserecords. When did you plant?
When did it get to this stage?When did it get to that stage?
Have you got any visuals on it?
And some of them might make beable to meet those metrics. And
so we're kind of learning as wego Mhmm. What each market wants
and then going, Laura, I'vegotta do this from the
beginning. We've gotta actuallygather all this data as we go.
(24:24):
So it's still a bit of alearning curve for us as well.
Adam Larson (24:28):
So when somebody purchases a carbon credit, where
does that money go? Does it goback to the farmer eventually?
Like, how does how does thathelp?
Samantha Jewel (24:35):
Yes. So, I mean, there's because of all the legal
things and international stuff,there is, you know, like, you're
trying to get as little of achunk, you know, the majority of
it to the farmer. But it's beenhard because every time we go
through another intermediary,they wanna clip. And so you're
it's very hard to keep that. Andsome of the protocols are on you
(24:56):
know, you know, we want direct.
And I I got into the blockchainspace in 2017, 18 to be able to
do an an exchange that wasdirectly from the buyer to the
farmer with a very small clip.And I just caught more and more
and more and more regulation onmy part that was beyond my
capacity financially to meet.And then I was like, oh, I've
gotta go through an exchange. Sothen it was you know, I'm just
(25:18):
saying each one has addedsomething, and I've taken
nothing in 27 years. So I'mlike, I'm just it's it's I'm
passionate about the time we'regetting the majority, but I am
very, very aware that there iswhy there is a percentage cut in
all of that because of howexpensive it is to do, to
measure, to audit, to fit withall the regulations, etcetera,
(25:41):
etcetera.
But our goal with the one we'reworking on is 80% of the farmer.
Mhmm. So and, obviously, thatthat's where blockchain and
smart contracts and auditing canreally come in because you can
put everything into theblockchain at every stage to get
that transparency.
Adam Larson (26:02):
Yeah. And utilizing the technology to help reduce
your overhead to make sure thatthe most of the cost, I mean,
that makes a lot of sense to setit up that way. So you wrote a
book, carbon is not a dirtyword.
Samantha Jewel (26:15):
Yes. I've got it here. There it is.
Adam Larson (26:17):
Yeah. That's Carbon
Samantha Jewel (26:18):
is not a dirty word.
Adam Larson (26:19):
Carbon is not a dirty word.
Samantha Jewel (26:21):
And I'm very proud of it because I actually
hate writing books. But I wrotethe book because my business
partner said, like, he wasrunning into all this trying to
sell the carbon. There's such aproblem. The, you know, the
financial people just don'tunderstand it. You need to write
a book because you know so much.
So I did that. I wrote the book,and I was trying to keep it
(26:43):
really simple. It's a 4 hourread. You can buy it on my
website, samjewel.com, or mybusiness one, earth, u r t h.
Io, which I think is on myscreen.
And, it's the greatest thing Ihave to say is that I gave it to
a farmer who said, read a bookin 30 years, I'll never read a
book. And then he rang me twiceto say, one, that he'd actually
(27:05):
got halfway through and he'donly spent 2 hours. He said and
then the second time when herang me, he just said, I wanna
ring you this out. Didn't thinkI could learn anything more
about the land, and you'vechanged my way my totally
changed the way I look atagriculture. And that's from a
farmer who'd been in his wholelife in the sugarcane industry.
So I was kind of like that justmoved me completely. So it's
(27:29):
like my ultimate goal is to beable to get someone who really
doesn't understand to get thesimplicity of why the soil is
the solution to everything. Nomatter whether you're an
accountant or a CFO sitting in abusiness in New York or you're a
Mhmm. Farmer out in the middleof the boondocks. Why that is so
important?
Adam Larson (27:48):
I think it's great. You know, I encourage everybody
to check out the links in theshow notes to, check out, Sam's
books and, her, her website andher organization, to keep the
conversation going because weneed to keep educating
ourselves. Obviously, this is avery emerging market, and I love
that you're at the forefront orat the having this conversation
now. I think it'll beinteresting if we had this
conversation again a year fromnow. You know, what do you think
(28:10):
that conversation would be?
What would what we'll be lookingat then?
Samantha Jewel (28:15):
Big thing I think that will happen is that
there will be more look. I thinkeventually, COP might get there
where they get to a point wherethey come with the framework.
They they did have some movementon the voluntary market
frameworks. As I understand it,I've been kind of watching I'm
not there this year, but I'vebeen just watching the sort of
LinkedIn posts from people inthe voluntary market saying, oh,
(28:36):
they made a bit more progress onit. So I I do think eventually
that will happen.
The big problem is that,obviously, a lot of nations have
got less, progress than others.And so they don't want to be
hindered by that becausecountries that moved ahead
actually had their GDP affectedbecause they were had they had
(28:58):
that money used to go somewhere.So it goes into the whole cost
of things. And if you're tradingwith other nations and they go,
well, I can go and get itcheaper over a year, you miss
out. And so that's really been abig problem.
I mean, people have had to pullback and others are moving
forward, and we're kind ofhelping work with nations,
advising them how to putframeworks in that will bring
(29:20):
them up to scratch withinternational standards. And I
think that as they get there,the ESG laws will be the big
thing that'll change. That'salready started. The UAE had
their, ESG laws come in 1stJuly, and they're scrambling.
They need to know what theirfootprint is.
I think there's an estimated$30,000,000,000 globally being
(29:41):
spent on footprint analysisloan. So it's it's a huge market
even in the analysis space,which obviously the CFO is
intrinsically involved withbecause they have to do it. I I
must say that when I I spent ayear ringing the CFOs, through
through LinkedIn, and not onlydid they not know that when I
(30:02):
read their, what's thatdocument? Anyway, they have to
put a sustainability documentout. It was all social.
There was no understanding ofthe e part. There was maybe a
mining industry might talk aboutwhat they've done with new
equipment or industry stuff, andbut they never talk about
offsets because there's thiswhole viewpoint that it's just
letting the polluters polluterather than understanding
(30:24):
they've gotta reduce first. So II think that that will get
there. I just think it's amatter of time.
Adam Larson (30:34):
Mhmm.
Samantha Jewel (30:34):
It's trade that will move it. It's the and it's
the money markets. The other bigthing that's really affecting it
is if you're a business seekingmoney, if you don't have your
ESG stuff together and yourcarbon net together, you just
won't get money. And, really,that's what will move everything
because everyone's looking formoney. And if you don't have a
(30:55):
credit score or or, like, acarbon score or rating, whatever
they call it, that will make abig difference to business in
business expansion.
So I I just think as thattrickles in, that'll become very
good. It would be normal.
Adam Larson (31:11):
Well, I think that's a great, place to end it.
Samantha, thank you so much forcoming on the podcast. I've
learned a lot. I hope ouraudience has learned, and I
encourage them to keep theconversation going and keep
learning about, this emergingmarket. Thank you so much.
Samantha Jewel (31:23):
And please feel free to reach out, and we can
help you with your ESG strategyand planning as well.
Announcer (31:31):
This has been Count Me In, IMA's podcast providing
you with the latest perspectivesof thought leaders from the
accounting and financeprofession. If you like what you
heard and you'd like to becounted in for more relevant
accounting and financeeducation, visit IMA's website
at www.ima net.org.
Welcome to Count Me In. I'm your host, Adam Larson,
and today, we're joined bySamantha Jewel, author, CEO,
soil carbon adviser at urth.io .Samantha's path in the carbon
markets began with concerns overfood ingredients and GMOs in the
19 nineties, leading to hergroundbreaking work in organic
farming and soil carbon credits.In this episode, we'll explore
(00:42):
Samantha's pioneering efforts inAustralia, where she was the
first to buy soil carbon creditsin 2006.
We'll discuss the immensepotential of regenerative
agriculture and the role offinancial markets in driving ESG
adoption. Samantha will alsoshare insights from her book,
Carbon is Not a Dirty Word, andhow emerging frameworks and
block tech technology areshaping the global carbon
(01:03):
market. Get ready to beinspired, and let's dive in.
Well, Samantha, I'm I'm veryhappy to have you on the
podcast. Thank you so much, forcoming on.
And today, we're gonna betalking about, carbon credits.
And I wanted to start a littlebit about you could share, about
(01:24):
your journey into the carbonmarkets and what kinda led you
focus on, especially, the soilcarbon credits?
Samantha Jewel (01:30):
Yeah. Look, I started 27 years ago back in
when mad cow hit England, and wemy family was feeding, 50,000
customers a week with the familyrestaurant. We're the 1st
restaurant chain in Australia in65. And I was you know, with my
first child, and I went, what?They're feeding it cow meat.
That's just the most insanething I could imagine. And I
(01:55):
kind of thought, oh, god. Wouldit we're Australians. We're so
laid back. And so, we probablyaren't paying any attention to
this.
So I I went into the familybusiness and went through every
ingredient to the stores. We hada very big menu. We made
everything from scratch, but,obviously, you're bringing
ingredients in. And I wrote toall the companies, and I was at
the same time, I discoveredGMOs, and I found a lot of
(02:17):
companies didn't even know whatthey were putting in. Like, say
they said they'd put sugar in,or sugar was extracted with a
genetically modified enzyme.
So it's kind of instrumental incause of all that actually
influencing a lot of the reallymajor companies in removing
those things from because I'msure I wasn't the only person,
but it became like, oh, thiscompany is doing this. This is a
(02:37):
family restaurant. And so, yeah,I kind of got started down that.
And the reason I I then went toorganic was there was nobody
doing paddock to platemethodology or or looking at it.
And, obviously, we couldn't notonly could we not afford to put
it into every food line, but weput over the course of time, I
(03:00):
put quite a lot of stuff in, andI obviously became more and
more, involved with the farmingmethodologies and what was going
on.
About 2,005, I was at one of Iwas paid by my family to go all
over the world for all theconferences. So I got, like, a
little mini PhD by the way I wasI was doing it, but it was sort
(03:21):
of self educated. But I found atone of the conferences, there
was the Australian of the Year,and he was saying, you know,
you're organic farmers. You'rethe single greatest solution to
the climate. And they're alllike, what?
And they said, because yourequested the most amount of
carbon, you put the carbon backout of the atmosphere and into
(03:42):
the ground. And so it was kindof that, like, epiphany moment.
I was so fed up with theinfighting and the organic the
different paradigms about howyou do something. And I thought,
this is it. This is the solutionbecause it's annulment.
It's in everything. So how youget there? I'll leave it to the
farmer. I'm not the farmer. Idon't know how to do it.
(04:03):
Mhmm. Probably do know how to doit now, but let's just say I
don't know how to do it. And, Iwent down this rabbit hole,
which I have literally nevercome out of, and I became the
1st person to buy soil carboncredit that got the Australian
government recognizing it as afinancial tool in 2006. And I
went on to then watch them for14 years. The debating, how do
(04:28):
we measure this?
And it's pretty obvious, takeshovel out, stick it to the
ground. And if it's going black,that's carbon. That's about it,
really. I mean, obviously,there's other factors to it, but
it it becomes very obvious. Andso I really have been on that
bandwagon for a long time.
And so I do know that there is abig difference between a good
(04:49):
credit and a bad credit and, andhow to get that. And I I really
kind of became obsessed withbeing that focal point, being
that bridge between the city andthe finance markets and the
country and the farmers whodon't know anything about
finance markets or or not. Theydo. They know about agriculture,
(05:10):
but not necessarily about thiswhole climate issue. Because
then you'd have just as manypeople in the farming side as
you would in the city side whosay that climate doesn't even
exist, which it does.
I mean, really, it does. It'sjust Mhmm. Put that one to bed
and move on. But, I will saythat agriculture has the single
(05:31):
greatest capacity. So one thingwe really do economically rely
on and manage and have influenceover that we can make the
greatest impact on the climatebecause if everything went
regenerative, actually trulyregenerating the soils, we could
soak up twice what we emit.
(05:51):
And I think a lot of peopledon't realize that because the
agronomist measure only sort ofwhere's your thing? About that
deep 6 inches. They're reallyonly measuring where the where
the roots are of the plant. Andthat's that's their whole focus.
It's about chemicals, what we doto make the cut the plant pump
out of the ground.
But, actually, we measure ameter into the ground, and we
(06:11):
work with farmers that have beendeveloping carbon for many, many
years. The plants, when allowedto do their thing with
biodiversity, with root density,they actually take the carbon
many meters into the ground. Andthat's kind of really where the
agronomists and scientists havegot it wrong because they only
measure a very short distance.They don't realize capacity of
the Earth to take it into theground. So there is different
(06:34):
ways of doing that, obviously,and does require change of
mindset and therefore funding,which is where I come in, is
trying to get that money acrossthe line between the 2.
And we're we're very close tobeing able to do that. That was
a long winded story, wasn't it?
Adam Larson (06:50):
That's quite alright. I mean, it was nice to
kind of hear the trajectory ofof your passion and, you know,
kind of how you got there. And Ithink we could kinda just take a
quick step back. Maybe you candefine what a soil carbon credit
is as opposed to other types ofcarbon credits because people
listening might not under quiteunderstand what we're talking
about here.
Samantha Jewel (07:07):
Absolutely. And that's probably one of the
biggest hurdles for a lot ofpeople because most people think
you say carbon, they say trees.
Adam Larson (07:14):
Mhmm.
Samantha Jewel (07:14):
And, and, obviously, trees are the simple
thing to do because you can uselook at them with a satellite.
You don't have to go out. We goout and do soil cores, and then
they take them to a laboratory.And it's it's kind of the Rolls
Royce of carbon because of the,laboratory testing of it and the
depth and quality of it. So
Adam Larson (07:34):
Yeah. Yeah.
Samantha Jewel (07:35):
You're looking at stable carbon that will be
there for, you know, a lotlonger than a tree grows, and
you've got to say and you say,oh, we've got this whole 25 year
thing on it. It's like, well,look, if you got the carbon into
the ground at depth, you'vespent a bit of time getting it
there anyway. And you don't wantto get rid of it because the
carbon actually provides a wholeraft of reasons why once it's in
(07:59):
the soil, it actually improveseverything. So it's not
something a farmer wants to getrid of. In fact, people buy land
based on how good the carbon iswithout realizing it because
they just call it good soil.
And and that's it is geologicalfactors. That's the minerals and
rocks that are in it. So thedifference between, let's say,
(08:21):
an energy credit, a lot of thatis what I call mitigation. It's
like I won't put carbon into theatmosphere. So that would be
biochar.
That would be, you know, I, redoreducing things, turning lights
off. You're reducing your bill.You're putting in renewables,
which are not emitting carbon tocreate energy. These are all
(08:43):
things that probably people aremore familiar with. But when
you're talking actuallyreversing the climate, you're
talking about taking carbon outof the atmosphere.
Well, people only probably knowabout carbon catcher, which is a
little bit of a furphy becausethe enormous amount of energy
that it takes to create it andplants do it in simple days
breath. Mhmm. So it seems a bitridiculous to spend all that
(09:07):
money on a machine when if youput that same money into
farmers, you would achieve itwithin a few seasons. Because,
obviously, it only really is ishappening in the growing season
when the plant is growing andtaking the carbon into it to
photosynthesize. That's thesimplicity of it.
Mhmm. So does is that clearenough differentiation?
Adam Larson (09:30):
Yeah. No. I think that's pretty clear. I I like
that differentiation. It'sbeautiful how the earth has
created, how growing seasons aredifferent on different parts of
the world.
You know? And so when one seasonis done, then the other part of
the season is grabbing thecarbon from their side. So it's
a it's a really kind of abeautiful thing the way you
described it. So as we're apodcast, you know, for
accounting and financeprofessionals, and you've talked
(09:51):
to many different CSOs, you'vehad to educate CFOs, different
businesses. You know, what aresome of the big challenges that
you've encountered as you try toeducate these teams saying, hey.
This is important. You need topay attention.
Samantha Jewel (10:02):
Well, because it's a lot of money, and people
don't really wanna do it in thefirst place.
Adam Larson (10:08):
Yeah.
Samantha Jewel (10:10):
Every region is different because a lot of the I
mean, the main people buyingcarbon are really big
multinationals, so they'redealing with every region. And
the regions themselves havedifferent rules. So some might
say, we only do carbon that issequestered in our in our
nation, or we only do carbonthat is under our rules, or and
(10:32):
that's very hard because youmight be growing it under a
particular methodology orparadigm, and it's there is no
international standard. Sogetting, a CFO up to being
willing to spend money on it isproblematic because they know
nothing about the science. Andso they've gotta bring a science
(10:53):
person on who can understandwhat you're saying and translate
it into their local standard.
And most of them just say,that's all too hard. I just want
the box ticked, and I don'tthink about it. And that's a
problem in itself because someof the companies that I won't
name have been that arepredominantly used in America
have been, you know, corrupt.They've been, you know, saying
(11:18):
tree selling trees that weren'tthere effectively and using
different maps. And so we werewe're using a much more rigorous
system.
And, so, actually, it's it'sit's much more like, yes. We've
truly sequestered the cap, andthere's I think the other things
to be aware of is that whilstthe CFO may not understand how
(11:41):
to get there or how to do thescience, they they have to sort
of, I suppose it's aboutdeveloping relationships, like
with everything. And why dothese podcasts? It's about you
need to know who I am and howcan you trust me. So I've been
doing this a long time.
I'm a true OG in the carbonspace. And, I work now with, a
(12:02):
wonderful guy out of the UAE,and I'm looking at relocating
over there at the moment, who'sbeen doing this for a long, long
time. So it's it it it talked tobig business and and and
translating my passion speakinto financial speak for them.
And that primarily the big thingwe're we're seeing is that
(12:23):
scientific education and gettingthat across the line into a way
in which they can understand itthat meets their metrics. So,
basically, the CFO has their ownboxes to tick mainly around ESG
and, you know, where the e andthe ESG, but the s and the g are
also I mean, obviously,governance is the big part that
we that we do already in it.
(12:46):
And I suppose the big s part ofit, the social part of this
whole thing is that if you don'tget the simple concept that
farms are being turned into bigagribusiness and humans are
leaving the land at a massiverate, so we've got in my
lifetime, it's gone from 2thirds globally, lived on the
(13:08):
land and and worked the land,and 1 third were in the cities.
It's now 5050, and they'resaying within a few years, it'll
be 2 thirds in the cities and 1third on the on the land. Now
the problem with that is thatthat means machines are doing
everything. Agribusiness isdoing it. You've gotta be huge
to stay in the market.
Food is incredibly cheap. Andwhat is going out in all that is
(13:30):
nutrition, nutrients, foodsecurity, and carbon, and water.
So because we're destroyingsoils, because agribusiness
almost can't do it right, I justhaven't seen them do it well.
And because they don't walk theland, because land isn't
homogeneous. It's differenteverywhere.
And a farmer with a smalleramount of land actually is
(13:53):
physically walking the land andgetting out of his tractor and
looking at the land and workworking with it, where a big
agribusiness is working prettymuch on robotics. Everything is
chemically sprayed, and it'sit's more problematic because
it's harder for them to embracethe concept that weeds need to
be there. There's a reason forthem. There's a whole lot of
(14:16):
other factors that comeinvolved. And I think it's where
you see diseases increasing notjust from bad diet, but, I mean,
some people eat very well, andthey source all their
ingredients well.
But the nutrients, even inorganic agriculture, are not in
the soil anymore. They're justnot there because of this
destruction of this atmosphericeverything exchange. So I hope
(14:41):
to tell you that I said saidthat simply.
Adam Larson (14:45):
No. I think that's a you you you're definitely a
great educator in explaining whywe need to care about it. And I
guess the the next question Iwould have, you know, for a CFO
of you know, let's say they're aCFO in some industry that
doesn't connect it. They don'tthink it's connected to
agribusiness at all, and they'relike, well, okay. So how does
like, why would a soil credit bea part of my my company's ESG
(15:07):
strategy, but we don't eventouch those those aspects of the
land?
Maybe we can help break downthose barriers a little bit.
Samantha Jewel (15:14):
Yeah. So, obviously, it's more easy for
somebody who has a supply chainconnection. And in Europe, for
instance, they've just passed anew I think it's a tax law. I'm
not sure which law it is, butthey've just passed a law where
a business that has a directsupply chain can claim, putting
investing money into that supplychain to get it to carbon
(15:35):
neutral so they can actuallyhave that as a tax write off. I
don't think it's in Americathat's only in a few places.
And but and a lot of thearguments about it are well, is
the business getting to net zerothemselves? So say you're a
steel factory and you'rewherever you are. You will do
whatever you can to reduce yourenergy and the the simple
(15:57):
points, but they might get to acertain point where you
literally there is no othertechnology. There's no other way
you can reduce your carbon.Mhmm.
So you have to buy some carbonoffsets to offset that gap
between what you've got leftover. And the point is that by
buying a soil carbon credit, youare buying a direct impact onto
(16:19):
the land that is, no matterwhich way you look at it,
supporting you. It's supportingyou atmospherically. I mean,
it's it is all related. So itdoesn't matter which industry
you're in, the earth issomething you're on and is
you're a part of no matter whereyou are.
We are actually allinterconnected. So it doesn't
matter which industry you're in.If there isn't a direct
(16:41):
correlation to your supplychain, you can buy a soil carbon
credit, and it is related towhat you're doing because it
cannot be. I mean, you breatheand you eat. Both of them are
involved.
You have staff. You have, youknow, there's just no way you're
not involved in it.
Adam Larson (16:59):
Yeah. I I see. I I really see what you're saying.
So the ROI is a healthy peopleand a healthy earth. Is that the
ROI?
Because from a business
Samantha Jewel (17:07):
perspective Look. You can if you wanna go
just from that sort of socialaspect, yes. Yeah. You can as
well. You are going to be iflet's say you're a business and
you trade, I mean, it's probablymore difficult for a business
that's only working within itslocal area.
But at this point, it's reallyonly major businesses that are
affected by the global laws thatare occurring. So my
(17:29):
understanding is Trump haspretty much said, forget it.
Climate change doesn't exist,and I'm gonna get that gold oil.
I mean, I've heard him on histalks. And that's that's fine.
But a lot of businesses inAmerica and other were trade
internationally. And so the mostimportant thing is, well, if I'm
in one country which says, isthat net zero, and you're in
(17:51):
another country, which is anunbeliever, you will have a tax
on what you are importing. Theywill either not take it, the
product, because it hasn't gotthose carbon credits already
embedded in it, or you will be,you know and you or you'll be
taxed against it, or you mightjust not even be able to trade
with people because they've madesome policy around that. So it
(18:12):
it's pretty important for abusiness to weigh all those
things up and, to see if theydon't do it, where that cost is
gonna come in for them down theline. And, if they they buy
carbon credits, which the otherbig thing to be aware of is
there's not that many of themaround.
Right now, we have, you know,whilst it's difficult to get
(18:35):
across the line in terms of CFOsunderstanding it, we have
1,000,000,000 of tons beingrequested of which there just
isn't that many. I mean, ittakes a year to develop carbon
to the ground and do all themeasurements and all the
auditing and all the, you know,to stop. So there's no
greenwashing. But there is notthat many carbon credits. So if
you're a business that is seeingthe light, you wanna get ahead
(18:56):
of it.
You can trade carbon credits.You can put them in the carbon
market and, you know, cover yourcost on them. You can, you know,
you can buy a surplus trade sumand offset what you need for
yourself. You can store them forthe next year or, you know,
because the price might be goingup there just like every other
market. They have their ownmarket volatility.
So, obviously, the difficultthing with that is that at this
(19:19):
point is there isn't aninternational framework. So
you'll have I know there's a lotof carbon credits coming out of,
say, Africa, where you say,well, how authentic is the on
the ground? Like, wheneverthere's, you know, difficulty in
the governance of something, youcan't the value becomes
different because you're you'resaying, well, who's you've gotta
(19:42):
have some other methodologythat's valuing it and putting
insurance in it. And so therethere are a lot of other factors
that are coming in to try andget around the fact that there
is no global framework for us.And I've been I'm trying to sell
a very different carbon creditto, let's say, the Australian
carbon credit unit, which is a25 year credit.
I'm selling a 1 year commoditycredit, which the CFO can write
(20:04):
off on their books and put as anasset as opposed to a 25 year
forward promise, which is aderivative. So and I believe the
SEC just recently called thecarbon credits derivatives
because they're a forwardpromise. But I am selling a 1
year credit, which doesn't havethat, problem. And the way I try
and explain it to people is tolook at it as a fractionalized
(20:27):
credit. So because it's not youknow what?
I mean, the 25 year credit is,say I don't know. In Europe,
they're selling for between€60.80 a ton, and an Australian
common credit sitting today ataround 35 Australian dollars of
credit. So they're all differentMhmm. Based on different rules.
(20:50):
And and I we're selling onethat's probably around 10 US
dollars a credit, but it's a 1year credit, and it's got a lot
more rigor around it.
And because it's measured everyyear, there's a lot more expense
in it. It's not every 3 years or5 years, and the farmer actually
enters it. And they have to theyhave to offset their own
(21:12):
footprint as well before theysell them. And there's this
whole discussion about methane,which is I'm not gonna go into,
but it's it's actually notaccurate the way it's measured.
Some people have got a cowinside like Holland, and others
have got them out on the groundwalking, and it's very different
amelioration of the cow, but inin the methane in that.
Anyway, that's another subject.
Adam Larson (21:33):
That's that mean that seems like a a lot to keep
track of. And and you approachyou you connect with, you know,
carbon credits across all thedifferent regions. How do you
manage the, like, okay, this inEurope, this in US, this over
here in Asia, this in Africa?Like, how do you manage the
different all the differentrules? Because there's no global
standard, as you've saidalready.
Samantha Jewel (21:52):
Yeah. Look, the big thing really is to talk to
each market. And then I mean, aton of carbon is a ton of
carbon. You know, like, it it'skind of ridiculous. You know,
we'll have, say, the Europeanmarket saying, well, how did
they grow it?
What grasses were they growing?What and it's like it's kind of
(22:14):
irrelevant. They could be anagribusiness doing it with high
chemical. I believe theywouldn't be able to achieve it.
But let's say they did.
You that isn't the point. Thepoint is if they've got a ton of
carbon, they've taken out of theatmosphere, it's in the ground.
How they got it there is notactually relevant. But at this
point, it's all about the storybecause there isn't everywhere
(22:36):
laws, they want the PR thing, soyou might have to represent the
information. Whereas there aresome like Stella McCartney, the
company in, England, theMcCartney daughter has a whole
fashion label.
She sources her wool and sendsher executives out to one of my
farms in West Australia toactually talk to the farmer and
(22:58):
learn what they're doing on theland. And that's there's such a
desire to not have thegreenwashing. People are really
hanging on themselves to do theresearch. So, you can do that.
Absolutely.
In fact, we encourage it. All ofour farmers will welcome any
exec that wants to come out andlook at what they're doing. So,
(23:18):
and and I suppose even withfarmers throughout America that
I know, they are, upset aboutthe greenwashing to the degree
that they don't even wanna enterthe carbon market. So there is a
lot of education still to goboth sides to get that across
the line because there's alwayscharlatans everywhere. There's
always snake oil salesman.
(23:39):
So you've kinda gotta work withthat. I worked through the
Bitcoin thing thinkingblockchain was the best thing in
the world, so I'm very aware ofthese different parameters that
have to be traversed in thesedifferent regions. And you look.
We just work with client 1 on 1and and basically design what
they need. So some of them areare more difficult because you
(24:02):
gotta go back to the farmer andsay, look.
You've gotta give us all theserecords. When did you plant?
When did it get to this stage?When did it get to that stage?
Have you got any visuals on it?
And some of them might make beable to meet those metrics. And
so we're kind of learning as wego Mhmm. What each market wants
and then going, Laura, I'vegotta do this from the
beginning. We've gotta actuallygather all this data as we go.
(24:24):
So it's still a bit of alearning curve for us as well.
Adam Larson (24:28):
So when somebody purchases a carbon credit, where
does that money go? Does it goback to the farmer eventually?
Like, how does how does thathelp?
Samantha Jewel (24:35):
Yes. So, I mean, there's because of all the legal
things and international stuff,there is, you know, like, you're
trying to get as little of achunk, you know, the majority of
it to the farmer. But it's beenhard because every time we go
through another intermediary,they wanna clip. And so you're
it's very hard to keep that. Andsome of the protocols are on you
(24:56):
know, you know, we want direct.
And I I got into the blockchainspace in 2017, 18 to be able to
do an an exchange that wasdirectly from the buyer to the
farmer with a very small clip.And I just caught more and more
and more and more regulation onmy part that was beyond my
capacity financially to meet.And then I was like, oh, I've
gotta go through an exchange. Sothen it was you know, I'm just
(25:18):
saying each one has addedsomething, and I've taken
nothing in 27 years. So I'mlike, I'm just it's it's I'm
passionate about the time we'regetting the majority, but I am
very, very aware that there iswhy there is a percentage cut in
all of that because of howexpensive it is to do, to
measure, to audit, to fit withall the regulations, etcetera,
(25:41):
etcetera.
But our goal with the one we'reworking on is 80% of the farmer.
Mhmm. So and, obviously, thatthat's where blockchain and
smart contracts and auditing canreally come in because you can
put everything into theblockchain at every stage to get
that transparency.
Adam Larson (26:02):
Yeah. And utilizing the technology to help reduce
your overhead to make sure thatthe most of the cost, I mean,
that makes a lot of sense to setit up that way. So you wrote a
book, carbon is not a dirtyword.
Samantha Jewel (26:15):
Yes. I've got it here. There it is.
Adam Larson (26:17):
Yeah. That's Carbon
Samantha Jewel (26:18):
is not a dirty word.
Adam Larson (26:19):
Carbon is not a dirty word.
Samantha Jewel (26:21):
And I'm very proud of it because I actually
hate writing books. But I wrotethe book because my business
partner said, like, he wasrunning into all this trying to
sell the carbon. There's such aproblem. The, you know, the
financial people just don'tunderstand it. You need to write
a book because you know so much.
So I did that. I wrote the book,and I was trying to keep it
(26:43):
really simple. It's a 4 hourread. You can buy it on my
website, samjewel.com, or mybusiness one, earth, u r t h.
Io, which I think is on myscreen.
And, it's the greatest thing Ihave to say is that I gave it to
a farmer who said, read a bookin 30 years, I'll never read a
book. And then he rang me twiceto say, one, that he'd actually
(27:05):
got halfway through and he'donly spent 2 hours. He said and
then the second time when herang me, he just said, I wanna
ring you this out. Didn't thinkI could learn anything more
about the land, and you'vechanged my way my totally
changed the way I look atagriculture. And that's from a
farmer who'd been in his wholelife in the sugarcane industry.
So I was kind of like that justmoved me completely. So it's
(27:29):
like my ultimate goal is to beable to get someone who really
doesn't understand to get thesimplicity of why the soil is
the solution to everything. Nomatter whether you're an
accountant or a CFO sitting in abusiness in New York or you're a
Mhmm. Farmer out in the middleof the boondocks. Why that is so
important?
Adam Larson (27:48):
I think it's great. You know, I encourage everybody
to check out the links in theshow notes to, check out, Sam's
books and, her, her website andher organization, to keep the
conversation going because weneed to keep educating
ourselves. Obviously, this is avery emerging market, and I love
that you're at the forefront orat the having this conversation
now. I think it'll beinteresting if we had this
conversation again a year fromnow. You know, what do you think
(28:10):
that conversation would be?
What would what we'll be lookingat then?
Samantha Jewel (28:15):
Big thing I think that will happen is that
there will be more look. I thinkeventually, COP might get there
where they get to a point wherethey come with the framework.
They they did have some movementon the voluntary market
frameworks. As I understand it,I've been kind of watching I'm
not there this year, but I'vebeen just watching the sort of
LinkedIn posts from people inthe voluntary market saying, oh,
(28:36):
they made a bit more progress onit. So I I do think eventually
that will happen.
The big problem is that,obviously, a lot of nations have
got less, progress than others.And so they don't want to be
hindered by that becausecountries that moved ahead
actually had their GDP affectedbecause they were had they had
(28:58):
that money used to go somewhere.So it goes into the whole cost
of things. And if you're tradingwith other nations and they go,
well, I can go and get itcheaper over a year, you miss
out. And so that's really been abig problem.
I mean, people have had to pullback and others are moving
forward, and we're kind ofhelping work with nations,
advising them how to putframeworks in that will bring
(29:20):
them up to scratch withinternational standards. And I
think that as they get there,the ESG laws will be the big
thing that'll change. That'salready started. The UAE had
their, ESG laws come in 1stJuly, and they're scrambling.
They need to know what theirfootprint is.
I think there's an estimated$30,000,000,000 globally being
(29:41):
spent on footprint analysisloan. So it's it's a huge market
even in the analysis space,which obviously the CFO is
intrinsically involved withbecause they have to do it. I I
must say that when I I spent ayear ringing the CFOs, through
through LinkedIn, and not onlydid they not know that when I
(30:02):
read their, what's thatdocument? Anyway, they have to
put a sustainability documentout. It was all social.
There was no understanding ofthe e part. There was maybe a
mining industry might talk aboutwhat they've done with new
equipment or industry stuff, andbut they never talk about
offsets because there's thiswhole viewpoint that it's just
letting the polluters polluterather than understanding
(30:24):
they've gotta reduce first. So II think that that will get
there. I just think it's amatter of time.
Adam Larson (30:34):
Mhmm.
Samantha Jewel (30:34):
It's trade that will move it. It's the and it's
the money markets. The other bigthing that's really affecting it
is if you're a business seekingmoney, if you don't have your
ESG stuff together and yourcarbon net together, you just
won't get money. And, really,that's what will move everything
because everyone's looking formoney. And if you don't have a
(30:55):
credit score or or, like, acarbon score or rating, whatever
they call it, that will make abig difference to business in
business expansion.
So I I just think as thattrickles in, that'll become very
good. It would be normal.
Adam Larson (31:11):
Well, I think that's a great, place to end it.
Samantha, thank you so much forcoming on the podcast. I've
learned a lot. I hope ouraudience has learned, and I
encourage them to keep theconversation going and keep
learning about, this emergingmarket. Thank you so much.
Samantha Jewel (31:23):
And please feel free to reach out, and we can
help you with your ESG strategyand planning as well.
Announcer (31:31):
This has been Count Me In, IMA's podcast providing
you with the latest perspectivesof thought leaders from the
accounting and financeprofession. If you like what you
heard and you'd like to becounted in for more relevant
accounting and financeeducation, visit IMA's website
at www.ima net.org.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.